<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Carol Browner: Environmental Regulations Create Market Opportunities</title>
	<atom:link href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2008/12/10/browner-climate-opportunity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2008/12/10/browner-climate-opportunity/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:42:01 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Scheinhaus</title>
		<link>http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2008/12/10/browner-climate-opportunity/comment-page-1/#comment-5572</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Scheinhaus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:59:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2008/12/10/browner-climate-opportunity/#comment-5572</guid>
		<description>Rods&#039; comments were interesting. He made several general statements, then failed to support them. He did make one interesting point. Often industries can be encouraged to do the economically and socially good thing with tax encouragements. That&#039;s so for individual citizens as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rods&#8217; comments were interesting. He made several general statements, then failed to support them. He did make one interesting point. Often industries can be encouraged to do the economically and socially good thing with tax encouragements. That&#8217;s so for individual citizens as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rod</title>
		<link>http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2008/12/10/browner-climate-opportunity/comment-page-1/#comment-3200</link>
		<dc:creator>Rod</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:43:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2008/12/10/browner-climate-opportunity/#comment-3200</guid>
		<description>Browner has a clever argument.  But it is just not true all the time that regulation is good for business.  Good regulation is good, bad regulation is bad.  Government can be good or bad, too much or too little...  Limited, smart, balanced government, a light touch is usually best.  The trouble with what Browner is saying is it could become the rationalization for a very heavy handed approach.

The trouble with mandates is that they frequently lead to political blowback which ultimately kills the mandate. Think about what happened to the EV1. The right incentives can work much better, alone or in conjunction with a mandate.  For instance, imagine if CAFE standards were combined with a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.greenenergytaxcuts.com/2008/11/how-to-save-auto-industry-without.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;green vehicle tax cut&lt;/a&gt;: every vehicle that exceeds CAFE standards by at least 20% receives a tax cut on sales and income tax, and even on capital gains tax on the stock or dividends of a company.  The extent of the cut would depend on how much the vehicles exceed CAFE standards, and for capital gains purposes, the proportion of revenue from such green vehicles.  Such a policy would make profit oriented executives VERY happy and excited in going green, and would substantially boost sales, investment, jobs, innovation and the whole economy... well beyond what mere mandates can accomplish.

Ms. Browner should take a look at the policy shift going on in Europe right now.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.greenenergytaxcuts.com/2008/12/european-commission-embraces-green-tax.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Green tax cuts have now become a central part of the new European Economic Recovery Plan&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Browner has a clever argument.  But it is just not true all the time that regulation is good for business.  Good regulation is good, bad regulation is bad.  Government can be good or bad, too much or too little&#8230;  Limited, smart, balanced government, a light touch is usually best.  The trouble with what Browner is saying is it could become the rationalization for a very heavy handed approach.</p>
<p>The trouble with mandates is that they frequently lead to political blowback which ultimately kills the mandate. Think about what happened to the EV1. The right incentives can work much better, alone or in conjunction with a mandate.  For instance, imagine if CAFE standards were combined with a <a href="http://www.greenenergytaxcuts.com/2008/11/how-to-save-auto-industry-without.html" rel="nofollow">green vehicle tax cut</a>: every vehicle that exceeds CAFE standards by at least 20% receives a tax cut on sales and income tax, and even on capital gains tax on the stock or dividends of a company.  The extent of the cut would depend on how much the vehicles exceed CAFE standards, and for capital gains purposes, the proportion of revenue from such green vehicles.  Such a policy would make profit oriented executives VERY happy and excited in going green, and would substantially boost sales, investment, jobs, innovation and the whole economy&#8230; well beyond what mere mandates can accomplish.</p>
<p>Ms. Browner should take a look at the policy shift going on in Europe right now.  <a href="http://www.greenenergytaxcuts.com/2008/12/european-commission-embraces-green-tax.html" rel="nofollow">Green tax cuts have now become a central part of the new European Economic Recovery Plan</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
