Is that per pay cycle or per year? If its the latter that makes more sense.

(Maybe there should be a seperate thread for this one)

Andrew. wrote:

Making cap and trade work is another works-only-in-theory model. It's too open for corruption and rigging. Cap n' trade is terribly problematic. It's just another subsidy for historical bad actors.

Carbon pricing in the form of taxes are simpler and less open to being broken. I support this.

This post is not to gloat, Andrew, as I thoroughly enjoyed this conversation (and meant to get back to you on it), but apparently a suspected rise in costs of emission rights (through cap 'n trade) has prevented two (out of a projected five) new coal plants from being realised in the Netherlands.

Meanwhile, PriceWaterHouseCoopers calculated that energy produced by coal plants will not be anymore profitable if and when "emission rights are fully taxed."

(Couldn't find an English article, here is that report (I sure as fuck didn't read it)).

Your points are taken, though.

sunlore wrote:(Maybe there should be a seperate thread for this one)

I think you're right. I moved the cap-and-trade topic right over heres.