Climate change solutions are indeed difficult to sort out. David Folland wants us to "lobby Congress to put a fee on carbon and return the proceeds to the American people" ("The climate change solution debate," Readers' Forum, Aug. 24). Say what?
Take the money, filter it through the hands of schemers and bureaucrats, and then return what's left of it to those who ultimately paid it in the first place? That's hard won incentive to reduce carbon use. There are important reasons why four of the five national legislators from our state think the carbon tax is not such a good idea.
And by the way, there are still not-yet-quantified forces affecting the complicated climate of earth that are part of the equation. Hopefully, we can do our part in reducing pollutions and retaining a hospitable home.
- In our opinion: The 3 levels of Christmas
- John Florez: Utah's prison relocation is like...
- W. Bradford Wilcox: Why the working-class...
- Carmen Rasmusen Herbert: New Christmas...
- Letter: Patriots or sheep?
- Greg Bell: Socialism vs. the safety net
- Reconnecting with Cuba is a good move —...
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Cogitating on...
- Letter: Patriots or sheep? 62
- Greg Bell: Socialism vs. the safety net 45
- Mike Lee: Change is coming to Washington 44
- Susan Roylance: Definition of the... 35
- My view: Chaffetz named... 34
- Jay Evensen: Cuba not likely to change... 34
- My view: Torture, morality and the laws... 30
- Jay Evensen: Should Utah raise its gas... 28