Father of cap-and-trade says "hold on" on using it on CO2

Thomas Crocker, then an economics Ph.D. candidate at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee,came up with the idea of cap-and-trade pollution regulation back in 1966. But now, he says it's not so good for carbon dioxide. He says a flat rate carbon tax makes more sense, and would do more.

I agree.

All well and good. But, now, he's backing off doing too much about CO2 period:

“The economists who have studied this problem, say, ‘Yes, it’s worthwhile taking some measures,’” Crocker said. “But to get into a great big panic and jump overboard right now is really not appropriate.”

That's bad enough. And, we've seen just how well economists have done with their ideas in the last couple of years.

Crocker then shows himself a climate change skeptic:

“There’s a great deal of ambiguity with respect to the natural science,” he said. “These models that they employ seems to me, they are numerical simulations, and as with any numerical simulation, a great deal depends upon what values you attach to unknown parameters.”

Stressing that it’s “worthwhile” to work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, Crocker advocated for a cautious approach to policymaking. “One should hedge, but one should not make big jumps,” he said.

Uhh, the numerical simulations are far more accurate than the ones your economist friends at Moody's and other raters ran on CDOs, etc. Big fail.

You can get enough election blogging from elsewhere; I'm going light on it.