The Green Anti-Economy

President Elect Obama and Colorado Governor Bill Ritter sing in harmony about creating millions of “green energy” jobs. While any government created job is of suspect value, these new jobs are especially troublesome, and taxpayers should be alarmed at their impacts. In fact the “green economy” will cost jobs, stifle economic growth, limit positive investment, and burden the poor.

Governments often seek to stimulate economic growth with public works programs, although it rarely helps. FDR tried with no success to end the Great Depression with aggressive spending on roads and bridges, as did Japan during its lost decade of economic malaise. The upside to these programs is that the US actually needs roads and bridges. Eventually, people will use them to go about their business and prosper. Furthermore, during a recession labor and construction materials are abundant, making it a good time to build. Hopefully once the projects are complete, the economy will have recovered, and the builders can move on to the private sector.

Obama and Ritter have an extra plan, though, to create government mandated jobs through a “green economy.” Through a carbon cap and trade program, along with other mandates, the Democrats have vowed to increase the US energy sector work force by several million people. Of course, the way to pay for these workers is to raise energy prices, permanently.

Public works projects eventually end, and the government funded jobs move on. These new “green jobs” are meant to be permanent. Instead of a boost to the economy, these jobs are subsidized by a government mandate to use more costly energy sources. Government mandated employment is paid with money people would otherwise spend elsewhere. Ultimately, jobs must be destroyed to pay for the new “green economy” salaries, and the net effect is less employment and prosperity.

Unlike public works projects, which build useful infrastructure, the “green economy” is simply to replace a system that already works well. Unlike most of the world, the lights almost never go out in the US. With the exception of nuclear power, there is no current “green” energy technology that can guarantee reliable power to the US. When the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine, traditional energy sources must power people’s homes, traffic lights, and hospitals. Indeed, for all the hype about wind and solar, they can provide no more than 20% of the US’s electricity, which is why Colorado’s plan to go “green” relies heavily on replacing coal plants with natural gas turbines. Not only is the “green” economy expensive, it doesn’t even work very well.

Because environmentalist Democrats hate nuclear power, they will select against that source of energy. Never mind that nuclear is among the safest and cleanest technologies ever invented. Never mind that only nuclear can generate electricity reliably. Never mind that nuclear costs far less than wind and a tenth as much as solar. Never mind that the nuclear capital of the US is Obama’s home turf of Illinois. Government meddling for political gain will stifle the only “green” technology that works and is cost competitive with natural gas and coal.

Worse still, the cost to implement inefficient technologies in favor of superior options will fall on the poor. The “green economy” is actually a regressive tax on lower income homes, as rising energy bills pinch the poor much more than the rich. The “green” wing of the Democratic party is hardly looking after the little guy.

Yet another sad mess, invented, hyped, and delivered to you by big government.