The NYT is trying to make my point that the numbers they print about taxes and spending are completely meaningless. How else can anyone explain the fact that in a discussion of an energy bill passed by the House, that eliminates $17 billion in tax breaks for the oil industry and uses the money to promote alternative energy, readers are never told that this sum refers to a ten year period?
If anyone cares, the $1.7 billion in annual taxes is equal to approximately 0.06 of projected spending over the next decade. It comes to about $5.70 per person per year.
The article also should not have printed without response Republican claims that the elimination of the tax break would lead to higher gas prices. In the short-term, supply is almost entirely fixed. This means that the tax increase will come almost entirely out of producers' profits.
Unlike many news organizations, the Prospect has remained staunchly committed to keeping our journalism free and accessible to all. We believe that independent journalism is crucial for a functioning democracy—but quality reporting comes at a cost. From Trump’s threat to the free press to Musk’s influence on our democracy, there is too much at stake in 2025 to stop now.
We’re behind on our goal to raise $75,000 to continue delivering the hard-hitting investigative journalism you’ve come to expect from us. Your support helps us maintain our independence and dig deeper into the stories that matter most.
We need you to make a year-end contribution today. Any amount helps secure our future and ensure we can continue holding power to account.
