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.
--Dean Baker