Roger Odisio wrote,
> An electricity price reduction is the same thing as a lump sum rebate in
> this context; each has the same effect on disposable income.
No. The lump-sum rebate in your example was without regard to levels of
consumption. The poor consumer received the same $200 as the rich
consumer, even though the rich consumer consumes more electricity
(although a smaller proportion of the rich consumer's income).
> And a price reduction/lump sum rebate is precisely what we *are* talking
> about. Gene asked whether it was correct to claim that a reduction in
> electricity prices would be progessive as to to income.
A price reduction would distribute savings according to the quantity of
electricity consumed. Thus, as Gene pointed out, the wealthy consumers --
who, it is assumed, consume more electricity -- would save more money in
absolute terms.
To my recollection, Gene did not ask if the reduction would be
"progressive as to income" (whatever that means). He asked whether it
would be like a progressive taxation.
> I said yes, and I see you agree. Case closed?
See my next message, "Fuck the math, do the history."
Tricky Devil
