> There are several studies showing the huge benefits of the CAA relative to its costs. Yes, but that wasn't the question. > Banning leaded gasoline alone was

> There are several studies showing the huge benefits of the CAA relative to its costs. Yes, but that wasn't the question. > Banning leaded gasoline alone was a net $16 billion/year benefit. The last time this came up, someone cited a study claiming that the CAA was responsible for 1/6th of the US economy. While I agree that there were net benefits, the 1/6th claim is absurd. While every one of these "studies" claims to be conservative, I've never seen one that actually is. Moreover, as with the space program, we may have gone through a "golden age" wrt certain kinds of regulation, where the small things might work but the big ones are one disaster after another. (That's not unexpected - we started with the low-hanging fruit.) Note that the acid-rain regulation is one of the disasters. (Yes, there was a problem, but the regulation was overkill.)