Dion's carbon tax + tax reduction of $15 B

[Azure]

Originally Posted by ernie

Yep. Except that most of Ontario's power comes from the wrost emissions offenders. The amount those power plants are going to be taxed under the plan is going to huge.

Curiously, the only province that won't be significantly hit with higher energy bills is Quebec....hydro power. Hmmm.

Manitoba has hydro power too....so I assume they won't be hit either.

[Slava]

Here is an interesting article about the business effects of the carbon tax plan. Interestingly highlights not only the negatives, but also some positives of the plan for business in Canada:

http://www.reportonbusiness.com/serv...umnsBlogs/home

[CaptainCrunch]

But the greatest advantage to business from a federal government committed to implementing a national green plan with firm rules and an exact timeline, is certainty. In the current climate of policy chaos business is reluctant to invest until it knows what the rules will be. That's not good for the economy.

Except that outside of some fluff, Dion's plan shows no indication of targets and goals except for the unrealistic ones that they adopted and didn't apply in their time in goverment.

[old-fart]

Originally Posted by Slava

Here is an interesting article about the business effects of the carbon tax plan. Interestingly highlights not only the negatives, but also some positives of the plan for business in Canada:

http://www.reportonbusiness.com/serv...umnsBlogs/home

I see it lists "a" benefit - government aid for companies that develop or implement greener technologies. Of course, there is nothing in the plan to suggest how such aid would be handled, what you'd need to do to qualify, etc. Let's not forget that this is clearly not an environmental policy as it sets exactly zero environmental goals or targets.

The next benefit seems to rely on "strong federal leadership" and if Dion is elected PM, it's safe to say that won't be in the picture. The guy can't lead his own rag-tag party, how's he going to lead the country? He can't keep Garth Turner in line, how's he going to get consensus from Danny in NFL and Eddie in AB?

Lastly, there is a potential benefit that other companies won't tax Canadian exports if we implement a carbon tax. They could, they might, but they might not. They might not if we implement a cap-and-trade system either. That's helpfully not mentioned.

This tax and spend plan will not work.

[Shawnski]

Originally Posted by Slava

Here is an interesting article about the business effects of the carbon tax plan. Interestingly highlights not only the negatives, but also some positives of the plan for business in Canada:

http://www.reportonbusiness.com/serv...umnsBlogs/home

More interesting aspects as to the "revenue neutral" aspect of this.

The plan does include government aid for purchases of more fuel-efficient machinery and for research and development of processes that will use less energy. Most businesses are already looking at this on their own in the face of rising energy costs. Under Mr. Dion's plan, the federal government will lend a hand.

So some how, in mystery land, income tax cuts will offset the increase from this carbon tax. BUT there is still money to administer this program AND provide government aid as per above.

But passing on higher costs is not as painless as it sounds. Just as when the GST was introduced in 1991 (by a Conservative government, one should point out), business will find itself sandwiched between the government and consumers.

Removal of the manufacturors sales tax had a huge impact to Ontario's economy. The GST was a revenue neutral version as well. Didn't turn out that way. No mention of that aspect here.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by fotze

Its the problem that there always will be for reducing fossil fuels. EVERYONE thinks someone else should pay the price, whether it be oil companies or people who fly or people who drive or industrial users. Its always someone else's burden.

That in a nutshell is my beef with 99% of the alleged environmentalists I've met.

I've heard 80% of canadians want action on the environment.
I'd guess 90% of canadians dont' want any action to impact them

And Dion's NEP2 will only reinforce that. What could be better than a tax that may increase your heat bills a bit (in Ontario) but otherwise passes the cost on to rich oil companies in Alberta.

People can think they are doing something for the environment (they're not) without actually doing much (so not much pain) and everybody is happy. Except Alberta.

[HOZ]

If you want people to do things. Use sugar not salt.

Don't tax. Use incentives.

[Azure]

Finally, someone mentions it.

NEP version 2.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Azure

Finally, someone mentions it.

NEP version 2.

I didn't realise that Peter Lougheed was on board with this version as well?

I find it hilarious that all of the CPC supporters here immediately mention this in relation to the GST as well...a tax that your party brought in to begin with.

Maybe if the debate was focused on solutions instead of just taking pot shots at the policy put forth here we would be getting somewhere.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

I didn't realise that Peter Lougheed was on board with this version as well?

I find it hilarious that all of the CPC supporters here immediately mention this in relation to the GST as well...a tax that your party brought in to begin with.

Maybe if the debate was focused on solutions instead of just taking pot shots at the policy put forth here we would be getting somewhere.

I agree with that, however Dion's "solution" is a carbon reduction plan in name only, its an economic transfer device to his stronger voting areas then a plan that will actually do anything to reduce emissions, unless the slowing down of the economy is part of a brilliant insidious plan.

Unfortunately I don't believe that there can even be a proper global plan put into place because each country has different priorities and goals, and a global plan that omits some countries from it while pounding other countries is stupid.

At some point something has to be done, but you can't believe that a country that puts a plan into place that effects its economic standing and then hopes to become the voice of environmental causes will create a forward burst that makes other countries sit up and take notice. What will really happen is that the other countries will step in to take advantage of the economic bonus that suddenly appears. IE Canada stops manufacturing certain products because the government taxes the companies doing it, and China steps in increases its carbon footprint and reaps the reward in terms of money.

Call me a cynic, but realistically to me the best plan is to take part of the budget surpluses that we have on a national scale and create corporate tax breaks for companies that clean up thier processes. Don't put a tax in place that going to increase the price of consumer goods, or essentials like fuels or electricity, because those taxes inevitably attack and effect the lower and middle class more then the upper class.

Don't punish people for consumerism, since consumerism is good for the economy, creates jobs, allows us to export more.

Simple as that, for every company that puts a plan into place to reduce their carbon foot print significantly, the government cuts them a check to cover 50% of the cost.

For every person that buys a bike, then the government gives them a $100.00 bonus. For every person that reduces their in home heating bill, they get a rebate from the government.

A pat on the head is superior to a kick in the ass.

But why in the hell should we do anything that boosts the Chinese or Indian economy for example at the cost of our own when those governments continue to be a significant contributor to the problem and have no limits under international treaties.

[Slava]

I think that you and I actually have some common ground here Cap'n! (I can't believe it either!). Dions plan though cuts corporate taxes by $3.4 billion as well. That is a huge cut, and combined with the increased spending in this area for the corporations to adopt cleaner technologies and investigate them in the first place this could have huge economic benefits in the future.

My belief is that companies that can profit from future environmental regulation and constraints will have a global advantage over those who are left behind doing the same old thing because they are profitable today and "the other guy" isn't doing anything new either.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Slava

I didn't realise that Peter Lougheed was on board with this version as well?

I find it hilarious that all of the CPC supporters here immediately mention this in relation to the GST as well...a tax that your party brought in to begin with.

Maybe if the debate was focused on solutions instead of just taking pot shots at the policy put forth here we would be getting somewhere.

Maybe if the policy was focused on solutions instead of just taking pot shots at one region we would be getting somewhere.

I'm a small c conservative..so not exactly what you would call sympathitic to the libs but I'd dislike this just as much under any government.

[Vansmack]

Originally Posted by Slava

I think that you and I actually have some common ground here Cap'n! (I can't believe it either!). Dions plan though cuts corporate taxes by $3.4 billion as well. That is a huge cut, and combined with the increased spending in this area for the corporations to adopt cleaner technologies and investigate them in the first place this could have huge economic benefits in the future.

My belief is that companies that can profit from future environmental regulation and constraints will have a global advantage over those who are left behind doing the same old thing because they are profitable today and "the other guy" isn't doing anything new either.

15 - 3.4 = 11.6

Sure there will be tax saving for individuals, but are you actually surprised that a board full of Flames fans (largely albertan fan base) are upset that the biggest employers are going to be heavily taxed? This plan is effectively increasing transer payments from Alberta to the rest of the country. That fact that you feel our dissent to be shocking is what most of us find to be a real shock.

Also, if Harper had made this proposal, we would be equally shocked and appaled. Just search the board for members comments regarding Stelmach and the royalty review. Just because a large number of us vote blue doesn't mean we necessarily agree with every action being taken.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Slava

I find it hilarious that all of the CPC supporters here immediately mention this in relation to the GST as well...a tax that your party brought in to begin with.

Are you saying that the feeling is that the GST is okay because the Conservatives brought it in?

Hardly. The Liberals don't have the exclusive license for producing bad ideas... they are just making more use of that license lately.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Slava

I didn't realise that Peter Lougheed was on board with this version as well?

I find it hilarious that all of the CPC supporters here immediately mention this in relation to the GST as well...a tax that your party brought in to begin with.

Maybe if the debate was focused on solutions instead of just taking pot shots at the policy put forth here we would be getting somewhere.

My party? After the stunt that the CPC pulled with the Copyright Tax, I'm afraid they're not my party anymore.

[Resolute 14]

Speaking of party politics, Slava, perhaps you could explain to me why the Liberals only use for Alberta is to leech off it's wealth while attempting to ridicule, ignore, use or destroy it?

Personally, the biggest question to me is how much Dion and his cronies stand to profit from this plan.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I agree with that, however Dion's "solution" is a carbon reduction plan in name only, its an economic transfer device to his stronger voting areas then a plan that will actually do anything to reduce emissions, unless the slowing down of the economy is part of a brilliant insidious plan.

Unfortunately I don't believe that there can even be a proper global plan put into place because each country has different priorities and goals, and a global plan that omits some countries from it while pounding other countries is stupid.

At some point something has to be done, but you can't believe that a country that puts a plan into place that effects its economic standing and then hopes to become the voice of environmental causes will create a forward burst that makes other countries sit up and take notice. What will really happen is that the other countries will step in to take advantage of the economic bonus that suddenly appears. IE Canada stops manufacturing certain products because the government taxes the companies doing it, and China steps in increases its carbon footprint and reaps the reward in terms of money.

Call me a cynic, but realistically to me the best plan is to take part of the budget surpluses that we have on a national scale and create corporate tax breaks for companies that clean up thier processes. Don't put a tax in place that going to increase the price of consumer goods, or essentials like fuels or electricity, because those taxes inevitably attack and effect the lower and middle class more then the upper class.

Don't punish people for consumerism, since consumerism is good for the economy, creates jobs, allows us to export more.

Simple as that, for every company that puts a plan into place to reduce their carbon foot print significantly, the government cuts them a check to cover 50% of the cost.

For every person that buys a bike, then the government gives them a $100.00 bonus. For every person that reduces their in home heating bill, they get a rebate from the government.

A pat on the head is superior to a kick in the ass.

But why in the hell should we do anything that boosts the Chinese or Indian economy for example at the cost of our own when those governments continue to be a significant contributor to the problem and have no limits under international treaties.

I'll one-up you.

• Buy a bike and write the cost off on taxes!!
• Label certain items as economical and give tax write-offs for those as well!
• Write-off any new car bought after 2009 that is under XX cc.