Kevin O'Leary's Letter to Premier Notley - Carbon Tax Discussion

[return to the red]

rebates for 66% of the population, pfft.

"Here's an idea, why don't you give me half the money you were gonna bet then we'll go out back, I'll kick you in the nuts, and we'll call it a day"

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by rayne008

NDP raises business tax from 10% to 12%
"It's only a 2% increase not a 20% increase"

NDP lowers small business tax from 3% to 2%
"33.3% tax reduction!!!!!"

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Jacks

NDP raises business tax from 10% to 12%
"It's only a 2% increase not a 20% increase"

NDP lowers small business tax from 3% to 2%
"33.3% tax reduction!!!!!"

That is a typically lame political dodge on the NDP's part, and a really terrible graphic full of nonsense.

Although I do recall the discussion of the business tax increase on this very board, and it was nearly unanimous around here that the business tax increase was in fact a 20% increase. I assume we'll all agree then that the small business tax cut is in fact 33%?

[SeeGeeWhy]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Good post IliketoPuck and a good linked article, solid summary at a macro level.



Excellent quote, I find "greenies" fail to understand this fact that oil demands keeps growing and growing as the world develops. Even if solar/renewables grow at a ridiculous pace (faster than they even are now), they will barely cover the growth in energy use, let alone replace the baseline 100 million bpd usage nowadays.

The world needs oil, will continue to use oil until renewables comes a long long way, and all we are doing in Canada is squandering the value we have been given.

They don't even cover the loss of 100% carbon free and reliable nuclear shut downs that natural gas advocates environmentalists have been winning.

Wind and solar gains do not replace losses from nuclear shut downs.

VRES tech will have its place but it will be limited. Proponents are hoping for exponential curves on total real costs, free of subsidies to make up for the comically large gap between useful output and current plus projected demand. This can NOT happen with an energy investment that gets you a 10% return on your energy invested IF YOU'RE LUCKY. We need an energy source that is more dense than fossil fuels and thus create a much higher energy return. If we Crack that nut, we can be TOTALLY INEFFICIENT at solving the GHG challenge so long as we make the transition quick. You can't hope to do that with a low EROI option.

The important part you mention: the world needs oil. Because it makes human lives incredibly more survivable and comfortable. This is the real dilemma we must solve.

I still think Alberta should be doing everything it can to produce a viable alternative before anyone else does. Adopting other people's crap tech won't help us in the long run, nor does it make any high value contribution to the overall problem. We can do better.

This has been a good thread with many good points, thanks to all contributing.

[Dion]

Pipeline would have always proceeded

Why did Ottawa finally approve the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion? “Simple – because Alberta is now a leader on climate change,” according to Environment Minister Shannon Phillips.

Perhaps in an alternative universe.

The pipeline was approved because Kinder Morgan proved in an extensive, transparent and science-based process that the project provides extensive economic and tax benefits to Canada.

In addition, it proved that the project will pass all of the relevant environmental tests. Also, any decision of the federal cabinet can be subject to judicial review. It is doubtful that “Alberta doesn’t have a carbon tax or over-priced electricity” would count as compelling reasons for rejecting the pipeline.

And it would have been a little embarrassing for the Trudeau Liberals to have the decision come back to cabinet with a rebuke by the Federal Court. Thank God we are not a banana republic where some surfer dude can override the rule of law on a whim.

http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/let...ednesday-jan-4

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Although I do recall the discussion of the business tax increase on this very board, and it was nearly unanimous around here that the business tax increase was in fact a 20% increase. I assume we'll all agree then that the small business tax cut is in fact 33%?

I don't speak for everyone but yes.

[IliketoPuck]

It's only a 1% reduction.

[Ozy_Flame]

As a small business owner, I am elated to have a percentage point lower on my corporate tax.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Dion

Pipeline would have always proceeded



http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/let...ednesday-jan-4

Larf. A decade of calgarians in power at the federal and provincial level with massiv makroities couldn't move the needle but according to letters to the editor (why did I read that garbage?) it was a foregone conclusion to happen anyway.

Albertans will convince themselves of anything.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Larf. A decade of calgarians in power at the federal and provincial level with massiv makroities couldn't move the needle but according to letters to the editor (why did I read that garbage?) it was a foregone conclusion to happen anyway.

Albertans will convince themselves of anything.

I actually think it was, and the reason for this is that this will allow Trudeau to shelf the Energy-East Pipeline, and avoid a conflict with Quebec where most of his support lies.

[Wiggum_PI]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Larf. A decade of calgarians in power at the federal and provincial level with massiv makroities couldn't move the needle but according to letters to the editor (why did I read that garbage?) it was a foregone conclusion to happen anyway.

Albertans will convince themselves of anything.

The approval of Trans Mountain isn't irrefutable proof that the NDP now have a "social license" to build pipelines.

The environmentalist groups that helped squash the Northern Gateway are trying to do the exact same thing to the Trans Mountain.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

That is a typically lame political dodge on the NDP's part, and a really terrible graphic full of nonsense.

Although I do recall the discussion of the business tax increase on this very board, and it was nearly unanimous around here that the business tax increase was in fact a 20% increase. I assume we'll all agree then that the small business tax cut is in fact 33%?

Of course it is a 33% reduction. Math is not debatable.

At least Notley learned how to math in the last two years.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Wiggum_PI

The approval of Trans Mountain isn't irrefutable proof that the NDP now have a "social license" to build pipelines.

The environmentalist groups that helped squash the Northern Gateway are trying to do the exact same thing to the Trans Mountain.

Social license doesn't mean what you think it means.

Social license is politicians banking enough points that when they make a controversial decision they won't burn too much approval / popularity.

It has nothing to do with convincing the hardcore environmentalist crowd. There is no amount of social license that will cause them to support a pipeline.

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Social license doesn't mean what you think it means.

Social license is politicians banking enough points that when they make a controversial decision they won't burn too much approval / popularity.

It has nothing to do with convincing the hardcore environmentalist crowd. There is no amount of social license that will cause them to support a pipeline.

Social license is more then just politicians.

A company who has a legal right to build a pipeline doesn't want landowners, activists and everyday people protesting on the right of way, in front of City Hall, in front of their headquarters, harassing their employees, protesting their stock, allowing the extreme environmental left to raise more funds for legal fights from people who normally wouldn't contribute, etc.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Social license doesn't mean what you think it means.

Social license is politicians banking enough points that when they make a controversial decision they won't burn too much approval / popularity.

It has nothing to do with convincing the hardcore environmentalist crowd. There is no amount of social license that will cause them to support a pipeline.

What you're describing is political capital.

Social license is generally described as obtaining approval of the local people.

The issue is that it's been co-opted to mean "approval of 100% of the population". Ie. hardcore environmentalist groups somehow have veto power (whether legally or illegally) over any project.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

As a small business owner, I am elated to have a percentage point lower on my corporate tax.

Well, as a small business owner this is a total shell game.

[Ozy_Flame]

Oh sorry, rabble rabble carbon tax, this sucks

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Oh sorry, rabble rabble carbon tax, this sucks

I'll say this though:

From an optics and political standpoint it was brilliant. Very well executed.

Lower taxes on income at the least important level possible = Accrual of Political Capital.

Institute a new tax = Expenditure of Political Capital.

Give her enough time and Aunt Rachel will magically pull a quarter out of your ear.

[Ozy_Flame]

Are you saying my business and me aren't important - and actually irrelevant - to the Alberta economy?

That's pretty arrogant coming from someone who helps small businesses for a living.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Are you saying my business and me aren't important - and actually irrelevant - to the Alberta economy?

That's pretty arrogant coming from someone who helps small businesses for a living.

Thats not at all what I'm saying. You've misinterpreted me entirely.

And it isnt arrogant, its correct.

The Carbon Tax for instance, is supposed to cost the wealthiest of Albertans what...I think that target is like ~$500 a year?

And that is, as I stated, a shell game.

Whats 1% of your Provincial Corporate Tax?

Are they pretty close to the same number? No way....