Alberta Election Poll (new poll added)

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

See, that bugs the crap outa me. There should be some evidence you pay it for it to be rebated.

Living at home doesn’t mean you don’t buy gas or others things which have increased in cost due to the carbon tax.

In addition, single people get less, and it is also partially calculated on income.

It’s certainly not “over 18? Here’s all the money!”

[Fuzz]

Care to explain how it reduces their carbon footprint, getting rebated far more than they spend? Because that's the goal of a carbon tax, right? Right?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Care to explain how it reduces their carbon footprint, getting rebated far more than they spend? Because that's the goal of a carbon tax, right? Right?

Use less and the difference is even more. The reason they are getting back more is because they already have low carbon footprints. So yeah...

Being concerned about families making under $45,000 a year getting back some money is really missing the forest for the trees. That's not the aim of the carbon tax.

EDIT: Maybe you're confused on the rebate. It's entirely income and household dependent. A family of four that makes 85,000 and uses a ton of carbon would receive the same rebates as a family of four that makes 85,000 and uses none. The first family would be taxed more on their carbon usage (via levies and indirect costs), maybe even higher than the rebate they received, while the second family (somehow) using no carbon would receive the same rebate but would have not been taxed (directly). So there is still a financial incentive to use lower carbon.

[Fuzz]

Kids living at home are not going to do anything to change their usage patterns. They aren't going to be using that rebate to purchase a more efficient furnace or add insulation. If they drive a car, it will be whatever they can afford. The net difference in CO2 emissions for a live at home kid between having a carbon tax and not having one is going to be as near to zero as you can imagine. It isn't going to reduce CO2 consumption.


Meanwhile, had that rebate been tied only to items the improve efficiency, like furnace rebates, insulation, transit, etc, and available to everyone, no matter their income level, I'd argue you would see much greater reductions in emissions without it being handed out to people who are marginally effected and have no means to reduce CO2.

[PsYcNeT]

So kick their freeloading asses out and then they can get full use of their rebate, and have the added benefit of doing dear ol' dad proud by bootstrapping themselves to success without non-governmental aid.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

If they drive a car, it will be whatever they can afford.

And you could afford a more fuel efficient car with more money.

How much do you get?

[GGG]

I think people are missing the point of what the rebated money is for in a Carbon tax. It isn’t to reduce Carbon footprint. It’s to spend on whatever you would normally spend money on. The reason you rebate all of the Carbon tax money is so the economic impact of the tax is near zero.

It’s why spending the Carbon tax funds on green projects rather than general revenues which reduce other tax rates or general rebates to the population is so terrible.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Kids living at home are not going to do anything to change their usage patterns. They aren't going to be using that rebate to purchase a more efficient furnace or add insulation. If they drive a car, it will be whatever they can afford. The net difference in CO2 emissions for a live at home kid between having a carbon tax and not having one is going to be as near to zero as you can imagine. It isn't going to reduce CO2 consumption.

So you're argument is based on 18-20 year olds who are staying at home and not the other 4.3M people in the province....

[Slava]

Have we seen statistics showing that carbon emissions have been significantly reduced since the carbon tax? Is it working? All I can recall is someone asking Notley a month or two ago and her saying she didn’t have the information.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Slava

Have we seen statistics showing that carbon emissions have been significantly reduced since the carbon tax? Is it working? All I can recall is someone asking Notley a month or two ago and her saying she didn’t have the information.

Haha as if any emissions in Canada matter.

It’s for the feels man.

[CaptainCrunch]

Is there anyway to stuff this virtual ballot box?


Or send out some virtual thugs to threaten and beatup the voters.


Welcome to Venezuelapuck.com

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GGG

I think people are missing the point of what the rebated money is for in a Carbon tax. It isn’t to reduce Carbon footprint. It’s to spend on whatever you would normally spend money on. The reason you rebate all of the Carbon tax money is so the economic impact of the tax is near zero.

It’s why spending the Carbon tax funds on green projects rather than general revenues which reduce other tax rates or general rebates to the population is so terrible.

Then why not call it a wealth redistribution tax?

Oh...

[stang]

Man oh man, the carbon tax is the biggest sham the government is pulling on us. Maybe try taxing dirty oil. Or stop buying oil from countries that don’t care about the environment. We have the cleanest oil production but can’t sell it anywhere, then bring in Oil from countries that don’t give 2 craps about the environment and tax the people for using it. What a joke.

We’re going to tax you but give it all back. Haha ok. I can’t even count on you to fix potholes but you’ll get this right.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by stang

Man oh man, the carbon tax is the biggest sham the government is pulling on us. Maybe try taxing dirty oil. Or stop buying oil from countries that don’t care about the environment. We have the cleanest oil production but can’t sell it anywhere, then bring in Oil from countries that don’t give 2 craps about the environment and tax the people for using it. What a joke.

We’re going to tax you but give it all back. Haha ok. I can’t even count on you to fix potholes but you’ll get this right.

I'd like the sourcing on this?

I think you couple probably argument on the basis on our industries safety record, or habitat reclamation, or workers rights. But having the cleanest production methods, seems like you have conclusion looking for a question.

[stang]

Originally Posted by #-3

I'd like the sourcing on this?

I think you couple probably argument on the basis on our industries safety record, or habitat reclamation, or workers rights. But having the cleanest production methods, seems like you have conclusion looking for a question.

You're right, I am summarizing a lot of things in that. Clean and safe operations. Top human and worker rights. Pointing fingers at Woman stoning Saudi, or starving people in Venezuela.

Late night rant I guess.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Haha as if any emissions in Canada matter.

It’s for the feels man.

This is a pathetic attitude. It is like saying you don't care if a dog ####s on your lawn, because your neighbours lawn has #### on it already.

[burn_this_city]

Its more like a baby peeing in a pool while 3 or 4 hippos do the same.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Its more like a baby peeing in a pool while 3 or 4 hippos do the same.

Its more like "everybody else is doing a bad job, I should get to do a bad job too."

[Jiggy]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Its more like "everybody else is doing a bad job, I should get to do a bad job too."

It's not the best attitude but it's true. Go to countries like India, China and Brazil. You will see that anything Alberta or Canada does to reduce it's carbon footprint it will not move the needle.

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by #-3

I'd like the sourcing on this?

I think you couple probably argument on the basis on our industries safety record, or habitat reclamation, or workers rights. But having the cleanest production methods, seems like you have conclusion looking for a question.

It's not the cleanest, but Oil Sands emissions are now at the US refined average for feedstock. So right there along with everyone else, and not the "carbon bomb" slander levels we get portrayed as.

Its more like a baby peeing in a pool while 3 or 4 hippos do the same.

Exactly. But also the hippos want you to incur massive externalities to get the baby to pee slightly less while they just continue to do their own thing. The important thing is you're a bad person if you don't go along with it.