Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I for one can't imagine why he wouldn't want to continue the conversation. What a mystery this is.

It’s because he doesn’t know what “fiscal” means and doesn’t know what the PBO does and is embarrassed about it.

I feel like I already pointed that out. You’re slipping in your old age.

[CaptainCrunch]

Anyone watching the inquiry into foreign interference?


I found it facinating that by the time Dong was done testifying he was unaware that a country called china existed and he was actually a white guy from Regina.


Ok, I'm kidding a bit, but his story certainly fell apart based on a submitted CSIS report concerning his interactions with Chinese personal that was recorded on phonecalls.


It got so bad that after he was done testifying he had to send in a document to correct the record.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by GGG

Home heating oil is the exact commodity you want to tax. It is where you have the largest affect. You have a lower cost substitute with a barrier to entry. You make the cost of heating oil so uncomfortable that people upgrade before the end of life of their boiler.

The whole point of the Carbon tax is brutal efficiency not caring about income. For these seniors eventually there will be businesses offering low cost loans and free heat pumps because the savings are so high.

Also using seniors is a cop out. There are many supports available for low income seniors. In fact seniors have the lowest rates of poverty of any demographic in Canada. You can throw out the whole program because a small portion of people is negatively affected. You could choose to subsidize them more.

Lets say for sake of argument that people in Nova Scotia get 100% of the carbon tax they pay on home heating oil rebated.

Where is the money supposed to come from to upgrade their heating source? Do you not think they would use something else if it were readily available.

I mean here in Manitoba a lot of the heating is done with electric, which is great, and I'm seeing lots of new builds that are moving towards heat pumps even in the winter, and then using electric as backup.

But for people on natural gas paying the carbon tax, yes they may get a rebate, but they don't necessarily get funding to upgrade from a highly efficient natural gas boiler to an electric one. And considering how tight money is for most Canadians, it is laughable how pathetically terrible this entire thing is being implemented.

Same thing with small business, but its even worse there.

Carbon tax applied.
No rebate.
Tough to get grants / cost offsets to upgrade from natural gas / propane to something better.

So in the end costs are passed on, likely more than are needed.

Why do the feds not rebate back what they promised to small businesses, but do it in the way to say the rebate is only sent back in the form of a 100% payment if you upgrade to a zero carbon emission source of anything. EVs, electric heat, heat pump, whatever.

[rubecube]

Kind of looking similar to the O'Toole trajectory at the moment. Big lead that tapers off as the election gets closer.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trud...anos-1.6831453

[CaptainCrunch]

The polls are all over the place, Abacus and 338 show no real changes over the last few months where Nano, the one that Rubecube posted above showed a narrowing but still large lead. .



I've learned to distrust all polls.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

The polls are all over the place, Abacus and 338 show no real changes over the last few months where Nano, the one that Rubecube posted above showed a narrowing but still large lead. .

I've learned to distrust all polls.

338 hasn't updated with the new Nanos numbers, but it's definitely too soon to know if they're an outlier or not.

[Monahammer]

Still 1.5 years to election... and seemingly no motivation at all for NDP to assist in calling it sooner.

Tons of time for PPs dumbassery to come around and bite his balls. But, I still think the will to change is too much for Trudeau to overcome. Also, he has totally sucked as a Prime Minister and is deserving to fall on his face.

If he had bowed out after his divorce, he could have saved a ton of face IMO. He could have painted this story about how he needed time to focus on his life/family, that he will always love Canada but that it wasn't right for him to continue now. Everyone would have had to sympathetically bought into it, and the liberals could have cleanly washed in a new leader and likely ride that to a win. Trudeau could have gone on to be the elder statesman of the party and maybe even had a 2nd political life in the next decade if he chose.

But with him holding the reigns and the party getting slogged down he'll get buried with it. Baffling and selfish political move but I suppose we shouldn't expect less. He seems like a real narcissist.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Still 1.5 years to election... and seemingly no motivation at all for NDP to assist in calling it sooner.

Tons of time for PPs dumbassery to come around and bite his balls. But, I still think the will to change is too much for Trudeau to overcome. Also, he has totally sucked as a Prime Minister and is deserving to fall on his face.

If he had bowed out after his divorce, he could have saved a ton of face IMO. He could have painted this story about how he needed time to focus on his life/family, that he will always love Canada but that it wasn't right for him to continue now. Everyone would have had to sympathetically bought into it, and the liberals could have cleanly washed in a new leader and likely ride that to a win. Trudeau could have gone on to be the elder statesman of the party and maybe even had a 2nd political life in the next decade if he chose.

But with him holding the reigns and the party getting slogged down he'll get buried with it. Baffling and selfish political move but I suppose we shouldn't expect less. He seems like a real narcissist.

Yeah, it's bizarre. I think everyone across the spectrum in Canada thinks he should resign.

I'm not familiar with the LPC's constitution. Do they have the ability to call for a leadership review?

[curves2000]

Originally Posted by Azure

Lets say for sake of argument that people in Nova Scotia get 100% of the carbon tax they pay on home heating oil rebated.

Where is the money supposed to come from to upgrade their heating source? Do you not think they would use something else if it were readily available.

I mean here in Manitoba a lot of the heating is done with electric, which is great, and I'm seeing lots of new builds that are moving towards heat pumps even in the winter, and then using electric as backup.

But for people on natural gas paying the carbon tax, yes they may get a rebate, but they don't necessarily get funding to upgrade from a highly efficient natural gas boiler to an electric one. And considering how tight money is for most Canadians, it is laughable how pathetically terrible this entire thing is being implemented.

Same thing with small business, but its even worse there.

Carbon tax applied.
No rebate.
Tough to get grants / cost offsets to upgrade from natural gas / propane to something better.

So in the end costs are passed on, likely more than are needed.

Why do the feds not rebate back what they promised to small businesses, but do it in the way to say the rebate is only sent back in the form of a 100% payment if you upgrade to a zero carbon emission source of anything. EVs, electric heat, heat pump, whatever.

This is bang on!! This get's compounded in other ways too, a lot of the energy efficient items that people can usually change cost a LOT more, or have a lot more service costs/reduced lifespans and more.

I just look at the rental properties that I have. I have done everything I can that is reasonable in recent memory and I qualify for literally ZERO rebates. Windows, new boiler system, new hot water tank, water efficient items such as toilets, shower heads and more.

Short undergoing major renovations to the building for serious insulation and more and going through the cost and trouble to me/tenants, why bother?

Carbon taxes are high enough on what is considered an older building but with serious capital improvements in the last couple of years. I have had to pass along some of those costs to tenants, but I am still way below market value on rent. I qualify for nothing, me and my tenants pay more yet the government is telling nearly everybody (80%) that we are all getting back more than we pay!

[Azure]

But hey, no issue getting that pay raise for politicians approved, but impossible to setup some incentives for help people PAY to move away from fossil fuel energy.

So better we exempt certain things from the carbon tax.

But only where votes are needed.

Not actually where alternative sources are expensive or hard to come by.

I mean the entire thing is just a total ####show.

[chemgear]

[Ped]

Blows my mind that the Liberal party leaders haven't told Trudeau it's time he steps down.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by curves2000

This is bang on!! This get's compounded in other ways too, a lot of the energy efficient items that people can usually change cost a LOT more, or have a lot more service costs/reduced lifespans and more.

I just look at the rental properties that I have. I have done everything I can that is reasonable in recent memory and I qualify for literally ZERO rebates. Windows, new boiler system, new hot water tank, water efficient items such as toilets, shower heads and more.

Short undergoing major renovations to the building for serious insulation and more and going through the cost and trouble to me/tenants, why bother?

Carbon taxes are high enough on what is considered an older building but with serious capital improvements in the last couple of years. I have had to pass along some of those costs to tenants, but I am still way below market value on rent. I qualify for nothing, me and my tenants pay more yet the government is telling nearly everybody (80%) that we are all getting back more than we pay!

If you’ve made the upgrades on your own dime and your tenants are still paying below market value then it seems like the carbon tax is working exactly as intended.

[timun]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

If he had bowed out after his divorce, he could have saved a ton of face IMO. He could have painted this story about how he needed time to focus on his life/family, that he will always love Canada but that it wasn't right for him to continue now. Everyone would have had to sympathetically bought into it, and the liberals could have cleanly washed in a new leader and likely ride that to a win. Trudeau could have gone on to be the elder statesman of the party and maybe even had a 2nd political life in the next decade if he chose.

But with him holding the reigns and the party getting slogged down he'll get buried with it. Baffling and selfish political move but I suppose we shouldn't expect less. He seems like a real narcissist.

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yeah, it's bizarre. I think everyone across the spectrum in Canada thinks he should resign.

Eh, you run the risk of a lame-duck leader who gets destroyed anyway. Look at the PCs vis-à-vis Mulroney and Campbell. Mulroney jumping ship wouldn't have saved that election for them, the damage was already so far gone and done.

I'd also not keep Trudeau around in any capacity, when he finally does move along. Again: the PCs did that with Diefenbaker back in the day and it led to the party spending 20 years in opposition (save Clark's short minority government). Diefenbaker spent his last 12 years stabbing Robert Stanfield and Joe Clark in the back at pretty much every turn.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by timun

Eh, you run the risk of a lame-duck leader who gets destroyed anyway. Look at the PCs vis-à-vis Mulroney and Campbell. Mulroney jumping ship wouldn't have saved that election for them, the damage was already so far gone and done.

I'd also not keep Trudeau around in any capacity, when he finally does move along. Again: the PCs did that with Diefenbaker back in the day and it led to the party spending 20 years in opposition (save Clark's short minority government). Diefenbaker spent his last 12 years stabbing Robert Stanfield and Joe Clark in the back at pretty much every turn.

I don't think they'd keep Trudeau around. It would be like if the CPC had kept Harper around despite knowing how fatigued Canadians were of him. I also don't think Trudeau's ego would let him stick around.

I'm not really sure what happens to Trudeau after his political career ends, and I think that's part of why he's hanging on to the bitter end.

[curves2000]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

If you’ve made the upgrades on your own dime and your tenants are still paying below market value then it seems like the carbon tax is working exactly as intended.

Not really in my opinion? I always repair, rather than replace if it makes more sense. I do like the "old is gold" mindset for a lot of things. A lot of items that are "high efficiency" are the items that require significantly more costs for service/parts. A lot of these items have incredibly short lifespan's, which in my opinion, reduces a lot of their "good" environmental impact.

Some things just reach end of life like in the building projects I mentioned. New boiler system? I didn't go for an ultra high efficient model, went with an 89% efficient model. The 94% model I was told would cost substantially more, in the 300% more, would probably last 15 years (vs 30+) and requires a lot more maintenance, has more electronic points of failure etc. I went with the cheaper option since the 5% efficiency isn't saving the planet and my overall cost of nat gas, not service fee's, are low. Why pay way more and have it cost me more and my tenants more?

Windows were upgraded to higher end Lux Windows. Energy efficient certified and all that. Of course despite a $30k investment, those models don't qualify, only the more expensive ones for a small amount of grant money.

Hot water tank is an energy efficient tank but not the ultra high efficient tankless hot water system. The increase in upfront costs, added operating expenses for maint/repair just doesn't make it worth it in my opinion.

A lot of "green" changes in day to day items we buy just don't make overall financial sense when running the numbers. I think we might be seeing some of this in the EV market. High costs for service, repair, collision repair, lack of parts and other issues. Sometimes a reliable and efficient Honda or Toyota that works like a charm is the way to go, why spend a lot more on a Tesla and have a mountain of headaches?

I think it's a conundrum a lot of people face

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by curves2000

Not really in my opinion? I always repair, rather than replace if it makes more sense. I do like the "old is gold" mindset for a lot of things. A lot of items that are "high efficiency" are the items that require significantly more costs for service/parts. A lot of these items have incredibly short lifespan's, which in my opinion, reduces a lot of their "good" environmental impact.

Some things just reach end of life like in the building projects I mentioned. New boiler system? I didn't go for an ultra high efficient model, went with an 89% efficient model. The 94% model I was told would cost substantially more, in the 300% more, would probably last 15 years (vs 30+) and requires a lot more maintenance, has more electronic points of failure etc. I went with the cheaper option since the 5% efficiency isn't saving the planet and my overall cost of nat gas, not service fee's, are low. Why pay way more and have it cost me more and my tenants more?

Windows were upgraded to higher end Lux Windows. Energy efficient certified and all that. Of course despite a $30k investment, those models don't qualify, only the more expensive ones for a small amount of grant money.

Hot water tank is an energy efficient tank but not the ultra high efficient tankless hot water system. The increase in upfront costs, added operating expenses for maint/repair just doesn't make it worth it in my opinion.

A lot of "green" changes in day to day items we buy just don't make overall financial sense when running the numbers. I think we might be seeing some of this in the EV market. High costs for service, repair, collision repair, lack of parts and other issues. Sometimes a reliable and efficient Honda or Toyota that works like a charm is the way to go, why spend a lot more on a Tesla and have a mountain of headaches?

I think it's a conundrum a lot of people face

OK, so you upgraded all these things to higher efficiency versions/more environmentally friendly versions than you had, but not the absolute best, but aren’t replacing items that still work “just because” and even though you’re passing the costs down your tenants still aren’t paying market value…

… and that means the carbon tax doesn’t work?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Azure

Lets say for sake of argument that people in Nova Scotia get 100% of the carbon tax they pay on home heating oil rebated.

Where is the money supposed to come from to upgrade their heating source? Do you not think they would use something else if it were readily available.

I mean here in Manitoba a lot of the heating is done with electric, which is great, and I'm seeing lots of new builds that are moving towards heat pumps even in the winter, and then using electric as backup.

But for people on natural gas paying the carbon tax, yes they may get a rebate, but they don't necessarily get funding to upgrade from a highly efficient natural gas boiler to an electric one. And considering how tight money is for most Canadians, it is laughable how pathetically terrible this entire thing is being implemented.

Same thing with small business, but its even worse there.

Carbon tax applied.
No rebate.
Tough to get grants / cost offsets to upgrade from natural gas / propane to something better.

So in the end costs are passed on, likely more than are needed.

Why do the feds not rebate back what they promised to small businesses, but do it in the way to say the rebate is only sent back in the form of a 100% payment if you upgrade to a zero carbon emission source of anything. EVs, electric heat, heat pump, whatever.

Perhaps from the government rebate programs

https://www.efficiencyns.ca/resident...-to-heat-pump/

And there are financing programs through greener homes and the efficiency Nova Scotia.

[curves2000]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

OK, so you upgraded all these things to higher efficiency versions/more environmentally friendly versions than you had, but not the absolute best, but aren’t replacing items that still work “just because” and even though you’re passing the costs down your tenants still aren’t paying market value…

… and that means the carbon tax doesn’t work?

I don't want to dig into things too much here but at the end of the day, it comes down to dollars and the bottom line. Sometimes upgrades are worth it and sometimes they are not. The payback period is only one aspect of things. You need to take into consideration things like service, lifespan and more.

The poster above talked about getting funds for what in essence are major renovations to homes and buildings. Insulation, design improvements, major HVAC systems and more. Where is this money suppose to come from? Is it my responsibility? Your's? The government's? To actually pay for renovations on improvements?

People are always more cognizant of costs and energy use when they are paying for things. Plenty of landlords who are upgrading specific aspects of properties to try and reduce operating expenses. Some things don't get looked after because they are not paying the bill, so why "upgrade" to things that are apparently more efficient but may cost more overall? Doesn't make sense.

I get what the Carbon tax is trying to achieve, force people into changing behaviors for certain things in order to reduce carbon footprint, emissions etc But we are doing it with these little games of "you will be better off" "look at all this money that your getting" "your saving the world, and it's only costing you a few more cents at the pump"

Think of carbon taxes like excises taxes on alcohol and tobaccos products. If the goal is to reduce booze and Tabaco consumption, your not going to waste time with these minor increases over the years. Few people quit over those small increases. Your make smoking or using vape like products so cost prohibited that people just stop. A pint of beer costing $40 might alter some habits. Why they don't do that is it's not political practical.

Just like slamming $1000 tax on your heating bill to force you or your landlord to change a 60 year old furnace isn't either. Or a $1000 carbon tax levy onto a flight to see grandma in Thunder Bay isn't either.

It's just better to keep repeating that over 32 million Canadians apparently are doing substantially better with carbon pricing than without it. Why don't we apply an end user carbon tax to more things , get more money back and reduce emissions. We can go to the steakhouse, have a T-Bone for $100, get back $120 and feel good about it

[rubecube]

Jesus Christ, curves. Have you ever heard of brevity?