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

[Locke]

Originally Posted by chemgear

I'm bemused that ad blitz by the NDP has some bat#### crazy woman hanging her laundry outside to dry right now.

Well, if its an NDP lady then doesnt the bat#### crazy part go without saying?

I'll show myself out.

[Dion]

NDP announces grant program to help charities deal with carbon tax

Phillips explained the new grant, entitled the Non-profit Energy Efficiency Transition (NEET) program, will support “energy efficiency audits” or “energy management plans” where non-profits will have experts tour their facilities and outline what they can do to be more efficient and save on fuel costs.

And while the province wouldn’t say how much of those retrofit costs it would fund once they’re outlined, officials did say many could qualify for funding help.

“Once these audits are complete, and the non-profits figure out what they need to do, they may qualify for further funding and rebates,” added Kirk Heuser, spokesman for the province’s Climate Change Office.

The NDP made the announcement Friday from the impressive new, high-tech facility housing the non-profit Meals on Wheels, a sustainable LEED building in the city’s southeast.

“Since we have arrived here, we’ve been able to reduce our energy costs by up to 20 per cent,” said president Jim Brown, pointing to solar panels and built-in rain barrels used to collect water for ground maintenance.

What other non profits have to say....

But other non-profits who haven’t enjoyed the luxuries of a new building are wary of whether an audit will provide any new information, and whether they could even afford them if they don’t qualify for full funding.

“We’ve already done this, a lot of non-profits have done this, because they’re doing annual assessments all the time to see how they can cut costs,” said Calgary Food Bank CEO James McAra.

“But how many non-profits don’t own their own assets,” he added, explaining that many landlords may not be willing to have an audit and purchase retrofits to reduce costs.

McAra argued the more important concern among non-profits is the uncertainty around the NDP’s carbon tax and how it will affect everyone’s bottom line.

“We’ve been worried about it for a long time. And we can’t get any detailed information as to how it will affect us,” he said.

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...ith-carbon-tax

[Izzle]

Very interesting read from Obama himself (apologies for the US-centric tone)

http://science.sciencemag.org/conten...e.aam6284.full

Highlights:

ECONOMIES GROW, EMISSIONS FALL

The United States is showing that GHG mitigation need not conflict with economic growth. Rather, it can boost efficiency, productivity, and innovation.

Since 2008, the United States has experienced the first sustained period of rapid GHG emissions reductions and simultaneous economic growth on record. Specifically, CO2 emissions from the energy sector fell by 9.5% from 2008 to 2015, while the economy grew by more than 10%. In this same period, the amount of energy consumed per dollar of real gross domestic product (GDP) fell by almost 11%, the amount of CO2 emitted per unit of energy consumed declined by 8%, and CO2 emitted per dollar of GDP declined by 18% (2).

The importance of this trend cannot be understated. This “decoupling” of energy sector emissions and economic growth should put to rest the argument that combatting climate change requires accepting lower growth or a lower standard of living.

For critics of Canada's carbon tax... especially the "China and India produce the most GHG emissions, they should be the first to switch to clean energy"

Were the United States to step away from Paris, it would lose its seat at the table to hold other countries to their commitments, demand transparency, and encourage ambition. This does not mean the next Administration needs to follow identical domestic policies to my Administration’s. There are multiple paths and mechanisms by which this country can achieve—efficiently and economically—the targets we embraced in the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement itself is based on a nationally determined structure whereby each country sets and updates its own commitments. Regardless of U.S. domestic policies, it would undermine our economic interests to walk away from the opportunity to hold countries representing two-thirds of global emissions—including China, India, Mexico, European Union members, and others—accountable.

[chemgear]

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-co...your-sacrifice

Rex Murphy: Cherish your suffering, Ontario; Premier Wynne’s green gods know of your sacrifice

In his familiar Lincolnesque manner McGuinty promoted the Green Plan as “placing Ontario in the forefront as a leader in the fight against global warming.” Ms. Wynne, as faithful to the doctrine of the founder, works out of the same catechism. Ontario is merely, and this is no small merely, leading the way

The dream was, I suppose, that the Kazakhstanis, and Burundians, the Chinese and Peruvians, all in their several dominions, taking the morning beverage to begin the day, would pause and remark to the neighbors, “Those Ontarians. They’re leading the fight against global warming. What a people.” Then, instantly, a worldwide flight to turn off the space heaters, shut down the factories, jail the coal miners, and turn out the lights. In 24 hours the only place left on the planet that still had the lights on would be a mansion in Tennessee.

So was all the pain worth it? Mr. Trudeau thinks so. For he has the same plan. And some of the same planners. So far, though, that’s the whole parade.

[killer_carlson]

God Bless Rex Murphy

Easily my favorite journalist in the country

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

God Bless Rex Murphy

Easily my favorite journalist in the country

Says a lot considering he is no journalist

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

He is, however, a really gifted writer. That was fantastic.

[OMG!WTF!]

I like this quote from the article...

And so, if they raise their eyes and see that last year carbon dioxide molecules were, say, 387 parts per million in the atmosphere of our planet, and now – as a mere cost of billions and utter depression in their electoral prospects, it is, say, 386 or even 385 parts per million – Ontario, they cry, has done its bit. A bit, after all, being all that Ontario can do.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Says a lot considering he is no journalist

LOL!

In what world would Rex Murphy not be considered a journalist?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

He's more of a commentator, no?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by transplant99

LOL!

In what world would Rex Murphy not be considered a journalist?

In a world where infotainment isn't considered journalism

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by transplant99

LOL!

In what world would Rex Murphy not be considered a journalist?

I don't believe he's ever been an actual journalist, I think his whole career is based around commentary.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't believe he's ever been an actual journalist, I think his whole career is based around commentary.

He is a regular contributor to the National and plethora of current and past CBC radio shows.

He does his own research, writes his stories, and then broadcasts them.

Even if a guy has an opinion piece in a newspaper or on tv etc, they are still journalists in every sense of the word.

Here are two definitions i found, the second was straight from Merriam Webster...

Journalism is the activity of gathering, assessing, creating, and presenting news and information. It is also the product of these activities.

1
a : a person engaged in journalism; especially : a writer or editor for a news medium
b : a writer who aims at a mass audience
2
: a person who keeps a journal

If Rex isn't a journalist, then niether is Bob Mckenzie, or Nahlah Ayed or any of a whole schwack of others who all do similar things as Rex.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by GGG

In a world where infotainment isn't considered journalism

Infotainment?

He does opinion pieces but he covers real stories even if he is interjecting his own thoughts on them.

He isn't TMZ or E level of a broadcaster.

Strange analogy.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Infotainment?

He does opinion pieces but he covers real stories even if he is interjecting his own thoughts on them.

He isn't TMZ or E level of a broadcaster.

Strange analogy.

See, that's where it becomes less like journalism. It's an interesting question actually as he mostly does opinion pieces. Anyone have a twitter account they could ask Jesse Brown? He'd have a good answer.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Infotainment?

He does opinion pieces but he covers real stories even if he is interjecting his own thoughts on them.

He isn't TMZ or E level of a broadcaster.

Strange analogy.

He's effectively a Rick bell type with much better prose. He takes a populist view point and doesn't bother with nuance.

He most reminds me of when Bart starts doing kids news stories.

[Clarkey]

So if 66.6% of people get their money back and the other 33.3% can 'afford it cause they are rich', what exactly is the incentive for anyone to reduce their CO2 output?

It's a half baked, tax grab, wealth distribution scheme, poorly masqueraded as an environmental program. The clueless NDP idiots who are trying to sell this thing even naively labelled it as a tax from the get go.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Clarkey

So if 66.6% of people get their money back and the other 33.3% can 'afford it cause they are rich', what exactly is the incentive for anyone to reduce their CO2 output?

It's a half baked, tax grab, wealth distribution scheme, poorly masqueraded as an environmental program. The clueless NDP idiots who are trying to sell this thing even naively labelled it as a tax from the get go.

Because, obviously, the bottom 2/3 of the population is going to invest those savings/rebates into buying solar panels and other green initiatives. Trickle up green economics!

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Clarkey

So if 66.6% of people get their money back and the other 33.3% can 'afford it cause they are rich', what exactly is the incentive for anyone to reduce their CO2 output?

It's a half baked, tax grab, wealth distribution scheme, poorly masqueraded as an environmental program. The clueless NDP idiots who are trying to sell this thing even naively labelled it as a tax from the get go.

That SO many people have difficulty with the concept of marginal tax rates is a damning indictment of our collective knowledge.

Here's the very basic breakdown:

Even if you get the rebate back you have the incentive to continue to lower your tax payments.

Against, it's almost as if people are willfully trying to not understand this basic point in order to satisfy their political priors.

[killer_carlson]

Again, righteous sanctimony from the leftist bureaucrats is a go to platform rather than listening to the concerns of those who feel the impact.

It's a wealth redistribution initiative dressed up as environmental policy. Just admit it.