Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Leeman4Gilmour

This Just Transition legislation is political fluff costing tax payers billions of dollars. An example from the position paper;

"Canada is investing $4.4 billion to help more than 200,000 Canadians make their homes greener and more affordable by lowering energy bills"

Sounds Jim Dandy. That works out to $22,000 for a lucky 200,000 people. There's over 14 million homes in Canada. I mean how does the government, how would anyone, calculate that spending $22,000 on 1% of the homes in Canada make any kind of difference. Just big numbers thrown out to make the electorate ooooo and ahhhh.

Here's the position paper;

https://www.rncanengagenrcan.ca/site..._-_july_15.pdf

It's fluff with big numbers and no basis. I get it, it's a position paper, but if you're going to throw out billions of dollars in estimates you should have a basis for that. That's a non-partisan rant against all politicians.

It'd help if you understood what that was referring to. The $4.4B program is 10-year interest free loans; they're not giving that money away:

We are working with our partners at Natural Resources Canada to deliver this initiative to provide $4.4 billion in interest-free loans, of up to $40,000 per household, helping up to 175,000 homeowners complete extensive home retrofits on their principal residence.

https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/profe...-greener-homes

Seems like a good program to me. The government fronts the money for people to pay for energy upgrades and then as long as the payback period of the upgrades are 10 years or less, (which most effective ones are) then the energy savings alone will cover the loan payments. So we improve residential infrastructure, reduce overall energy usage, and generate economic activity at a relatively small cost to taxpayers.

[FacePaint]

Originally Posted by Azure

You are right there will be lots of jobs available as we transition into the new energy economy and we should work on transitioning workers, but why anyone would trust the federal government to successfully do anything other than waste billions and still have nothing to show for is beyond me.

Work like that is successfully down as close to the source as possible.
If you want to transition workers, fund it on the local level and remove the feds from having any say so.

In fact don't fund it. The provinces should fight it out. War of attrition. People have always moved to where the work is.

The Federal government funds the Labour Market Trade Agreement which is administered by the Provinces (training is Provincial jurisdiction). I don't see any details to conclude this training would be different? So... Wish come true?

[GGG]

Hmmmm

Though relative to the start of the December we are 8.5 cents better off so always more is going on than just taxation

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Originally Posted by opendoor

It'd help if you understood what that was referring to. The $4.4B program is 10-year interest free loans; they're not giving that money away:

https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/profe...-greener-homes

Seems like a good program to me. The government fronts the money for people to pay for energy upgrades and then as long as the payback period of the upgrades are 10 years or less, (which most effective ones are) then the energy savings alone will cover the loan payments. So we improve residential infrastructure, reduce overall energy usage, and generate economic activity at a relatively small cost to taxpayers.

Appreciate the clarity. If the risk is so low on the money, why set a ridiculously low limit to the number of households who could potentially benefit? Why not open it up to any house intending on improving the energy efficiency of their homes? What's the end game? Is the end game to significantly reduce CO2 emissions? This won't move the needle at all. Nah, I stand by my opinion. Waste of money with no significant benefit to the environment.

To expand a tad. I've found numbers ranging from 14% to 17% of energy consumption in Canada is via household. And electricity generation contributes 8% of Canada's total Co2 emissions. To me it doesn't matter if that $4.4B is over 10 years and is in the form of interest free loans. If the goal is to significantly lower emissions, providing assistance to improve the energy efficiency of 1% of the homes in Canada does nothing.

And, for the record, I don't have issue with the $15B the feds are allocating to public transit projects, the $8B earmarked for decarbonization projects, and a few other points in that legislation.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Leeman4Gilmour

Appreciate the clarity. If the risk is so low on the money, why set a ridiculously low limit to the number of households who could potentially benefit? Why not open it up to any house intending on improving the energy efficiency of their homes? What's the end game? Is the end game to significantly reduce CO2 emissions? This won't move the needle at all. Nah, I stand by my opinion. Waste of money with no significant benefit to the environment.

To expand a tad. I've found numbers ranging from 14% to 17% of energy consumption in Canada is via household. And electricity generation contributes 8% of Canada's total Co2 emissions. To me it doesn't matter if that $4.4B is over 10 years and is in the form of interest free loans. If the goal is to significantly lower emissions, providing assistance to improve the energy efficiency of 1% of the homes in Canada does nothing.

And, for the record, I don't have issue with the $15B the feds are allocating to public transit projects, the $8B earmarked for decarbonization projects, and a few other points in that legislation.

I think you're misunderstanding the purpose of almost all industry funding. You cannot fund the transition entirely or even significantly through subsidies. The role of government subsidies is to send signals to business and create or nurture new or emerging markets to steer the direction of private capital.

In this case, getting a few people to start buying heat pumps creates/increases a market for manufacturers and installers. This means that Mitsubishi for example, may start making and selling more options for their heat pumps as they see that Canada is putting their money where their mouth in their push for heat pumps (which is an important part of net zero goals). As this trend continues, heat pumps become cheaper due to competition and scale. Ditto for installers. Most HVAC installers know nothing about newer heat pumps and tell people they don't work at lower temps, mostly because they aren't current with newer technology and not familiar with heat pump installation so they push for familiar options. Creating more customers, even a few, means you get more installers ready to install heat pumps.

It's more about planting seeds than buying plants if you get my anology

[Fuzz]

Often times if programs like this are successful they get expanded and extended. So it may seem small now, but if it works that could change. If it doesn't, you haven't committed too much to it.

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I think you're misunderstanding the purpose of almost all industry funding. You cannot fund the transition entirely or even significantly through subsidies. The role of government subsidies is to send signals to business and create or nurture new or emerging markets to steer the direction of private capital.

In this case, getting a few people to start buying heat pumps creates/increases a market for manufacturers and installers. This means that Mitsubishi for example, may start making and selling more options for their heat pumps as they see that Canada is putting their money where their mouth in their push for heat pumps (which is an important part of net zero goals). As this trend continues, heat pumps become cheaper due to competition and scale. Ditto for installers. Most HVAC installers know nothing about newer heat pumps and tell people they don't work at lower temps, mostly because they aren't current with newer technology and not familiar with heat pump installation so they push for familiar options. Creating more customers, even a few, means you get more installers ready to install heat pumps.

It's more about planting seeds than buying plants if you get my anology

I understand just fine. Good analogy, appreciate the effort. Still don't see the value or feel any significant gains will be made by that particular piece of the proposed legislation. Just one man's opinion.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Often times if programs like this are successful they get expanded and extended. So it may seem small now, but if it works that could change. If it doesn't, you haven't committed too much to it.

I'm not sure it really needs to. It's not being done in a vacuum, either. Adding carbon taxes and industry incentives we see strong signals towards emission reduction spending. We cannot just give government dollars to everyone to do it all. There's nowhere near enough money. But if we make it cheaper to have a heat pump than a furnace, create a market for home energy efficiency trades, incentivize manufacturers to produce goods here, create policy that strengthens solar ROI, etc, then things go themselves.

[calculoso]

“Canada’s economy added 104,000 jobs in December, blowing well past expectations”

“It was an absolutely massive surprise, says Desjardins economist”

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/can...mber-1.6705569

The Canadian labour market ended the year on a strong note as the economy added a whopping 104,000 jobs in December, showing no signs of the slowdown many economists have been anticipating.

Statistics Canada reported Friday that the unemployment rate fell slightly to 5.0 per cent last month. This marks the third decline in the unemployment rate in fourth months, edging it closer to the record low of 4.9 per cent reached in June and July.

In its latest labour force survey, the federal agency says the rise in employment was driven by an increase in full-time work.

…

"It was an absolutely massive surprise," Royce Mendes,#managing director and head of macro strategy at Desjardins, told CBC News. The number was over 20 times more than the 5,000 jobs that economists had forecast, he said.

[Ironhorse]

Where the hell are all these jobs? My kid is still trying to find one…

[calculoso]

Believe it or not, this is not an Onion or Beaverton headline

Man Arrested for Attempted Murder while Already on Release for Attempted Murder

https://twitter.com/user/status/1611561429957578752

[GGG]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Grid de-carbonization impacts jobs, no?

It’s two separate government programs discussed in the same article.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Believe it or not, this is not an Onion or Beaverton headline

Man Arrested for Attempted Murder while Already on Release for Attempted Murder

https://twitter.com/user/status/1611561429957578752

Maybe after a certain number of failed murder attempts, the police don’t consider them a real threat anymore. Just a nuisance.

They should do something like that with attempted robbery. Like, if nothing was actually stolen, meh. Only prosecute successfully completed murders and robberies.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by GGG

It’s two separate government programs discussed in the same article.

Yes. Both impact jobs and our province, no?

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Maybe after a certain number of failed murder attempts, the police don’t consider them a real threat anymore. Just a nuisance.

They should do something like that with attempted robbery. Like, if nothing was actually stolen, meh. Only prosecute successfully completed murders and robberies.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Maybe after a certain number of failed murder attempts, the police don’t consider them a real threat anymore. Just a nuisance.

They should do something like that with attempted robbery. Like, if nothing was actually stolen, meh. Only prosecute successfully completed murders and robberies.

"Buy one get one free" legal system?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by peter12

The reason we are so far behind in infrastructure isn't because of a lack of money, it's because we have a byzantine and sclerotic permitting system that tacks on years - sometimes decades - onto a project.

This is a feature, not a bug, of energy regulations in all first world countries and it's 100% NIMBYism

[Azure]

Originally Posted by calculoso

“Canada’s economy added 104,000 jobs in December, blowing well past expectations”

“It was an absolutely massive surprise, says Desjardins economist”

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/can...mber-1.6705569

The Canadian labour market ended the year on a strong note as the economy added a whopping 104,000 jobs in December, showing no signs of the slowdown many economists have been anticipating.

Statistics Canada reported Friday that the unemployment rate fell slightly to 5.0 per cent last month. This marks the third decline in the unemployment rate in fourth months, edging it closer to the record low of 4.9 per cent reached in June and July.

In its latest labour force survey, the federal agency says the rise in employment was driven by an increase in full-time work.

…

"It was an absolutely massive surprise," Royce Mendes,#managing director and head of macro strategy at Desjardins, told CBC News. The number was over 20 times more than the 5,000 jobs that economists had forecast, he said.

And here we go with another interest rate increase.

[CaptainCrunch]

Well its nice to see that instead of job gains being bolstered by massive public sector hirings this one is mainly private sector.

Full time jobs with a lot of them in manufacturing, food and hotel services from what I can see.

[Northendzone]

some interesting, and i suppose not overly surprising tidbits coming out of bill morneau's book about his time as finance guy.

https://torontosun.com/opinion/edito...deau-poilievre

of course bill was a guy that "forgot" he owned a french villa