Dion's carbon tax + tax reduction of $15 B

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

I have found the best way to discuss things is to not really make a point, insult people, and make rampant generalizations as well.

I didn't insult anyone there. I have knocked on doors for political parties before and I find many, many people do not follow the issues. And if you can't explain your platform plank in two sentences or less, many people lose interest. You really need to keep it simple.... and this is not a simple tax to understand.

My statement was "if people don't understand it they reject it as evil". Nowhere did I suggest that this was the only reason to reject the carbon tax... there are lots of pros and cons. But most people across the country are not going to study this hard enough to find those pros and cons and have a debate. Dion is pinning his hopes on a complicated issue that I'm doubting will win many votes in any province, much less Alberta.

And doing anything about Global Warming is going to alienate Alberta as polls show that Albertans are the least likely to believe that it is happening. I don't think the carbon tax is ABOUT alienating Alberta for the good of the other provinces, it's about addressing an issue that other provinces want action on save one.

[Azure]

Personally I hope the NDP takes over the Liberal seats. They seem to form a better opposition than the Liberals do.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

I didn't insult anyone there. I have knocked on doors for political parties before and I find many, many people do not follow the issues. And if you can't explain your platform plank in two sentences or less, many people lose interest. You really need to keep it simple.... and this is not a simple tax to understand.

My statement was "if people don't understand it they reject it as evil". Nowhere did I suggest that this was the only reason to reject the carbon tax... there are lots of pros and cons. But most people across the country are not going to study this hard enough to find those pros and cons and have a debate. Dion is pinning his hopes on a complicated issue that I'm doubting will win many votes in any province, much less Alberta.

And doing anything about Global Warming is going to alienate Alberta as polls show that Albertans are the least likely to believe that it is happening. I don't think the carbon tax is ABOUT alienating Alberta for the good of the other provinces, it's about addressing an issue that other provinces want action on save one.

Except that the Federal Liberal's always find a way to exempt Ontario industries while going after Alberta Industries.

Remember their last environmental plan where the auto industry was going to be exempt, but the Oil Industry was going to be targeted?

Maybe Alberta is cynical because the Liberal government has spent a great deal of time trying to pound punative platforms down their throat, while Jean Chretien flys over Alberta on the way to campaign in B.C. while exclaiming that Albertan's don't think right.

[old-fart]

I understand the plan perfectly well, and it is a bad plan. If this is an "environmental" policy, where are the outlined targets to actually reduce carbon or GHG? If the plan works absolutely perfectly, and every penny is returned to the tax payers (something I don't believe for a second will actually happen), and then those taxpayers reduce their carbon footprint (the apparent aim of this policy)... how will Dion make up the impending shortfall in revenue? Will he run a deficit, or will he raise income taxes back up again (or raise the GST)? It is exceedingly unlikely he will reduce services, so how will he make up the shortfall?

This is a bad plan, and if the electorate is even a little smart, Dion will be done in politics after the next election when the NDP pass the Libs as the official opposition.

[automaton 3]

My thoughts echo many of the previous posters, this plan is an absolute train wreck on many levels.

Even at its most basic level, it can't be "revenue neutral" as it will surely costs hundreds of millions, if not billions to administer this boondoggle, let alone all of the assorted handouts Dion has also promised.

[Teh_Bandwagoner]

Pierre Trudeau? Is that you?

[Vedder]

Originally Posted by automaton 3

My thoughts echo many of the previous posters, this plan is an absolute train wreck on many levels.

Even at its most basic level, it can't be "revenue neutral" as it will surely costs hundreds of millions, if not billions to administer this boondoggle, let alone all of the assorted handouts Dion has also promised.

Yeah I think this thing would be an absolute nightmare in terms of administration and implementation costs.

[Stranger]

Originally Posted by Vedder

Yeah I think this thing would be an absolute nightmare in terms of administration and implementation costs.

If the gun registry is any indication, the Liberals have lots of experience with administration and implementation nightmares, so that shouldn't be a problem. This should only cost taxpayers a billion or two.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

I have found the best way to discuss things is to not really make a point, insult people, and make rampant generalizations as well.

I think what he is pointing out is that democracy in part is to cater to the lowest common denominator in how you communicate and build policy.

I've got some bad news for anyone that doesn't notice that.

[calculoso]

Firm takes action against Liberal 'Green Shift' brand

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...tories&s_name=

An environmental consulting and supply company in Toronto is firing off a legal "cease and desist" order to stop the Liberal party from using the firm's trademark name - Green Shift - for its new carbon-tax plan.
...
Environmental consultant Jennifer Wright, who has owned Green Shift since 1999 and registered the company name in 2001, said Monday she and a handful of other dedicated environmentalists who work with the firm can't afford to have its identity associated with any political party.
...
"We're just trying to ask them politely to do the right thing," she said in an interview. "We have asked them to stop using the name and we've asked them for a full public apology."

A Liberal spokesman confirmed the party knew of the Green Shift company before Dion's announcement, saying someone contacted Green Shift before Dion announced the scheme last week.

"A courtesy call was made last Monday in advance of (the) launch to let them know they might get increased traffic," said Mark Dunn, Dion's communications director.
...
A Liberal spokesman discounted the company's protests that the Liberals mimicked Green Shift's web domain name, by adding the article "the" before Greenshift.ca.

[CaptainCrunch]

And in another whoops today

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Colum...968491-sun.php

Who's going to pay for that?

[Boblobla]

We should be worried about this tbqh:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...BNStory/energy

[old-fart]

Anybody try the nice little calculator on the Libs website to see how much you'd "save" with their new tax cuts and other social programs? I'd save $64 a month, just over $2 a day. That likely won't cover the increased heating and electricity costs, not to mention the increased cost of gas for the car, food, clothing and virtually everything else that will rise in price as a result of this faulty policy.

And how much will it reduce GHGs? That's right... there are absolutely no targets whatsoever in this plan. None. No targets at all to reduce what it is they say the plan is actually meant for.

Don't kid yourself. This is not an environmental policy. This is a tax grab to pay for Liberal social programs, plain and simple.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by old-fart

Anybody try the nice little calculator on the Libs website to see how much you'd "save" with their new tax cuts and other social programs? I'd save $64 a month, just over $2 a day. That likely won't cover the increased heating and electricity costs, not to mention the increased cost of gas for the car, food, clothing and virtually everything else that will rise in price as a result of this faulty policy.

And how much will it reduce GHGs? That's right... there are absolutely no targets whatsoever in this plan. None. No targets at all to reduce what it is they say the plan is actually meant for.

Don't kid yourself. This is not an environmental policy. This is a tax grab to pay for Liberal social programs, plain and simple.

To me, its the same as Kyoto. Its an economic transfer device. For Kyoto, money goes from developed nations to undeveloped nations that have no need to reduce their carbon emissions.

For Dion's plan, its an economic transfer device from Energy producing provinces to manufacturing provinces that are facing recessions.

[BCReefer]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

I didn't insult anyone there. I have knocked on doors for political parties before and I find many, many people do not follow the issues. And if you can't explain your platform plank in two sentences or less, many people lose interest. You really need to keep it simple.... and this is not a simple tax to understand.

My statement was "if people don't understand it they reject it as evil". Nowhere did I suggest that this was the only reason to reject the carbon tax... there are lots of pros and cons. But most people across the country are not going to study this hard enough to find those pros and cons and have a debate. Dion is pinning his hopes on a complicated issue that I'm doubting will win many votes in any province, much less Alberta.

And doing anything about Global Warming is going to alienate Alberta as polls show that Albertans are the least likely to believe that it is happening. I don't think the carbon tax is ABOUT alienating Alberta for the good of the other provinces, it's about addressing an issue that other provinces want action on save one.

Devil - I understand what you were saying, others just took it the wrong way. But I do think you missed one main point. Most people will only hear a few parts - lower taxes and tax the polluters or users.

They may not realize that they are the same people, it just looks better for the government when it is the hydro company raising the rates to cover the new tax.

I was at a seminar a few weeks ago and it seems that automobiles only account for 25% of the problem. The other 75% comes from industry who manufactors all the items we buy.

unless we all starting driving battery cars tomorrow with 0% emissions we would only make a 25% difference.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by BCReefer

I was at a seminar a few weeks ago and it seems that automobiles only account for 25% of the problem. The other 75% comes from industry who manufactors all the items we buy.

But that is where green taxes are really supposed to work - on industry. If company X can find a way to shave costs and have lower prices than company Y and thus sell more product, then company X will have a market advantage. Therefore companies that are being taxed due to their CO2 output, may actually have a market reason to clean up their act.

If you believe that both company X and company Y will both just raise their prices to cover the new tax, then you believe that capitalism is a broken system. As a card carrying member of the Green Party, I've supported CO2 taxes long before I ever heard the name Stephane Dion. I think the profit motive is far more effective in sparking creative thinking than hard caps and regulation are.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

But that is where green taxes are really supposed to work - on industry. If company X can find a way to shave costs and have lower prices than company Y and thus sell more product, then company X will have a market advantage. Therefore companies that are being taxed due to their CO2 output, may actually have a market reason to clean up their act.

If you believe that both company X and company Y will both just raise their prices to cover the new tax, then you believe that capitalism is a broken system. As a card carrying member of the Green Party, I've supported CO2 taxes long before I ever heard the name Stephane Dion. I think the profit motive is far more effective in sparking creative thinking than hard caps and regulation are.

That would be swell if Dion was proposing to be the PM of the earth.

Problem is that anyone who makes the widget in a different country gets the advantage and kills the Canadian compeditor.

The entire green movement would be better served to not be so regional. Dion is just looking for votes in areas of the country where he thinks he has a chance to grab a vote. The entire proposal has nothing to do with cleaner air, the earth will not emitt less CO2. The proposal has to do with being a regional populist in his country and push industry out to other another.

Kyoto was the same way, buy votes at home without doing a bit of good for the country.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

But that is where green taxes are really supposed to work - on industry. If company X can find a way to shave costs and have lower prices than company Y and thus sell more product, then company X will have a market advantage. Therefore companies that are being taxed due to their CO2 output, may actually have a market reason to clean up their act.

That might work in a perfect world, however it would still cost company X a lot of money to retool their manufacturing or industry, probably more then the taxes could take, so they're going to push those losses on the consumer. Beyond that, this really isn't about competition because we're talking about increases in sectors which means that all companies in that sector will be effected. Lets say Company X and Company Y both manufacture cars. They both get heavily taxed under the carbon tax, so they have a choice, they can accept the tax and push the losses on the consumer, or they can retool at major costs to reduce their carbon signature, then they push those retooling costs onto the consumer, plus they will still be tax, probably a little less, so they push that taxation costs onto the consumer.


[quote=Devils'Advocate;1356754If you believe that both company X and company Y will both just raise their prices to cover the new tax, then you believe that capitalism is a broken system. As a card carrying member of the Green Party, I've supported CO2 taxes long before I ever heard the name Stephane Dion. I think the profit motive is far more effective in sparking creative thinking than hard caps and regulation are.[/quote]

There is no such thing as perfect capitalism or capitalism in a vacuum, its not about reducing prices its about increasing profits.

In a country that has a taxable surplus, they shouldn't be looking at any kind of new taxation systems even if it is supposedly which it won't be, they should be using part of the surpluses for corporate grants for companies that work towards new processes which reduce their carbon signatures. Encourage instead of punish.

All Dion is going to do is exempt every industry East of Sask and buy votes.

[FLAMESRULE]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

We should be worried about this tbqh:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...BNStory/energy

Not really. While the US is by far the biggest consumer of CDN oil the Chinese and East Indians are desperately searching for global supply. If the US wants to posture and act like a baby then they'll more than gladly buy it. Also, this whole thing with the US mayors saying they should ban consumption of tar sand oil is counterproductive and will actually drive costs up.

This is all political posturing to show voters they're trying to do something to 1 - help control gas prices and 2 - be environmentally sensitive. Unfortunately neither will be achieved. The only thing that will help both is to curb CONSUMPTION. And that cant happen quick enough.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

All Dion is going to do is exempt every industry East of Sask and buy votes.

Yep. Except that most of Ontario's power comes from the wrost emissions offenders. The amount those power plants are going to be taxed under the plan is going to huge.

Curiously, the only province that won't be significantly hit with higher energy bills is Quebec....hydro power. Hmmm.