Alberta Politics Thread

[chemgear]

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...06#post5780706

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I mean, there are also more good restaurants, so... But yeah, that's too bad. First good meal I had when I moved here was at Escoba, a tenderloin with gorgonzola sauce. Good times. But it was never the greatest space.

[stampsx2]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

We can argue about how relatively effective the carbon tax will be but saying it wont be effective is basically repudiating the entire field of economics. But, hey what do they know?

Saying the carbon tax wont be effective is basically saying that gasoline demand is 100% inelastic to price. That's simply false and ignorant.

Tinordi can you pleeeeease answer one question. I've asked you before and you go into hiding.

Canada co2 emissions: 2% of the world total
China co2 emissions: 24% of the world total
US co2 emissions: 15% of the world total

You're saying we in Canada need to completely alter our lifestyle for 2%?

Have you done anything to focus on the real problem? 155 new approved coal fired power plants burning cheap coal in china according to greenpeace?

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Have you done anything to focus on the real problem? 155 new approved coal fired power plants burning cheap coal in china according to greenpeace?

No, because it doesn't fit the narrative.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Tinordi can you pleeeeease answer one question. I've asked you before and you go into hiding.

Canada co2 emissions: 2% of the world total
China co2 emissions: 24% of the world total
US co2 emissions: 15% of the world total

You're saying we in Canada need to completely alter our lifestyle for 2%?

Have you done anything to focus on the real problem? 155 new approved coal fired power plants burning cheap coal in china according to greenpeace?

These 'enviromental activists' are too weak to take on the real problem in China so they pick the easiest target even though it's not the right one to make themselves look and feel better about themselves.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

I've defended my point about as much as this debate warrants it. If you think the price of something has no impact on the consumption and then back it up with laughably bad analysis then I'll give your argument the defense it deserves which is derision and ostracism.

I will reiterate my argument: We can argue the relative effectiveness of the tax to lower gasoline demand but to claim all it is is a cash grab that will have no impact is both ignorant and false.

But please go on and try to put words in my mouth and make baseless boasts about how you won this round.

I responded earlier to this, with a small amount of research, becuase you were unwilling to provide any. What I found was there wasn't much evidence that carbon taxes have any affect at lowering CO2 emissions.
here:
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...postcount=1236
and here:
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...postcount=1237

And if the point of the carbon tax is to lower CO2 emmisions, and it isn't doing that, then isn't it just a tax?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

These 'enviromental activists' are too weak to take on the real problem in China so they pick the easiest target even though it's not the right one to make themselves look and feel better about themselves.

Its a business for a bunch of these protesters, they find the easy mark and then get funded by the RG or Tides whether directly or indirectly and show up at the nearest protest.

Half the time they don't even know what they're protesting.

But go to China to protest, first of all, that's a lot of work man, second of all, Chinese Prisons aren't known for their hospitality.

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I wasn't talking about the carbon tax, Tinordi. So if you want to offer a rebuttal, please offer one for the actual conversation, not the one going on inside your own head that nobody else is privy too.

I was talking about the gasoline tax. All we will see at the pump is higher prices, and we've seen over and over again that consumption doesn't really decrease despite the price.

StatsCan only offers 2010-2014 for its fuel consumption page, but in that time frame, Calgary went from a low of about 93 cents per litre in April 2010 to a peak of 130 cents in May 2013. Overall fuel consumption in Alberta still rose 15% over that time - from 5.4 billion litres in 2010 to 6.2 billion in 2013. (and up to 6.4 billion in 2014).

(Yes, I realize I am mixing local price with provincial usage and that makes it an imprecise comparison. It is still enough to demonstrate the point.)

You seem so certain that raising prices won't change behaviors. Please back up your statement. Compare Europe and Canada with cost of gasoline and see who is driving vehicles that are gas guzzlers. You can say that consumption won't change, even though it mis t likely will with education and time. I would be willing to put money on the fact that at a prolonged price increase people will begin to shop for more fuel efficient vehicles.

[Resolute 14]

I think that is a little unfair, CC. I believe many of the anti-oil protesters are sincere in their beliefs. Just a little too trusting (or uncaring) to realize that they are being funded by groups more interested in corporate espionage than environmentalism.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

You seem so certain that raising prices won't change behaviors. Please back up your statement. Compare Europe and Canada with cost of gasoline and see who is driving vehicles that are gas guzzlers. You can say that consumption won't change, even though it mis t likely will with education and time. I would be willing to put money on the fact that at a prolonged price increase people will begin to shop for more fuel efficient vehicles.

I already backed up my statement in the very post you quoted.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

Compare Europe and Canada with cost of gasoline and see who is driving vehicles that are gas guzzlers.

Wait - without even commenting on the substance of the question (whether gas cost increase influences driving behaviour), do you actually think this would be a fair comparison that would tell you anything meaningful whatsoever? Seriously?

It seems to me, by the way, that it's common sense that some level of cost increase will influence behaviour. However, all evidence provided in this thread has shown that gasoline surtaxes, in the way they've been implemented in the past in similar circumstances, haven't had any substantial effect. So I'd probably agree that if you suddenly bumped the cost of gas up by 300%, you'd see a change of behaviour, but it doesn't seem to be manifesting itself in the case of gas taxes.

You can admit that cost changes influence behaviour of consumers as a general proposition (in fact you should) without admitting that these taxes are likely to cause a change in driving habits here. Those two realities are completely consistent with one another.

[Resolute 14]

That disingenuous question also opens up for other extreme arguments.

"Raising minimum wage doesn't have negative impacts on business!"
"Why don't we raise minimum wage to $50/hr then?"

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

You seem so certain that raising prices won't change behaviors. Please back up your statement. Compare Europe and Canada with cost of gasoline and see who is driving vehicles that are gas guzzlers. You can say that consumption won't change, even though it mis t likely will with education and time. I would be willing to put money on the fact that at a prolonged price increase people will begin to shop for more fuel efficient vehicles.

Ok, I'll play.

If we compare Europe and Canada objectively, we get the following:

Land mass: Roughly the same at 10 Million Square Kilometers.

Population: Europe ~750 Million; Canada ~35 Million.

In Canada, the low population density and substantial distances between major population centers, coupled with the pool of available taxable funds (needed to create major infrastructure projects like public transit), renders direct comparisons on fuel consumption between Europe and Canada completely unrealistic, and quite frankly, intellectually dishonest.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

That disingenuous question also opens up for other extreme arguments.

"Raising minimum wage doesn't have negative impacts on business!"
"Why don't we raise minimum wage to $50/hr then?"

Thing is, you could at least play out the conversation for a 300% increase in gas prices. Create a hypothetical world where no one drives unless they absolutely have to, offset those fuel costs with subsidies for businesses that have to use car transportation, ride-share services, a huge emphasis on public transit, etc. Given the chains of causes and effects it would probably be a huge, unwieldy mess, but you could probably still make society functional with $4/l gasoline, even if you think it probably would be worse for most people.

$40+ minimum wage? Nope.

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I already backed up my statement in the very post you quoted.

You backed it up? You gave stats from 2010 to 2013 with a difference in price between that time of 37 cents. You failed to add that in 2010 the economy was bouncing back from a slip in 2009, and that continued through the end of the time frame. This would account for more vehicles on the road, no? What was the population increase in Calgary over that time frame? You can throw numbers around all you want but without a true picture you can't say what is going to happen one way or another.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Wait, you say there are myriad other factors that might influence peoples' driving habits besides gas prices?

Good thing none of those factors are in play to influence the difference in habits between here and Europe... Otherwise your last post would seem ridiculous.

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Ok, I'll play.

If we compare Europe and Canada objectively, we get the following:

Land mass: Roughly the same at 10 Million Square Kilometers.

Population: Europe ~750 Million; Canada ~35 Million.

In Canada, the low population density and substantial distances between major population centers, coupled with the pool of available taxable funds (needed to create major infrastructure projects like public transit), renders direct comparisons on fuel consumption between Europe and Canada completely unrealistic, and quite frankly, intellectually dishonest.

I agree with what you are saying with furl consumption, it's a bad comparison. But if you look at the type of vehicle the average European drives I think you would agree that they are more prone to find a fuel efficient vehicle than I Canada. I would say the reason for that is the cost of gas.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

I agree with what you are saying with furl consumption, it's a bad comparison. But if you look at the type of vehicle the average European drives I think you would agree that they are more prone to find a fuel efficient vehicle than I Canada. I would say the reason for that is the cost of gas.

Is that your opinion, or do you have available statistics to corroborate?

If it's your opinion, so be it, you are more than welcome to it. But you are coming off as though it is fact, when logic would dictate that there are myriad other reasons for Europeans driving smaller vehicles than just the price of gas.

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Wait, you say there are myriad other factors that might influence peoples' driving habits besides gas prices?

Good thing none of those factors are in play to influence the difference in habits between here and Europe... Otherwise your last post would seem ridiculous.

Good thing I wasn't posting numbers to say "this is how much fuel they used in Munich on April 21st 2011". I believe that I pointed to the fact that Europeans are more concerned about fuel efficient vehicles because of the cost of fuel.

Thanks for pointing that out though, you seemed really intelligent pointing that out.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

I agree with what you are saying with furl consumption, it's a bad comparison. But if you look at the type of vehicle the average European drives I think you would agree that they are more prone to find a fuel efficient vehicle than I Canada. I would say the reason for that is the cost of gas.

Wonder around downtown Prague or London or wherever in Europe and you can see why they drive smaller cars. The streets are simply smaller and don't have room for the larger vehicles. They happen to be more efficient, but its not entirely altruistic.