Carbon Tax - What Do You Think

[train]

It has been widely publisized that Dion wants to unveil a federal carbon tax as a cornerstone of his new platform.

It is reported to be controversial within the party due to the current high cost of fuel and the medicre to bad press carbon credit trading is getting Europe.

I participated in a survey recently on the subject done for the Globe and Mail.

What do you think?

 

[themexi]

Well since the whole greenhouse gas global warming "issue" is bullshit junk science...... The carbon tax provides me with the reason for all the nonsense.....

It's a cynical tax grab

 

[hunter001]

What do they plan to do with the tax? If the tax is going to make alternatives available then it might be a good thing. If it is just a tax to force people to reduce consumption I think the price of oil is already do that in today's market.

 

[slowandeasy]

Well since the whole greenhouse gas global warming "issue" is bullshit junk science......

Says the Phd candidate in climatology! I guess your thesis was just 9 words then.

I am a bit skeptical, but I am neither an environmental scientist nor do I read enough in that area to make an informed decision. Even if it turns out to be proven incorrect, any discussion about the impact of human interaction with our enviornment should be encouraged.

I think that the pollution of our water supply and other environmental issues should be more prominent.

 

[enduser1]

Well since the whole greenhouse gas global warming "issue" is bullshit junk science...... The carbon tax provides me with the reason for all the nonsense.....

It's a cynical tax grab

You speek the truth Bro!!

 

[train]

Who is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in Ontario at the moment ? I may be wrong but isn't it the Provincial Government and OPG with their coal-fired electricity plants ?

 

[train]

The tax is suppose to be revenue neutral, in that excess funds raised from large polluters will go back as tax cuts to people.

It is kind of pointless to discuss until we see the details. Personally I'm somewhat against any tax and prefer a cap and trade system ... however like I said the devil will be in the details and will just have to wait.


bbk

There are certain basic fundementals that we have to agree work in both principle and in the mechanics. For instance which system, if any, do you think works , why does it work, and can you prove that it works.

I think there are systems that are unabtrusive such as BC and Quebec but we are a long way for determining whether they have any effect on emmissions.

We already effectively have a carbon tax on many items such as gasoline. Everytime the price of gas goes up Harper and McSquint rub their collective hands in glee as they count the revenues increasing. The taxes are mainly % taxes and not a flat rate per litre. This simple occurence alone may keep both these governments out of a current year deficit.

Tax revenues have increased significantly over the last year and yet consumption has not declined. There is little to support additional carbon taxes being effective unless you increase taxes by a shock factor of say 20% ? 30% ? 50% ? What does that do to the economy ?

I think we need to look more closely at Japan. They are the only significant, stable country that has reduced their consumption of oil in the last 5 years.

An internal ( within Canada) cap and trade is, I agree dependent on the details as invariably someone gets lucky and starts from a surplus position. If no one starts with a surplus then the trading portion is a bit of a moot point is it not.

I have a feeling that, for better or worse, this is going to be either the defining moment in his success or the final nail in Mr Dion's coffin. The silence is deafening, in terms of the sound of support, from within his party so far.

 

[Bud Plug]

If you want to tax something meanful.....

Tax the couples who have 3 or more children. The biggest environmental problem is overpopulation. The rest are just peripheral side effects.

If you want to save the planet, have 1 or fewer children.

 

[amber-jade]

Well since the whole greenhouse gas global warming "issue" is bullshit junk science...... The carbon tax provides me with the reason for all the nonsense.....

It's a cynical tax grab

the rothchilds think they rule the world ,
oh wait, THEY DO
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZzDkFFthE48&feature=related










.

 

[red]

Tax the couples who have 3 or more children. The biggest environmental problem is overpopulation. The rest are just peripheral side effects.

If you want to save the planet, have 1 or fewer children.

or just commit suicide.

 

[alphauniform]

Well since the whole greenhouse gas global warming "issue" is bullshit junk science...... The carbon tax provides me with the reason for all the nonsense.....

It's a cynical tax grab

....Agreed!....but in some form it's coming.
The UK just recently "trial ballooned" the idea of having every resident be issued with a magnetic "swipe" card that would hold an allocated finite number of "carbon credits" Every time you bought something, the corresponding carbon units would be deducted from the card until you ran out, at which point you would reload by purchasing from the "market" at a premium.
Expensive to set up, but probably a wonderfully profitable business to be in!!

Hmmmmmm...........now perhaps some of you agency owners would like to define an hours entertainment in carbon credits!!!!!

 

[landscaper]

The european experiance with the cap and trade system has been mixed to say the besy possible thing about it. Some countries are haveing a little bit of sucsess with it but most are haveing proffiteering problems as the system was not thought out completely. Could we do it correctly? Just looking at the talent pool in Ottawa these days not likely.

The concept revenue neutral has a different sort of meaning when a government uses it. It means that the tax base will not go up, not that it won't cost us more money at the beginning the middle and the end.

Just a case in point , you slap a carbon tax on big oil do you really think they will eat it? Nope they will increase their prices blame the govenrment taxes and increase their profits because they can wright off the taxes payable from the profits transfer the profits to the home office and say thank you very much.

 

[hunter001]

...actually no. Go to Sarnia and see the effect of the refineries ... then check out the auto industry in Windsor. Those two alone dwarf the coal fired generators. Then you have the steel plants of Hamilton ... hell auto congestion in Toronto does more damage.


bbk

Go to Sudbury... Ground f***ing zero.

 

[slowandeasy]

Tax the couples who have 3 or more children. The biggest environmental problem is overpopulation. The rest are just peripheral side effects.

If you want to save the planet, have 1 or fewer children.

Bud... Canada is probably the most underpopulated country in the world. We need more Canadians not less...

 

[train]

... it's widely published by the Conservatives who are using fear tactics before they have even seen the plan ... funny how Harper, who will need BC votes in the next election, is being very supportive of the Provincial Liberal Governments Carbon Tax plan ... saying that it is a good mix with their plan.

It is reported to be controversial within the Party ... well not really, there is a healthy debate on how to approach this or whether we should try at this time.

Like I said this is nothing but a fear tactic from a Government that has nothing to offer but fear.


bbk

Actually it wasn't the Conservatives that reported this - it was your beloved Toronto Star as well as the Globe and Mail . They quote "unnamed sources" , an MP actually, within the party. Hey if it's in the Star it must be true didn't you say ?

 

[train]

...actually no. Go to Sarnia and see the effect of the refineries ... then check out the auto industry in Windsor. Those two alone dwarf the coal fired generators. Then you have the steel plants of Hamilton ... hell auto congestion in Toronto does more damage.


bbk

Auto congestion in TO isn't a single user.

I think it would be a good starting point for someone to lay out which companies, industries and activities are the biggest current emitters of greenhouse gases.

 

[slowandeasy]

Also tax divorce couples. Two households produces more
carbon and waist than one.

I think you are correct. After I got divorced, I was so happy and stress free, but my WAIST did get bigger

 

[Bud Plug]

Bud... Canada is probably the most underpopulated country in the world. We need more Canadians not less...

Canada doesn't need more people. We just need the right mix of labour. Our economy isn't growing that fast.

Other countries need a lot fewer people (India, China for examples). At least China is trying to control its population growth (although doing just about everything else wrong!).

 

[Bud Plug]

Also tax divorce couples. Two households produces more
carbon and waist than one.

On that theory, you should tax everyone who doesn't live in an apartment building or condo (unless it's a tent!).

 

[someone]

I had no idea who was right, so I did a search and the following link was the first one that came up: http://www.pollutionwatch.org/pressroom/releases/20070315.jsp

The second graph is entitled “Top 10 Greenhouse Gas Emitters in 2005 (tonnes CO2 equivalent)” According to it, the top emitter in Canada was Ontario Power Corporation’s Nanticoke Generating Station. Moreover, most of the top 10 were generating stations.