Trudeau says he doesn't understand why NDP is pulling back from carbon price support
- Thread starter oil&gas
- Start date
No constantly calling someone right wing or a MAGA because they don't agree with you on everything is foolish. What I posted is fact.
you want to confiscate a business owners income @ 95 to 99% and your claiming i don't make any sense ???????
of course you did not as you are not bright enough to foresee the reactions to your theft
you did say you would confiscate a business owners income @ 95 to 99%
actions have consequences
if govt tried to confiscate 95% to 99% of ANY business owners income
he / she would just stop operating the business , shut it down and fly out of your jurisdiction
other business owners would see an irrational lunatic is in charge and pull their money out of your country & stop all operations
actions have consequences
you would be left holding your dick in your hand trying to explain the economic collapse, chaos and product shortages to the angry/ hungry / unemployed mob
you could try saying
to the angry mob but it would not do you any good
you would likely need to declare martial law, just to save your life
your not very bright
Last edited:
well I would not classify wind farms as a success as they are not economically viable without govt subsidies
Greta TOONberg is a child who has been manipulated by adults ( shameless evil adults)
she is a stupid, naive and attention seeking child and sadly will likely become an emotional mess once she figures out how she has been deceived and manipulated
her protesting a wind farm is comically ironic and does highlight the lunacy of the current enviornut movement
Considering I did not say confiscate a business owners income everything you've said here is irrelevant and not a response to my post. You are having the argument in your head.
too funny
confiscation @ 95% to 99% being renamed to taxation @ 95% to 99% would not change the reaction by business owners or the anarchy your lunatics "taxation policy'' would produce
you are not very bright
I'm not trolling. I'm asking you questions to understand your point.
Why do leftists always accuse others of trolling when they are faced with questions they either can't answer or won't answer. Happens every time.
Per capita, in this context doesn't matter if the entire amount for Canada is 1.5%. To illustrate my point, I even suggested using net-zero to remove the entire 1.5% as it relates globally. Then you pivot to "per capita"? Why? I've already demonstrated that Canada reaching net-zero has insignificant impact on global numbers.
Nowhere have I ever said I don't like taxes. That's your imagination.
Are you defending taking almost all of someone's income for taxes?
Isn't marketing (i.e. propaganda) wonderful? A decade or more polluting the planet under the guise of it being "better" when it just kicks the can down the road and moves the problem elsewhere. Brilliant!
An EV has roughly double the production footprint of a typical internal-combustion-engine (ICE) vehicle. Both have similar embedded production emissions from, for example, producing the body of the vehicle, which is between five and ten tons of CO2e emissions, depending on its size and production location. On top of that, however, producing a typical EV (with a 75-kWh battery pack) emits more than seven tons of CO2e emissions on the battery alone.
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries...ace-to-decarbonize-electric-vehicle-batteries
Okay at what % does taxation turn into confiscation. Let's hear your logic.
It does matter. We are the consumers. To reduce emissions you need to reduce consumption and reduce production. But since consumption and production are related, you need to reduce consumption, to have an impact on production. The reason per capita emissions are important is because it shows you how much we consume. Our consumption drives production in countries like China, which is also the number 1 country for emissions.
So in sum, our consumption needs to be reduced in order for production in China, India etc to reduce, to have an overall cumulative positive impact. We don't live in a vacuum.
Also 1.5% is a LOT for a country that accounts for only 0.48% of the world population. So that number needs to reduce as well.
shut Canada down completely and it would not make a difference in emissions
not that emissions of atmospheric plant food matter
The natural cycle of atmospheric plant food is 50 X what man produces
Last edited:
Sure it does.
You're still trying to argue that if you don't pay for your meal at a restaurant and tell them its only 1.5% of revenue then it doesn't matter.
Analogies aren't your strong suit.
We're talking about per capita vs overall. Total is 1.5% regardless.
If I owe $1.50 for that meal, and it's split among 150 patrons that's 1 cent per person. Still totals $1.50.
Well, spending $1.50 on a meal for 150 people does sound like something you'd do.
And of course you'd argue that therefore there is no need for you pay your fair share, even if its only 1 cent, because its only a tiny part of the total.
Same argument, you won't pay your fair share.
You're a cheapskate and a free loader.
Says the guy who can't explain what "fair share" means.
Says also the socialist who expects everyone else to pay for his lifestyle.
Ironic indeed.
long before taxation reduces the risk adjusted after tax return to the business owner below his/her risk adjusted cost of equity capital
business owners assume a lot of risks you are not bright enough to even imagine.
they need to be compensated for assuming those risks
if they are not they should park their money in a savings account
no investment by business owners >> no economic growth, no innovation , no hiring
far more logical / practical than your clown show based on spite
you are not very bright
Attachments
How do you know it is staged? I did not see him hiding, he addressed those haters directly.
You are answering a question and a scenario that solely resides in your head, not to mention I am not talking about corporate taxes, but personal income taxes. You are also not answering the question I asked. I asked at what tax % does it turn from taxation to confiscation?
