THIS is Why the Carbon Tax is SO Unpopular
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 04. 2024
- If it's true that eight out of ten Canadians receive more in rebates than they pay in carbon tax, why is the program so unpopular? The Line's Jen Gerson breaks it down.
FULL INTERVIEW: rtrj.info/040924Gerson
Make everyone’s life miserable for 1.5 % right!
yes and our trees obsorb 10 times as much as that.Carbon has no borders. why do we have to suffer to set the example for the world. Trudeau wants us hungry and weak so they can control there narative.15 minute cities ,own nothing eat bugs and be happy.
Doing nothing can be selling LNG to the biggest polluters of the world. Axe the tax, improve our standards of living.
You know as well as I do that axing the tax is going to do squat for the standard of living. Its well known that seniors and retirees MAKE money off the tax.
And Saskatchewan and Alberta BOTH get more than a third of their power from COAL, so don't preach to us about selling to other countries to get them off a product that the provinces WITH the gas won't even get off of. Thats hypocrisy at its finest.
Ya She is so right put tea spoon of sugar on our plate after taking our bottle of maple syrup.If we get more back then why would we all be complaining .Thats kinda dumb if you give more back we won't take the bike because we can afford gas and drive because we can afford it.
Let the scientists that crested this mess solve this mess...no more taxes😅😅😅😅
Yeah and tap water is really red wine!
Nobody talks about short term 90 day investments.
'punished by our trading partners' lol.. If the trade is fair they punish themselves as well which they will not do. Add to that Canada becoming entirely self sufficient ....
.....and our largest trading partner, the US, does not have a carbon tax
No one is professing to do nothing. People are professing that we should be working to tackle global emissions instead of being solely focused on Canadian emissions while simultaneously increasing coal exports and refusing to help other nations reduce their emissions by supplying natural gas to displace higher emitting fuels.
Lots of people are professing to do nothing. They are all over social media, claiming climate change is a hoax and the carbon tax is a scam, or that Canada only accounts for less than 2% of global emissions (so we shouldn't do anything).
PeePee has no plan and absolutely no intention of doing anything.
How about teaching people more about gardening and not tossing their plastic or any garbage into, ditches, side of the sidewalk or oceans ect?
They should do what Alberta's doing ,charge a small fee and when you take the stuff in they give you money back.Plastic is oil .A company in Alberta called Cielo is taking all kinds of land fill and turning it into high grade diesel fuel which is way less a GHG then Methane.Were cleaniing up the trash and benifiting from it. Apparently they run a tight ship and they are carbon negitive.
You need to be a single-issue voter...
Tax hike,Commodities price hike nvr could be wellfare fr people
But the PBO also said, in another report frequently cited by Poilievre, that when taking into account the knock-on economic effects of the carbon tax, most households will actually see a net loss.
The PBO said the tax will have a negative effect on the larger economy, leading to a loss of employment and investment income for some families.
The federal rebates won't be enough to offset both the tax and the slightly lower incomes some Canadians will collect as a result of the levy, the PBO said.
Yes we know that, those who make more money dont' get rebates so will see a net loss. Boo hoo. If you make over 80 grand a year then the carbon tax will cost you. At the same time, yay, you will get a rebate that likely only your income group can afford on an electric car, if you choose to do so.
And yay, you can get the same no interest loan as anybody and go off the grid and save even more money. Of course they don't calculate THAT, because thats in individual choice. All those tesla drivers in the east benefit already from subsidized and regulated hydro rates.
ANd there is no way for the PBO to know the effect on the economy, economists can't predict outside a month what will happen.
The PBO also said, in that same report, that anything you do, including nothing, is going to cost Canadians. In short, the brightest minds in Canada, the brightest minds in the world, a Novel prize winning Economist and expert on the economics of climate change all agree a price on carbon is one element to cost effective reduction of emissions.
@@bibiburns3236 lol Novel prize winning Economist and expert on economics ok what is his or hers name, back ground and was the award for economics on climate just the name would be enough to back your statement .... Waiting!!! Funny selling NG to India and China would drop Co2 levels by 30% but you would rather spout mistruths, you are a LIB no doubr. Just the name please.
@@bibiburns3236 Well, I still argue that a CAP AND TRADE is a better and more effective one. Its how we dealt with acid rain in the last eighties, early nineties, and signed on by Mulroney and Reagan, two pretty gung ho right wing industrialist politicians.
And it would effect most consumers very little, just like the acid rain issue, in fact prices never changed much at all.
But because INDUSTRY doesn't want it, you don't hear it in ANY media or from any politicians. Again, the ONLY time I"ve heard Trudeau even mention it was on this show, which has very few listeners.
@@bibiburns3236
Article
You will only pay the carbon tax on the gas it takes for you to drive to the store and that is all that the Bank of Canada uses to assess the impact on inflation, not all of the other steps that increase the price. It’s a lazy method for the Bank of Canada and it’s lazier still for these economists to use that as their measurement when claiming to refute myths about the carbon tax.
Yves Giroux, the parliamentary budget officer, looked at the full impact of the carbon tax - from what we all pay, the lower economic growth, the increase in prices, the increased amount of GST we pay - and arrived at a basic conclusion: Most of us are paying more.
“Once you factor in the rebate, but also the economic impacts, the majority of households will see a negative impact as a result of the carbon tax,” Giroux told a House of Commons committee last week.
You're not adult enough to figure that out on your own jen? Come on... grow up.
she just wants to whine
CO2 has no borders ours is 1.5% and we are so green on the earth map, I bet our green sucks that up ten times over. Why do we pay carbon tax during such troubled times as it is?
She's just dead wrong here. The very people who need to hear this message from the feds (they have talked about the price on carbon being the least expensive way to reduce emissions a LOT) dismiss it without evidence or much thought because the Liberals are saying it.
Agreed.
But it wasnt important to keep taxing the jurisdictions down east where Trudeau needed to save the votes, now that is so strange.
@@7thpilot ?
@@7thpilotwhat?
This person needs to learn critical thinking. All I heard was waaaaaaaaggghhhhh 😂😂
Quite clearly with the current government, we'd be far better off if they did nothing. However, this price on pollution grift is just that. Watch climate the movie. The experts say carbon levels are already historically, if not dangerously low. And if they were to get anywhere close to where they've been traditionally, it would be a boon to society.
The experts say no such thing. Stop getting your information from a propaganda movie.
@squatch545 You're a leftist, which means you don't care about reality, you only care about ideology. Carbon levels are currently between 4 and 500 ppm. Historically, they've been in the thousands. 20000 years ago, they dropped to 150 ppm, driving a significant amount of plant and animal life to extinction. Tell me who in the movie is wrong by name and with citations. You won't, because you can't.
@squatch545 As always, YT deleted my reply, so I'll remove all the true things I said that people who are afraid of the truth don't like and simply ask you if you watched the movie, and can you point to something specific in the movie that's incorrect? I would rather be corrected than wrong.
@@robk5427 I know how you feel. YT deletes half my comments on here as well. We can't have discussions on YT anymore it seems.
I will have to go back and skim through the movie and take some notes. I will get back to you.
My government is here to help me help myself. It's my choice to accept it.
Yeah right Liberal government is like having a 50 pound weight on your back holding people down
Then they need to get out of the way. The government is WAY to involved in my life.
When the government says they are here to help, run the other way ,they will probably make things more difficult.
This young woman needs to read at least a little bit of research before she opens her mouth?
Oh the articles where the some scientist have all agreed that the Climate is changing and make sure their funding doesnt get cut, they are all very consistent on that but when asked why over 80% have no idea or say it may be Carbon but all trials and data have no consistency. A few years back the big story was the Polar Bears where dying off when that was proven wrong the story changed to our methods of counting bears has improved, ON and ON and On it goes this hype has been around since the late 60s with all prediction's falling off the map and it all stays true to this day.
Yeah and some people need to get their head out out of their and realize that the carbon tax is a tax fraud!
Carbon Tax isn't a tax.
@@CtO-nj9uu Oh so its just Carbon windfall for the poor
@@7thpilot Windfall should be in place for Albertas entire oil sector. Albertans for generations have elected terrible governments with the one exception being Peter Lougheed. Alberta had a chance to have a well over 100 billion dollar fund yet they elected government after government who has pissed it away.
People need to be more respectful of wildlife conservation!
people that are mad about the bag tax are morons though. they can be mad all they want. tying a carbon tax to mitigation is forgetting that the mitigation is reducing emissions in the first place, and without rebates the price signal cannot be meaningfully high. Jen clearly just wants to complain and has no economic depth -- running interference for oil interests.
I don't understand why people don't know the "carbon tax" isn't to stop anything. It's to make stuff so expensive you won't use as much of it!
The government gets more revenue and we use less gas and shit!
The government doesn't get more revenue. Poor people do. And then hopefully they use the money to make greener choices. It's a simple policy really, Jen and Ryan are just too stupid to get it
@@superamazingexpertfantasti6593 Man even Trudeau makes more sense than you. Poor people use money to buy food and shelter.They also vote for anyone who gives them money.
@@MrBrndin whatever they do with the money I don't care, I'm just happy they get it
@@superamazingexpertfantasti6593 Yah, you dont really have to have a point, just go by how you "feel"
So ... basically, she thinks that "technology will save us", and the moment any action inconveniences her, it's unacceptable.
I am somewhat less than persuaded by that - especially after decades of watching the O&G sector fight any kind of action other than increasing their profits and production.
Canada only emits about 1.5% of global carbon emissions. We could reduce our emissions to ZERO and it would have NO EFFECT on a global scale.
Instead of virtue signaling, Canada could export clean burning LNG to China and India (which account for over a third of emissions) , to get them off of coal.....AND Canada could also use the royalty payments to address our horrible budget deficits.
@@bogeybichon7000 Royalty payments … you mean the royalties that we don’t collect because our idiot provincial govts keep handing out royalty “holidays” and other breaks for “developing resources”?
As for LNG to other countries, burning NG still results in the emission of CO2 which is still a greenhouse gas. We couldn’t build enough LNG export capacity (and fleet capacity) if we tried - certainly not in time for them to even reach break-even. While I’m not familiar with India’s energy transition effort, I do know that China’s is well on its way - even accounting for the utter BS that is Beijing propaganda. By the time we have the export capacity built, they won’t be interested. Also, it’s a lot easier to build a pipeline from Russia into China for NG - the cost of LNG and its processing facilities doesn’t make sense.
@@michelleshaw337 You need to get you facts straight The oil and gas industry pays approximately $48 Billion in royalty and taxes on a yearly bases. We are not building the LNG capacity that we could because of all the roadblocks and restrictions the Trudeau Liberal government has put in place. Since Trudeau been in power the USA has built 7 LNG plants, so obvious there is a market for it.
Both China and India continue to construct coal burning power plants , so taking these plants from coal to LNG would result in a significant reduction in emissions. Everyone is saying how green China is becoming yet they use coal to produce 61% of their electricity and are building new coal plants on a weekly basis. If Canada could use its LNG to convert coal plants to LNG it could easily reduce world CO2 by 1.5 % which is the total this country produces.
Then why are there multiple projects _ALREADY_APPROVED_ not putting shovels in the ground?
@@michelleshaw337 Specifically what projects are you talking about??