Do you think a consumer carbon tax in Canada will have any effect on the earth's climate?

[Gaon]

This could be the dominant discussion in Canada. Do you think it will have even a slight change on the earth's climate, or do you believe it's symbolism. Perhaps some people think it's a revenue policy and not an environmental one.

[Anonymous]

This could be the dominant discussion in Canada. Do you think it will have even a slight change on the earth's climate, or do you believe it's symbolism. Perhaps some people think it's a revenue policy and not an environmental one.

I think it's something else.....a vote buying scheme..



Working class families are being charged more for necessities like heat and transportation and the proceeds of my family's earnings are given to corporations and billionaire friends of the prime minister..



And no, I don't believe it will have any affect on climate.

[Gaon]

I know it will work differently in each province. But, I thought the tax was supposed to be a  deterrent to driving and I assume turning up the heat in homes. Like taxes on tobacco and alcohol. But, there is no rebate on those taxes. I we are to believe the pm, most people will get most, if not all of the money they pay in carbon fees back. Doesn't that defeat the purpose taxing C02 emissions?

[Anonymous]

This could be the dominant discussion in Canada. Do you think it will have even a slight change on the earth's climate, or do you believe it's symbolism. Perhaps some people think it's a revenue policy and not an environmental one.

Every single frickin thing Justine does is virtue signalling.

[Anonymous]

This could be the dominant discussion in Canada. Do you think it will have even a slight change on the earth's climate, or do you believe it's symbolism. Perhaps some people think it's a revenue policy and not an environmental one.

I think it's something else.....a vote buying scheme..



Working class families are being charged more for necessities like heat and transportation and the proceeds of my family's earnings are given to corporations and billionaire friends of the prime minister..



And no, I don't believe it will have any affect on climate.

I am with you. This is robbing the middle class to buy the votes of the rich.

[Anonymous]

This could be the dominant discussion in Canada. Do you think it will have even a slight change on the earth's climate, or do you believe it's symbolism. Perhaps some people think it's a revenue policy and not an environmental one.

I believe True Dope will stop climate change in it's tracks with his bold carbon cash grab. ac_toofunny  ac_lmfao

[Anonymous]

This could be the dominant discussion in Canada. Do you think it will have even a slight change on the earth's climate, or do you believe it's symbolism. Perhaps some people think it's a revenue policy and not an environmental one.

I believe True Dope will stop climate change in it's tracks with his bold carbon cash grab. ac_toofunny  ac_lmfao

A good healthy amount of cynicism.

[Anonymous]

We are copying the mistakes of other countries. Australia scrapped it's carbon tax, Europe is moving away from it's scandal plagued cap and trade. Subsidies for useless wind and solar are dropping. Canada is copying what did not work in other countries.

[Zetsu]

What Trudeau is doing is basically boldly robbing a person and using that money he stole to buy weapons to kill the victim, pretty much the oil industry.  Only proves traitor Trudeau is nothing short of a cunning waste of shit, as usual.

[Anonymous]

What Trudeau is doing is basically boldly robbing a person and using that money he stole to buy weapons to kill the victim, pretty much the oil industry.  Only proves traitor Trudeau is nothing short of a cunning waste of shit, as usual.

Speaking of the oil industry, the pm's carbon tax doesn't apply to imported oil.

[Anonymous]

This could be the dominant discussion in Canada. Do you think it will have even a slight change on the earth's climate, or do you believe it's symbolism. Perhaps some people think it's a revenue policy and not an environmental one.

Canada's carbon tax is just plain stupid. It costs too much and does too little.



Carbon taxation was originally based on a right-wing, free-market theory. The simple idea, to paraphrase Milton Friedman, is that if you tax something, you get less of it. It could elegantly allow the markets to find the most efficient ways to reduce carbon without the need for government regulations. Many respectable conservative-minded people bought into this theory. Let's look at the reality in practice.



Theoretically, carbon prices are supposed to reduce regulation. However, in every jurisdiction where carbon pricing has been implemented, it doesn't reduce regulation — it increases it. Carbon-pricing schemes in Europe, California and Canada are all very complicated. The Canadian government just recently introduced 500 new pages of legislation and regulation.



Another problem is carbon leakage, which occurs when production and investment simply move to jurisdictions without a carbon tax. In this case, emissions are simply displaced in whole or in part.



Carbon leakage is worse than you think, as it can actually increase global emissions. Take the case of Canadian aluminum, which produces only two tonnes of carbon per tonne, versus American aluminum at 11 tonnes of carbon per tonne. In practice, no one should have to explain to an aluminum worker that they lost their job because "after all, we all need to do our part," only to have global emissions increase 550 per cent as a result. (To generalize this example, Canada's economy is 70 per cent reliant on trade, and 80 per cent of our trade is with the United States, which has not imposed a carbon tax.)



The other problem we find in practice: Demand for hydrocarbons is very inelastic. People will pay what it takes to heat their homes and get to work. The Conference Board of Canada found that even a $200/tonne carbon tax would only reduce 12 megatonnes of Canadian emissions before carbon leakage. Global carbon would likely only be reduced by 70 per cent of this amount. Meanwhile, just one large LNG plant could achieve more than that by replacing coal in China with natural gas.



Canada has a global comparative advantage in carbon in many industries because of our high environmental standards. A global approach to capitalizing on Canada's environmental advantage would yield a double dividend of a stronger economy and a cleaner global environment. Carbon pricing, on the other hand, may create a green paradox — policies meant to reduce emissions that not only eliminate some people's jobs, but increase global emissions.

https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/i-believe-in-global-warming-and-even-i-think-carbon-taxes-are-idiotic">https://business.financialpost.com/opin ... re-idiotic">https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/i-believe-in-global-warming-and-even-i-think-carbon-taxes-are-idiotic



Trudeau's carbon tax is the worst of all worlds: kills jobs, artificially raises the cost of living, lowers investment and does nothing to reduce emissions.

[Anonymous]

What Trudeau is doing is basically boldly robbing a person and using that money he stole to buy weapons to kill the victim, pretty much the oil industry.  Only proves traitor Trudeau is nothing short of a cunning waste of shit, as usual.

Speaking of the oil industry, the pm's carbon tax doesn't apply to imported oil.

How come in the middle of a trade spat with the Saudis, Ottawa isn't even imposing the same taxes and regulations on Saudi oil that it imposes on Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland oil?



It looks as if, a) the Liberal government isn't serious about standing up to the Saudis and b) they aren't serious about their own campaign to reduce emissions and save the planet.



If the Liberals are so intent on cutting Canadians' emissions by imposing a new carbon tax and by creating impossible new environmental standards for the approval of new pipelines, how come they let foreign oil enter the country without subjecting it to the same "green" taxes or the same environmental screening processes?



Keep in mind, too, that Liberals let millions of tonnes of American coal come into Canada for export to the rest of the world without imposing a carbon tax, either.



The short answer is: The Liberals aren't a serious government. They're nothing more than intellectually lightweight virtue-signalers.

[Blazor]

No it wont. The earth goes through natural cycles every so many thousands of years, and its been proven to of gone through it 5 times already.



They are robbing y'all.



https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61DGmr6YlFL._SX258_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg">

[Anonymous]

Besides being bad economics, it does not nothing to slow global climate change.



By Robert P. Murphy, a senior fellow at the Fraser Institute



Alberta carbon tax — just bad economics



As the Kenney government begins its constitutional challenge to Ottawa's carbon tax on consumers, both the provincial and federal governments agree on Alberta's new carbon tax on large industrial emitters.



Yet legal issues aside, Alberta's carbon tax reflects bad economics.



Even though many Albertans worry about climate change, it's important to take steps that will actually be effective.



Passing symbolic legislation will simply raise energy prices without doing much to help the environment.



One major problem with the Alberta government's so-called Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction (TIER) program is that it's not a simple carbon tax applying uniformly to all emissions.



Instead, the TIER program is a hodgepodge of annual emission-target reductions enforced with an initial financial penalty of $30 per tonne of excess emissions, and with differing benchmarks based on the industry.



When the plan was first rolled out in late-October, it only applied to some 55% of Alberta emissions.



This approach undermines the whole justification of a carbon tax.



In theory, a carbon tax — set to the level of environmental damages and then applied uniformly to all emitters — will provide the proper "price signal" to prompt emitters to account for the damage they cause.



But these ostensible virtues of a carbon tax are muted if it's implemented in an arbitrary fashion — as it is with Alberta's TIER program.



[size=150]A more fundamental problem is that Canada is a negligible player on the world scene when it comes to future emissions.



For example, in 2017, Canada was responsible for only 1.6% of global carbon dioxide emissions.

[/size]

And that percentage will only shrink over time as countries such as China and India experience faster economic growth with relatively high emissions-to-GDP ratios.



A few years ago I asked climate scientist Paul Knappenberger to use a standard climate modelling package and emission scenario to project the contributions of various regions through the end of the century.



Knappenberger found that from 2017 to 2100, China alone accounted for a third (33%) of global emissions while India accounted for another 13%.



The entire European Union was only 7%. Needless to say, the impact of Canada — let alone Alberta! — on total global emissions over the next 80 years will be quite small.



When it comes to climate change economics, it doesn't work to merely ask each small country to "do its part."



[size=150]If only some countries enact aggressive policies, then "leakage" occurs, where emissions "migrate" to other jurisdictions.



For example, if the EU and Canada make gasoline very expensive, then their people will drive less.



But this will lower global oil prices, encouraging Americans and the Chinese to drive more.[/size]



Such aggressive policies would greatly inconvenience Canadians and Europeans while doing little to slow global warming.



By its nature, climate change is a global problem.



Trying to solve it through the political process is a dubious strategy, as voters in future elections can always demand a reversal (just look at Australia, the United States and, of course, Canada).



Albertans concerned about climate change should support solutions that don't depend on permanent global government enforcement.



This could include more research or even something as simple as a tree-planting initiative.



But enacting a provincial tax on CO2 emissions is more symbolism than substance.

[Anonymous]

No it wont. ]

I believe the basic theory behind AGW. What we do not know is how much man is responsible for a changing climate.