LinkSoul60

What are you even talking about.... The government gave lower income persons a tax break last year and is trying to help this year with food-related rebates. What has he done in policy that has widened the wealth equality gap?

What if the liberals had an X platform...more believable? Cite those economists when you can. Interested to see how their perspectives differ. No, I didn't vote for all that and the poor and vulnerable have always been on my radar. A liberal minded person can't have empathy or provide charitable donations? Let me save you some time on X or Facebook though. If something doesn't make sense let me know; Industrial carbon pricing systems are Canada’s most important policy lever for cutting carbon pollution and creating a competitive clean economy with low costs for businesses and big incentives for investment in low-carbon projects. These systems are also designed to cost next to nothing for Canadian consumers. The Canadian Climate Institute has done extensive research and modelling quantifying the effects of this policy. This fact sheet outlines how and why industrial carbon pricing has virtually no impact on the day-to-day expenses of average Canadians and keeps costs low for businesses: Industrial carbon pricing costs Canadian consumers next to nothing—and in some cases even provides benefits. Our research shows that industrial carbon pricing systems have an impact of around zero per cent on household consumption, a measure of income, in 2025. These costs are projected to remain very low and reduce consumption by just a tenth of one per cent by 2030. In some cases, industrial carbon pricing—also called large-emitter trading systems—provides small net benefits for consumers, largely because of provisions in Alberta’s system that can reduce the cost of electricity Industrial carbon pricing applies to goods sold on international markets where most price increases aren’t passed on to consumers. Most companies that participate in industrial carbon pricing systems sell a significant portion of their products in other countries. About 50 per cent of the output of Canada’s large emitters is exported, and some industries export much more, which lowers costs on consumers. For example, the oil sands send closer to 80 per cent of production abroad. In addition, these exported products are sold on global commodity markets, which set the price paid and further limits the amount passed on to consumers. Industrial carbon pricing has essentially no impact on the price of food and the agricultural sector. Our modelling, done in partnership with Navius Research for the Independent Assessment of Carbon Pricing Systemsshows that industrial carbon pricing has near zero overall impact on households’ spending on food. The same analysis projects that the cumulative GDP impact on the agricultural sector would be 0.08 per cent by 2030. Farmers don’t directly pay the industrial carbon price and there are almost no costs to pass through the supply chain on to consumers. Costs for consumers are virtually nothing because industrial goods have only a small impact on the price of finished consumer products. Industrial carbon pricing does not apply directly to individual consumers—only to the largest emitters of greenhouse gases in the country, like oil sands facilities, steel mills, and cement plants. Industrial carbon pricing has modest or negligible increases in the cost of industrial goods such as steel, which represent only a small portion of the final cost of consumer products people buy in Canada. For example, research finds that industrial carbon pricing that applies to the highest emitting steel plants in the country would still only add $0.12 to the cost of a refrigerator, and under $3 to the cost of a pickup truck. Industrial carbon pricing is low-cost for businesses, which also limits costs passed on to consumers. Industrial carbon pricing is designed to contain costs because industries only pay for emissions that exceed a specified limit, and if they outperform the limit they make money by selling credits for cash. Data shows that industrial carbon pricing currently only adds an average of 9 cents per barrel to oil sands producer costs. Our research shows that if industrial carbon pricing is strengthened in line with the Canada-Alberta MOU, oil sands producers would still only be paying 50 cents per barrel in 2030—roughly the cost of a Timbit, after inflation is factored in. Industrial carbon pricing imposes much lower costs on total emissions than consumer carbon pricing, around $10 or less per tonne of emissions against a carbon price of $95 per tonne.

Absolutely it has and I'm in the corner of similar bans here that Australia did for banning persons under 16 from most social platforms. The biggest concern though (my 2 cents).... wealth inequality. Those who have wealth continue to grow that and those who don't continue to go backwards. It's going to blow up at some point in the masses.

I'm not capable because I don't subscribe to X. Come on now.... What if I said the industrial carbon tax adds less than 1% to our cost of food. Would you believe that? And why would you assume I don't care about people of low or no income and vulnerable communities?

Honestly, there is not a lot of anything that reminds me of the 70' or 80's...politically (which wasn't top of mind for me then) our how the world has changed socially. This last decade or so has got nasty in how people view right and left positions and at some point it's going to have a larger impact. On a bit of a tangent now but..... throw in how social media has changed our lives, the soon to be larger impact of AI, and the continued wealth disparity we see and a civil war wouldn't surprise me at all.

I'm probably not coming across properly but every Canadian not having that equal access would be unpopular with the majority of Canadians regardless of income... my opinion. I'm not disagreeing that we should look at other models that have worked at all, but to where the pain points are right now I don't follow how an scaled to income system is going to address the lengthy wait times or the amount of additional healthcare professionals we need. I'm 100% for any organization or practitioner to follow Canadian Medical Standards but there is no government monopoly today, is there? Most of our doctors and physicians are 'private contractors' who are paid by service provided by the province, and we have private clinics, although they can't charge for services covered by the public system. The first thing need to address are the pain points we have today and do it much sooner than later. That means getting more bodies in our systems to align with our population growth. Once (or if) we can do that and somewhat normalize then I'm for looking into every corner of our system and others to improve it, and not get back to where we are now. Just my 2 cents...

They got that from their party leader. He's still a year behind but to his credit is trying to pivot into 2026. It's only late March so he's still got time. His loyal followers out here....not sure if they can pivot either. Seem to be stuck on some sort hamster wheel.

By Trump's admission removing the sanctions was to increase supply and contain pricing. Not sure about the supply, but it's done nothing for the price. Yes, Russia has continued to use shadow fleets to get around the sanctions. Your point is....what?

JJ, everything is because of the liberals and Carney. Not sure how but I have little doubt that someone here will spin this war his way sooner or later. At this moment though, X followers everywhere are searching for that info.

Owned...? I'm not sure you'd qualify for rent in this convo.

Forgot to mention... don't forget to send the back-up you have for Carney's $1B expense summary from last year. You can include it along with your summary of how the industrial carbon tax impacts food inflation if easier 👍

lol... fool isn't capable of remembering what she said, or looking back for that matter and I'm the little boy hiding. Carry on fool...

I don't know what grade I've give him... and that's not dodging the question. We pay for groceries like everyone else and know how expensive it is but honestly haven't dove into all the why's and how's too deeply. A quick look though says climate change, higher corporate profits and supply chain inefficiencies are key drivers. Throw in our reliance on imports with a weaker dollar, tariffs, along with rising energy, transportation and labour costs and next thing you know things, including food cost a lot more. Makes sense right... How much of that would you put on Carney? Okay your turn. Explain how the industrial carbon tax increases food inflation.

Good stats. Now explain the industrial carbon tax impact on that food inflation.

You can't read or remember what you said. Is that a literacy or age related thing? So you agree, but also agree with removing them. Odd... The only person acting like a child here is you. I'll tell you for the last time.... you don't need my help to scroll back and to see what you've said. You've become a bore in this circular conversation...

😂

Lol... did you get that from your friends on X, or from Poilievre? Try reading....

I only see one dummy here... 🫵

It's not my problem you can't keep up with what's been said. It's really simple actually... Russian's invasion of Zelensky/Ukraine is the reason sanctions were imposed. Not too hard to understand is it? Of course you think doing a disservice to Ukraine is okay.... any Russian sympathizer would think exactly the same.

Lol... ah yes, that go-to source of the skinny when you need it, Braeden Caley. I'll give you this... I saw a few clips of the interview which was enough for me, but Poilievre did okay. He looked nervous and repeated the same things every Canadian has known for a year with nothing new, but all in all he did okay. It's not going to do much for his appeal to voters, so back to reality now.

No, I'm inferring you lack them. We've been through this already in this little back and forth. You don't need me to go back and look at what's been said. You're a sympathizer of Russia so it makes sense that's how you view it. In the grand scheme of things removing the sanctions have done little to nothing for where the price of oil is right now. As far as hurting them economically, yes that was the intent and purpose of oil sanctions. Fortunately for Russia though they get to see increased revenues from oil now that will continue to help them fund their war on Ukraine. There's something to be said about kicking an enemy when they're down. Too bad it didn't happen here.

lol... the only thing that twisted is your thinking, which would be a great case study for any phycologist.

Lol... For what it's worth to you and your fellow cry hards... in your zest to slam anything and everything liberal try not being so intellectually lazy before thinking that you've somehow 'won' something. If you would have taken 10 seconds out of your life you'd have learned this survey has NOTHING to do with affordibilty, future prospects, etc, etc in Canada. The report is ONLY about explaining how the timing and nature of social media use may help account for the striking variations in youth happiness across different parts of the world. We rank 25th and the US ranks 23rd, with all Western countries moving backwards since the last survey. I'm sure your response will be along the lines of 'I knew that' or the usual 'your mother needs to tuck you' schtick. Before you do that take a couple minutes to think about this.... Part of the playbook you clowns roll with is that MSM is brainwashing all of 'us', but not you guys as you're way more informed because you go to only trusted news sources like X, Facebook, Rebel News and Fox. You all have this blind belief that if anyone who thinks like you says something on X or Facebook it has to be fact. That's being nothing but naive and gullible , and small wonder why you're so misinformed. The last 3 days it's been all in with 'we have given away $100B in scholarships', 'Carney expensed $1B in travel last year', and now the inference is youth in Canada are unhappy because of liberals. You guys are all in, but each point has zero credibility and facts to....like absolutely zero. You're likely not to learn much from your continual enjoyment of misinformation, but I wouldn't expect you guys to either. So back to the survey... It's massively long and I have no interest in reading it all so only looked at the summary and a few points thereafter. Try the same to see what you can extract something from the report that pins youths social media use and habits on our liberal governments. The first and most important part though.... is that you have to read. Give it a try. Happiness Worldwide in 2026 The World Happiness Report focuses on changes in life evaluations across time, countries and generations. This report has become an indispensable resource for satisfying the growing global interest in prioritizing happiness — or wellbeing — in policymaking. The 2026 edition highlights the role social media plays in social connection, trust and shared experiences worldwide, with new analysis from expert contributors on mental health and social media across regions. This edition explains how the timing and nature of social media use may help account for the striking variations in youth happiness across different parts of the world, drawing on insights from an international team of expert authors featured in the seven chapters that follow. Gallup World Poll data on life evaluations are the primary source behind the annual happiness rankings for countries worldwide. In the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, the happiness of people under 25 years of age has fallen by an average of 0.86 points on a 0 to 10 scale in the past 20 years.

I'd fully expect you to use the TDS thing as well. If you can't dazzle them with brains baffle them with BS right.... Apparently facts don't align with your perception of logic. I told you this earlier and a few times since...look for yourself, it's not hard to find. What pertinent question is there about removing Russian oil sanctions....keep oil moving to other countries because of your miscalculations? I tend to look at this the exact opposite.... if there would be a time that sanctions would hurt Russia, it would be now. But alas....

Similarly I didn't had a problem standing up to a bully in my youth, nor would I today, although I'm too old for that shìt. That's not the crux of what I said though.... Not participating isn't about standing up to anyone, it's for the simple reason this isn't an alliance led attack and Canada wasn't part of it, nor did we know it was coming. My rhetoric of the getting beat down economically and saying no thanks to an ask for help is just that, rhetoric. Moot point until or if we're ever asked to participate, but I find it hard to believe there would be anywhere near majority consensus from Canadian's to support this. I don't think there is any question at all what Iran was/is. It's been that way for a half a century but as we've heard there was no imminent threat. It was only a month ago though that the world was told their nuclear capabilities were 'totally and completely obliterated'. I find it real hard to believe the level of threat could change from being obliterated a month ago to an imminent threat today. There is obviously disagreement within the US intelligence community about that as well with the director resigning. I'm not sure we even know the objective is or what success is do we... is it regime change, nuclear capabilities, long range missiles...? To get involved in something with no clear objectives that potentially harms our soldiers makes no sense at all. The closing of the strait is causing havoc across the globe now and will get a lot worse the longer this goes on. We're not the saviours of the world though and the countries that are most affected like the Asian countries should logically be the first ones sending mine sweepers or other assets there if in fact the US needs help, which is unclear with that changing with each his comments. I agree with your aside though... Regardless of Trump we're brothers with the US and part of an alliance with them and other like-minded countries. If there was a request before this began to assist in a supporting role I think we would have looked at it closely and most likely we would have agreed to support the effort. I'd like to think Nato as a whole would have supported it as well. That said, I still think that in some way we are in fact involved given we have troops on a US base in the ME.