madmax Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 Interesting article in the Globe and Mail. Seems Dion has had a difficult time making up his mind. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National Quote
Avatar Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 Great, more tax on gas. The government gets to borrow our money until income tax time, no thanks. Quote
jdobbin Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 (edited) Interesting article in the Globe and Mail.Seems Dion has had a difficult time making up his mind. What flip flop are you referring to? A carbon tax has been proposed by both environmentalists and by the right wing C.D. Howe Institute. This topic has been covered far more in another thread. Edited May 13, 2008 by jdobbin Quote
madmax Posted May 13, 2008 Author Report Posted May 13, 2008 What flip flop are you referring to. This flip flop, which happens to have been on the minds of the National Post as well.... Bad Policy now Good Policy A carbon tax that won't flyNational Post Published: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 Stephane Dion Stephane Dion is again musing about a carbon tax. During his bid for the Liberal leadership in 2006, he called it "bad policy." Then, last spring, he suggested a carbon tax was a good policy, but not so good that the Liberals should adopt it. Now, Mr. Dion appears to be saying that a carbon tax may be the right policy for the Liberals after all. His most recent flip flop could not come at a better time for the Conservatives. With high gas prices already enraging consumers, Mr. Dion's idea will be suicidal at the polls. Quote
gc1765 Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 This flip flop, which happens to have been on the minds of the National Post as well....Bad Policy now Good Policy I'd rather a politician realize their mistake later rather than never... P.S. I'd love to see Jack Layton now try to claim that the NDP is the environmental choice. Even the Liberals are more green now than the NDP. Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
M.Dancer Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 I'd rather a politician realize their mistake later rather than never...P.S. I'd love to see Jack Layton now try to claim that the NDP is the environmental choice. Even the Liberals are more green now than the NDP. Layton is being true to his ideaology. He attacks business and lets the consumers (who vote....but not for him) go scot free. I still believe the best policy would be a bit of both (excluding Layton), clamping down on emmisions through legistation and putting a fee (a modest tax) on all carbon products. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
madmax Posted May 13, 2008 Author Report Posted May 13, 2008 (edited) P.S. I'd love to see Jack Layton now try to claim that the NDP is the environmental choice. Even the Liberals are more green now than the NDP. The Liberals always campaign to the Left and Govern from the right.. Liberals to remove the GST...... Liberals to Fight FTA..... Liberals to stop NAFTA... Liberals against the combat mission in Afghanistan... Liberals to Secure Workers Wages/Vacationpay ... Liberals for the environment..... Edited... I took a look at an Environmental Site..... http://blogs.greenpeace.ca/2008/05/12/cana...about-ge-foods/ Greenpeace If anyone believe the Liberals would be better for the environment than the Conservatives, they should ask themselves why it is the Liberals, including Dion, vote against the environment EVERY SINGLE TIME. Edited May 13, 2008 by madmax Quote
madmax Posted May 13, 2008 Author Report Posted May 13, 2008 Layton is being true to his ideaology. He attacks business ..... Yes....I think you are onto something, because the ideology suggests the Petroleum Market is reaping huge profits, don't need anymore tax breaks or subsidies from government. Mr. Layton said forcing big polluters to pay is the most effective and rapid way to bring down the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Quote
M.Dancer Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 Yes....I think you are onto something, because the ideology suggests the Petroleum Market is reaping huge profits, don't need anymore tax breaks or subsidies from government. Except that the petroleum producing industry, while making a good poster.whipping boy, ain't the one that will suffer/and or necessarily cut the most emmisions. Think manufacturing. Whether it's extruded plastics or metal, manufactureres are the ones who use massive amounts of energy and the ones who could least afford another kick in the teeth. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
madmax Posted May 13, 2008 Author Report Posted May 13, 2008 Except that the petroleum producing industry, while making a good poster.whipping boy, ain't the one that will suffer/and or necessarily cut the most emmisions. They will receive tax breaks. Think manufacturing. Whether it's extruded plastics or metal, manufactureres are the ones who use massive amounts of energy and the ones who could least afford another kick in the teeth. I am well aware of what manufacturers face. Quote
M.Dancer Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 They will receive tax breaks. I thought you just wrote they don't need tax breaks? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
madmax Posted May 13, 2008 Author Report Posted May 13, 2008 I thought you just wrote they don't need tax breaks? That is correct. They don't need tax breaks or subsidies. Both of which they are receiving. Quote
madmax Posted May 13, 2008 Author Report Posted May 13, 2008 Except that the petroleum producing industry, while making a good poster.whipping boy, ain't the one that will suffer/and or necessarily cut the most emmisions. Oil is Exported. It goes to the US via the FTA. We are not allowed to put an export tax on it. How do you reduce Global Consumption of oil extracted from Canadian Soil? Quote
jdobbin Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 This flip flop, which happens to have been on the minds of the National Post as well....Bad Policy now Good Policy I believed it was always bad policy if not coupled with other tax cuts. In the 2006 election, Dion was not going to propose new taxes unless offset by tax cuts or cuts in spending. The proposal by environmentalists at the time was solely for a tax increase. Quote
gc1765 Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 Layton is being true to his ideaology. He attacks business and lets the consumers (who vote....but not for him) go scot free.I still believe the best policy would be a bit of both (excluding Layton), clamping down on emmisions through legistation and putting a fee (a modest tax) on all carbon products. Personally, I don't see a difference between the two. If you make businesses pay, does Layton think that they won't pass that cost onto the consumers? Because if he does, I don't think he understands how competition & the free market work. Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
M.Dancer Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 Personally, I don't see a difference between the two. If you make businesses pay, does Layton think that they won't pass that cost onto the consumers? Because if he does, I don't think he understands how competition & the free market work. Of course there is no difference. The NDP have always treated the voters as idiots. They think as long as there is no direct taxation voters won't notice....not that they have to worry about an NDP budget being tabled... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
madmax Posted May 13, 2008 Author Report Posted May 13, 2008 Personally, I don't see a difference between the two. If you make businesses pay, does Layton think that they won't pass that cost onto the consumers? Because if he does, I don't think he understands how competition & the free market work. How do you get those that purchase oil from Alberta to pay the Carbon Tax? Quote
Keepitsimple Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 The Liberals always campaign to the Left and Govern from the right.. Liberals to remove the GST...... Liberals to Fight FTA..... Liberals to stop NAFTA... Liberals against the combat mission in Afghanistan... Liberals to Secure Workers Wages/Vacationpay ... Liberals for the environment..... Edited... I took a look at an Environmental Site..... http://blogs.greenpeace.ca/2008/05/12/cana...about-ge-foods/ Greenpeace If anyone believe the Liberals would be better for the environment than the Conservatives, they should ask themselves why it is the Liberals, including Dion, vote against the environment EVERY SINGLE TIME. You forgot at least one: Liberals to eliminate Poverty by 2000. Quote Back to Basics
eyeball Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 Oil is Exported. It goes to the US via the FTA. We are not allowed to put an export tax on it. How do you reduce Global Consumption of oil extracted from Canadian Soil? Assuming either or both win the Whitehouse we hope Obama and Clinton keep their word on NAFTA, THEN we tax the shit out of it. We could also apply heavy export duties, through clenched teeth so they feel more like sanctions, against countries that violate the Prime Directive and insist on militarily screwing around in other people's countries. Then we apply these funds towards developing newer cleaner energy technologies, paying dividends to Canadians and meeting our country's needs. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
M.Dancer Posted May 13, 2008 Report Posted May 13, 2008 Then we apply these funds towards developing newer cleaner energy technologies, paying dividends to Canadians and meeting our country's needs. What do you care about Canadians? Yoiu keep saying youre an earthiling, you should pay what other earthlings pay.... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Wilber Posted May 14, 2008 Report Posted May 14, 2008 A stupid idea championed mostly by city dwellers who have options those who don't live in cities will never have. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
buffycat Posted May 14, 2008 Report Posted May 14, 2008 (edited) Well, all the Algore-Sky is falling crowd should be happy!! Afterall - isn't this what Global Warming (oh so sorry - it's called Climate Change now -since it certainly ain't warming!!) Crew wanted all along!!?? LOL And leave it to you guys to make this some kind of partisan issue - LOL even Louder! It's about the $$MONEY$$ Baby! It always is with these folks! (And it's OUR money, to boot!!) Bah bah bah... (edited: just cuz I had more to say) Edited May 14, 2008 by buffycat Quote "An eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind" ~ Ghandi
Bryan Posted May 14, 2008 Report Posted May 14, 2008 (edited) People in favor of a carbon tax better be prepared to start paying huge premiums on everything they buy or consume, just to prove they aren't trying to force others to pay for their ideals. In fact, that's how they should do it: hold a referendum on carbon taxes. Only those in favor of them will have to pay them. Irrevocably. Edited May 14, 2008 by Bryan Quote
WIP Posted May 14, 2008 Report Posted May 14, 2008 Personally, I don't see a difference between the two. If you make businesses pay, does Layton think that they won't pass that cost onto the consumers? Because if he does, I don't think he understands how competition & the free market work. Layton trots out socialist ideology that hasn't been updated since the Great Depression! Socialists always think there is free money available through taxing rich people and corporations, and then - as happened with Bob Rae's government, they are dismayed to find the costs being passed down in job cuts and plant closures. So now it's the same thing with the carbon tax! He either doesn't understand or is afraid to tell his people that the only viable way in a free society to cut carbon emissions, is to shift taxation in that direction and tax the causes of pollution. I don't know if it's ignorance or willful ignorance, but either way, socialists are never able to figure out how to create policies that would get the results they wish for. Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
WIP Posted May 14, 2008 Report Posted May 14, 2008 People in favor of a carbon tax better be prepared to start paying huge premiums on everything they buy or consume, just to prove they aren't trying to force others to pay for their ideals.In fact, that's how they should do it: hold a referendum on carbon taxes. Only those in favor of them will have to pay them. Irrevocably. I don't like the amount I have to pay in income tax every year! How about if you pay my share of income tax since you are so much in favour of keeping the present system! Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.