Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
At least Harper wants to make it law to reduce emissions by 20% by 2020. I'll take a 20% decrease instead of just trading around carbon credits any day.

And they'll get there, even just by talking to it (or "wanting" to make the law - they've been around over two years already - with environment as a top priority)? You know that, for sure. That crystal ball (or is it ideological affiliation?) must be really helpful... When are we going to meet the aliens?

If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant

Posted
And they'll get there, even just by talking to it (or "wanting" to make the law - they've been around over two years already - with environment as a top priority)? You know that, for sure. That crystal ball (or is it ideological affiliation?) must be really helpful... When are we going to meet the aliens?

No, of course I can't say for sure. Neither can you. How can anyone defend a "what if"?

All we have is party track record. One one hand we have a few broken Tory promises. On the other we have a hand that falls down and breaks under the weight of a ZILLION broken Liberal promises!

Nothing in life is a certainty but if you're going to place a bet you should look closely at the odds rather than just picking "the horse with the nice nose".

"A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."

-- George Bernard Shaw

"There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."

Posted
No, of course I can't say for sure. Neither can you. How can anyone defend a "what if"?

OK, so we won't be branding carbon trading as a "fifth wheel" while Tories would be law a "working strategy" just yet? Not without at least an attempt at logical argumentation?

If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant

Posted
They're not taking the side of Quebec. McGuinty has made this decision based on Ontario's environmental policy, and the best way to carry it out. The issue is the environment, not language, not seperation. The inaction of the federal government (due to the opposition parties in Parliament) puts the responsibility on the provincial governments to move forward with their own programs, as environmental policy is not exclusively federal or provincial jurisdiction, it is a shared jurisdiction.

In your own mind.

Mc.guinty is taking unilaterally taking an irresponsible course of action relating to the future welfare of the residents of Ontario.

Wild Bill said it right:

At least Harper wants to make it law to reduce emissions by 20% by 2020. I'll take a 20% decrease instead of just trading around carbon credits any day.
Posted
OK, so we won't be branding carbon trading as a "fifth wheel" while Tories would be law a "working strategy" just yet? Not without at least an attempt at logical argumentation?

Am I understanding you correctly? You are attacking the Tory policy of legally demanding an actual cut in carbon emissions because we don't know for sure if the government will actually follow through.

Meanwhile, you are championing a system of carbon trading that doesn't actually cut any carbon emissions at all! It just allows rich countries to buy credits from poor ones.

If I've misunderstood you please explain.

"A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."

-- George Bernard Shaw

"There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."

Posted (edited)

The Conservatives' plan is better, but the reality is that it will not be passed by Parliament at this point, due to the opposition parties blocking it, and so the provinces are stepping up to the plate. How is McGuinty's plan irresponsible? Do you oppose the plan itself, or that Quebec is involved?

Edited by Sean Hayward

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,896
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    postuploader
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • User earned a badge
      One Year In
    • josej earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • josej earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Dave L went up a rank
      Contributor
    • dekker99 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...