Dion's "Liberal Green Shift" carbon tax Plan

[Wilber]

The market responded to that demand despite what the costs might be in emissions. A carbon tax spread over all emissions producing energy will set a cost to carbon whatever the demand is.

The market will still respond, tax or no but the time to apply a tax is not when people are already getting hammered. That just shows ignorance of economic reality and total insensitivity toward those who are getting hammered.

[jdobbin]

The market will still respond, tax or no but the time to apply a tax is not when people are already getting hammered. That just shows ignorance of economic reality and total insensitivity toward those who are getting hammered.

The reality is that gas doesn't increase under the Liberal plan. It does under the Tory and NDP plan.

The reality is that the Tories and NDP don't decrease tax elsewhere with their cap and regulation plan.

The market has had a poor response to the rising cost of energy in the last decades. It is hard to see that changing.

[Wilber]

The market has had a poor response to the rising cost of energy in the last decades. It is hard to see that changing.

In that case why do you want to tax energy as it obviously won't work? You seem to think that a tax will somehow influence the market more than a price increase. Equine feces.

[jdobbin]

In that case why do you want to tax energy as it obviously won't work? You seem to think that a tax will somehow influence the market more than a price increase. Equine feces.

A tax would remain in place even when prices fluctuate downward. We have seen in the past that when oil prices rise that people and companies will start to take steps to mitigate the price. However, when they fall, consumption resumes as per usual. House sizes and car sizes zoomed up when oil fell last time.

A carbon tax stays in place. The costs are known and the ways to mitigate that tax is known.

The right wing doesn't believe in climate change. Never has. They would have been against this policy even if oil was falling in price.

[jbg]

Why do anything at all when the right wing doesn't even believe in global warming? Just complain it costs too much and say the market will fix any and all problems.

How warm was it in Winnipeg last winter?

[Peter F]

How warm was it in Winnipeg last winter?

Monthly temperatures at Winnipeg 2007

2007 mean max mean mean min extr max extr min

january -9.8 -16 -22.2 5.8 -37.6

February -13.4 -18.8 -24.2 -0.8 -41.7

March 0.3 -5.1 -10.5 9.3 -30.8

Environment Canada

[Keepitsimple]

A tax would remain in place even when prices fluctuate downward. We have seen in the past that when oil prices rise that people and companies will start to take steps to mitigate the price. However, when they fall, consumption resumes as per usual. House sizes and car sizes zoomed up when oil fell last time.

A carbon tax stays in place. The costs are known and the ways to mitigate that tax is known.

The right wing doesn't believe in climate change. Never has. They would have been against this policy even if oil was falling in price.

The "Right Wing", as you put it....does not deny Climate Change - any bumpkin accepts that earth's natural processes lead to continuous climate change. What people question is how much climate change is accellerated because of mankind's burning of fossil fuels. We know it's not 100% because a good portion of climate change is natural which even the alarmists should agree on.....so maybe it's an outrageously high 50%....but then we know that there are several mankind-driven factors that are not related to fossil fuels (population, land use)....so maybe it's still an outrageously high 25%.....and if that's the case, what effect can we actually have on "Global Warming" - even if every human on earth stops burning fossil fuels? Conservation, a general respect for our environment, continued research into Climate Change, technology investment, and long range adaptation are the answers.

Edited July 7, 2008 by Keepitsimple

[Riverwind]

Good deconstruction of the Green Shift plan here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...ialComment/home

Moreover, ignoring their carbon-tax burden, a childless single person with income of $5,000 would benefit by $550, whereas a childless couple with a $100,000 income split equally between the spouses would gain just $675.

Surely, with 20 times the income of the single person and correspondingly higher expenditures, the couple would bear carbon taxes far more than 23 per cent above those of the single person.

...

It would raise the $1,000 employment credit, currently available to all wage and salary earners, to $1,850, but phase out that benefit to zero for earners at $50,000 and above. That would increase the effective marginal tax rate on earners below $50,000, reducing their incentive to work, save and invest.

It is becoming increasingly clear that this tax plan will not be revenue neutral for many people and that the amount of carbon produced is largely irrelevant when it comes to deciding who wins and who loses. Edited July 7, 2008 by Riverwind

[Wild Bill]

Good deconstruction of the Green Shift plan here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...ialComment/home

It is becoming increasingly clear that this tax plan will not be revenue neutral for many people and that the amount of carbon produced is largely irrelevant when it comes to deciding who wins and who loses.

If you think about it, no such government plan can be revenue neutral at the individual level. People have wildly different circumstances and situations.

Dion may trumpet the term "revenue neutral" while implying that no one should fear being financially hurt but this is obviously mere politics. How can you come up with a plan detailed enough to cover everyone?

The answer is that you can't. Politics is the art of the greatest good for the greatest number, while garnering the greatest number of votes! From Dion's perspective, if he believes that more people will benefit from his plan than will be hurt then his conscience is clear.

From a citizen's perspective, it all depends on which category you fall into. Canada's leaders from the North have already spoken out against Dion's plan as hurtful to them while they try to keep warm during their long winter. The Oil Patch expects to be hurt as well.

Then again, those aren't exactly Liberal strongholds anyway so I guess it doesn't matter. Watch for the new GST (Green Shift Tax) to play well in Toronto, Quebec and Ottawa and almost nowhere else.

Come to think of it, that might be enough!

[Topaz]

Lat night Larry King , he had on the CEO if Chrevron and Robert Kenndey Jr. among others and they were talking about the high price of gas and the environment. BTW, if you want to read the transcripts go to www.bourque.com and its near the bottom of page under Larry King. I tried the direct link but couldn't get it to work. Anyway, Kennedy is saying exactly what Dion wants to do, polluters pay. Everyone is talking about the amount of money either its going to cost or how much indivduals are going to be getting BUT you can't put a price on OUR HEALTH! If we can't breath, nothing else matters and its time to clean up the environment.

[Argus]

Good deconstruction of the Green Shift plan here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...ialComment/home

It is becoming increasingly clear that this tax plan will not be revenue neutral for many people and that the amount of carbon produced is largely irrelevant when it comes to deciding who wins and who loses.

Yes, bait and switch is the term. They're calling it a climate plan, but in actuality it's got a lot of income redistribution - away from those who work - to those who don't. Great. Another big welfare program which takes money out of my pocket. And like almost everything else they do the Liberals are being dishonest about it - calling it a climate program, and trumpeting it as a "save the world" motherhood issue. Well if they really cared that much about climate change they wouldn't have twisted this into a massive welfare program. Just taking away the employment credit would cost me $1000 a year, without even taking the increased electric costs or increased heating oil costs, or increased costs of goods into account.

[Topaz]

Yes, bait and switch is the term. They're calling it a climate plan, but in actuality it's got a lot of income redistribution - away from those who work - to those who don't. Great. Another big welfare program which takes money out of my pocket. And like almost everything else they do the Liberals are being dishonest about it - calling it a climate program, and trumpeting it as a "save the world" motherhood issue. Well if they really cared that much about climate change they wouldn't have twisted this into a massive welfare program. Just taking away the employment credit would cost me $1000 a year, without even taking the increased electric costs or increased heating oil costs, or increased costs of goods into account.

What about the fact Dion plan has not taken effect yet and already natural gas is going up, you and I know any reason is given when the utilities want an increase! The people screaming the most are the investors or shareholders of gas and oil and what they can lose, like our politicans being one of those losers.

[Riverwind]

you can't put a price on OUR HEALTH! If we can't breath, nothing else matters and its time to clean up the environment.

Sigh. CO2 is not a smog and confusing CO2 with smog simply demonstrates that you don't have a clue what you are talking about. It is sad that so many Canadians display a similar level of ignorance when it comes to GHGs.

[jdobbin]

What people question is how much climate change is accellerated because of mankind's burning of fossil fuels.

Fine. What we know is that many on the right wing are not convinced on this point and are not interested in doing anything about it.

[Argus]

Fine. What we know is that many on the right wing are not convinced on this point and are not interested in doing anything about it.

Actually, what we know is that many are not convinced on this point, and not interested in wasting massive amounts of money on poorly thought-out schemes which will have little or no impact anyway.

[jdobbin]

Actually, what we know is that many are not convinced on this point, and not interested in wasting massive amounts of money on poorly thought-out schemes which will have little or no impact anyway.

That sounds like the Tory plan thus far with caps that will simply pass on costs on gas and do nothing to reduce industrial because they'll be based on intensity or have large loopholes big enough to drive a coal fired plant through.

[Keepitsimple]

Fine. What we know is that many on the right wing are not convinced on this point and are not interested in doing anything about it.

As I said before, I think you'll find that those on the Right will gladly invest in Conservation, a general respect for our environment, continued research into Climate Change, technology investment, and long range adaptation contingency programs.

[Argus]

That sounds like the Tory plan thus far with caps that will simply pass on costs on gas and do nothing to reduce industrial because they'll be based on intensity or have large loopholes big enough to drive a coal fired plant through.

They will, however, reduce actual pollution, which pretty much everyone but Liberals thinks is important. As for "intensity based" that sounds like the only economically viable scheme to me. The idea that the bigger and more succesful you get the heavier penalties you'll face from government for having more emissions is ludicrious, and guaranteed to persuade growing industries to relocate elsewhere.

And as for coal fired plants - they are operated by the Ontario Liberal Party, and will be for some time to come, with no plans for cleaning them up or shutting them down any time in the near future.

[madmax]

Fine. What we know is that many on the right wing are not convinced on this point and are not interested in doing anything about it.

I guess we will find out what Liberals think about it in the Bi Election in Guelph.

From the Conservative Candidate Press release

http://www.gloriakovach.com/PressReleases/...Tax-Scheme.aspx

Locally, Liberal candidate Frank Valeriote has been completely silent on the plan, and where he stands. He has issued no press releases. He has stated only two things publicly on this issue. Firstly, he supports a cap and trade program for greenhouse gas emissions. Cap and trade is a scheme that is supported by the NDP, but not by his leader, Stéphane Dion. Secondly, he opposes any government investment in green technology. The new Dion carbon tax scheme includes such an investment, in the form of an “Accelerated Capital Cost Allowance for green technologies”.

Of course being a party press release, I am certain it is not partisan. Ok, it is partisan. But there hasn't been any comment from the LPC Candidate, drooling over the Tax Scheme.

[Wilber]

A tax would remain in place even when prices fluctuate downward. We have seen in the past that when oil prices rise that people and companies will start to take steps to mitigate the price. However, when they fall, consumption resumes as per usual. House sizes and car sizes zoomed up when oil fell last time.

A carbon tax stays in place. The costs are known and the ways to mitigate that tax is known.

The right wing doesn't believe in climate change. Never has. They would have been against this policy even if oil was falling in price.

So what you are saying is that no matter how high prices get, it is official Liberal policy that they will never be high enough.

[blueblood]

Lat night Larry King , he had on the CEO if Chrevron and Robert Kenndey Jr. among others and they were talking about the high price of gas and the environment. BTW, if you want to read the transcripts go to www.bourque.com and its near the bottom of page under Larry King. I tried the direct link but couldn't get it to work. Anyway, Kennedy is saying exactly what Dion wants to do, polluters pay. Everyone is talking about the amount of money either its going to cost or how much indivduals are going to be getting BUT you can't put a price on OUR HEALTH! If we can't breath, nothing else matters and its time to clean up the environment.

I seen that, the CEO and the guy from NBC (forget name) made Robert Kennedy Jr. look like a dumb ass. The market is doing more for curbing pollution through high energy prices more quickly and efficiently than any gov't policy ever will.

[jdobbin]

As I said before, I think you'll find that those on the Right will gladly invest in Conservation, a general respect for our environment, continued research into Climate Change, technology investment, and long range adaptation contingency programs.

You'll have to show me that gladness because many of the right seem to think those thinks are leftist ideals and want no part of them.

[jdobbin]

I guess we will find out what Liberals think about it in the Bi Election in Guelph.

I have heard some local Liberals are not happy with the candidate because of some of his past statements on the environment.

The NDP are looking to take the seat but the Catholic vote might be hard to overcome.

[jdobbin]

So what you are saying is that no matter how high prices get, it is official Liberal policy that they will never be high enough.

Did I say that?

I think I said that with fluctuating prices like we saw today, we will see a consistent application of carbon tax that encourages carbon producers and consumers to find ways to reduce emissions.

[Keepitsimple]

Did I say that?

I think I said that with fluctuating prices like we saw today, we will see a consistent application of carbon tax that encourages carbon producers and consumers to find ways to reduce emissions.

Yep. That's what you said.