Dion's "Liberal Green Shift" carbon tax Plan

[jdobbin]

You've raised this point too many times on various threads for me to count. Looks like you're not immune to the "but the Liberals/Conservatives" malady.

If and when I have said that it was when right wing was talking about past Liberal governments rather than on positions in terms of present day policies. All the parties, except for the BQ, seem to have outlined some sort of policy.

I would just like some explanation of why the Tory plan is better. Can you explain why?

I keep hearing the Liberal plan is bad but I never hear why the Tory plan is so good.

[Keepitsimple]

Citation for your analysis?

Not sure what I need a citation for...unless I'm missing something.

[jdobbin]

Not sure what I need a citation for...unless I'm missing something.

Sounds like you might be.

[Topaz]

The Tory are running scared! I even heard the minister of the Environment say greenhouse gases were too high!!! I agree so far with Dion plan, Canadians will get money back for the carbon tax and I say, carbons will come down the more the plan fines higher fines to the major polluters and more money coming into Canadians pocket. Hydro rates are going to rise, nat. gas are going to, even before the carbon tax can come into effect, so at least I'm getting the money to cover the difference! The big polluters are oil and gas, they spill into the Great Lakes and say I'm sorry, pay their fine and do it over and over again. Polluters of the air or water , should pay big time and then maybe our grkids will have clean air and water!

[Fortunata]

You've raised this point too many times on various threads for me to count. Looks like you're not immune to the "but the Liberals/Conservatives" malady.

I listened to Question Period today capricorn and in every answer the Cons had the ... but the Liberals. Every answer. In many instances a question about subject A would bring an attack on Liberal's subject X - not even related. Is this what you expect from a government or what you expect from an opposition party? It's truly disgusting that a sitting government acts like this.

So every time you see a ... but the Liberals ... on this board think about every single answer that this government gives. They set such a low standard that everybody here is above them.

[Topaz]

I listened to Question Period today capricorn and in every answer the Cons had the ... but the Liberals. Every answer. In many instances a question about subject A would bring an attack on Liberal's subject X - not even related. Is this what you expect from a government or what you expect from an opposition party? It's truly disgusting that a sitting government acts like this.

So every time you see a ... but the Liberals ... on this board think about every single answer that this government gives. They set such a low standard that everybody here is above them.

I agree 101%!!! They never answer any question, they just turn the question around and attack. These government ministers are being paid 250,000 to what... be smart mouth ********! BTW.....www.greenshift.org

[capricorn]

I listened to Question Period today capricorn and in every answer the Cons had the ... but the Liberals.

Fortunata, I purposely used "but the Liberals/Conservatives" in my response to dobbin because I think some supporters of both parties are equally plagued with the "but...but" comeback. In a way, they're emulating those they support.

Every answer. In many instances a question about subject A would bring an attack on Liberal's subject X - not even related. Is this what you expect from a government or what you expect from an opposition party? It's truly disgusting that a sitting government acts like this.

Would you not agree that this Parliament has passed its best before date and is dysfunctional? The conduct you allude to describes this state of affairs perfectly. The only way to get things back on track on Parliament Hill is to have an election. Personally, I am not too happy that the Liberal party hasn't yet pulled the plug in spite of all the opportunities offered to them, and I am not alone.

IMO politics is akin to a game. When the game turns to childishness, pettyness and personal agendas, most of us are turned off. Perhaps that is the source of so much negativity and personal attacks on political forums.

[noahbody]

Canadians will get money back for the carbon tax and I say, carbons will come down the more the plan fines higher fines to the major polluters and more money coming into Canadians pocket.

Canadians will be paying more for everything. Take daycare for example. A daycare will have to recover for the increased cost of electricity, heating and food. Their staff, who are not well paid to begin with, will no doubt find it more difficult to make ends meet and likely demand more money, which will further raise the cost of daycare. This might create needed spaces though, as no one will be able to afford it. So it's like two plans in one.

[Argus]

Polling has shown people will support action on climate change.

With a 10 percent reduction in income taxes, the plan looks a lot more intriguing than the Tory plan which will likely pass on quite a hefty increase in gas tax.

Who benefits under the Liberal plan to tax home heating oil and gas.

Rich people: People in well-built homes, people in high priced condos in downtown Toronto, people who can afford to lay out tens of thousands to retrofit their homes to high standards of insulation.

Who will get hammered:

Poorer people. Lower income people who live in rental housing which does not have the best insulation, by far, and who either pay their own heating, or who pay it through rent.

Older people: Seniors living in fifty year old bungalows on fixed incomes who can't afford twenty thousand to retrofit them with better doors, windows and insulation.

The optics are not good, especially coming off two years worth of massive price increases in home heating fuels.

[Kleiniken]

Dion's Carbon tax plan is going be as much a hit with the Canadian electorate as cold and flu season. Next elction will line up kind of like this, Dion will have his carbon tax plan which he claims will be redistributed back along with oodles of new spending initiative.

Harper will come back with an actual tax cut and a middle of the road green initiative as well as a shopping basket of items for a broad cross section of canadians.

The verdict most likely this carbon tax will take away any chance the liberals have of forming government, especially since all the other parties will most likely emulate dions plan, leaving the conservatives as the only rational choice.

The questions dion will face on this bold initiative:

1. How will canada compete with the wold with a tax code that taxes those with the most money and those that use the most carbon?

2. How can this plan be revenue neutral seeing as though tens of thousands of bureaucrats will have to be hired to police this new tax code.

3. If it is revenue Neutral where will the money come for all your additional spending promises.

4. Hey how come everything I buy is made overseas, hey wait a minute how come there's no more jobs?

5. Will this actually help the environment?

6. How much will all the goods and services I buy increase in price by?

a. Even though I might get a carbon rebate, how will I pay for all the increased costs of all the goods I now buy

7. How can I possible trust the government not to just keep my cash?

Just a few of the questions Dion will have to face on his tax on everything. Despite polls that say that people want to do something about the environment, no poll it is always implicit that the carbon tax will only affect business and not you. When this rotten egg comes home to roost as a huge gaping hole in your wallet, people will change their tune awfully quick.

I can't believe this is the best the liberals could come up with.

[eyeball]

What this logic forgets is that one person's "wasteful use of energy" is another person's "essential contribution to society". The carbon tax does not distinguish between to two. This leads to situations where a poor person earning little more than minimum wage will be forced to quit their job and go on welfare but a rich person can easily afford to keep driving that hummer. There is no way a tax break can make up for increases in non-descretionary spending that poorer people face.

If your don't like that example because gasoline is 'exempt' for now then consider the plight of poor person living in rental accomodation where they are responsible for the heating bills. This person cannot afford the cost of upgrading the heating system and will likely not have many options when it comes to choosing different accomodation. But difference in costs won't make any difference to a rich person who runs an inefficient air conditioner.

You could always tax rich people extra and use it for more welfare. Programs that provide funding for upgrades to low income housing could also be used.

At the end of the day this proposal will result in even more offshoring of Canadian jobs as businesses discover that moving production to countries with no such taxes is cheaper than actually doing something about emissions. For those industries whic can't move they will increase thier prices which will lead to more inflation.

We should impose tarrifs on imports from countries that do not adhere to similar standards as our own and reward industries that remain with tax cuts.

Edited June 20, 2008 by eyeball

[eyeball]

If it is ethanol from grain or corn, it is a poor choice. I like ethanol from garbage and there is one group in Montreal that is doing well with that.

I was thinking I'd use kelp.

4 lbs of kelp equals 1 lb of coal by the way but it can grow up to two feet a day, so its a tad more renewable.

Edited June 20, 2008 by eyeball

[eyeball]

It seems to me the Conservatives are on to something in labeling it a "tax on everything". Harper called it "crazy economics". Of course these are exaggerations but it is language Canadians can understand.

I'm no fan of the Liberals but I did hear Dion put in a way that sounded quite sane to me. “We’ll cut taxes on those things we all want more of — income, investment and innovation — and we will shift those taxes on things we want less of — pollution, greenhouse gas emission and waste,"

Story

[Riverwind]

But this problem arises in every activity dependent on the price mechanism.

There is a big difference between accepting that some people get cancer and introducing government policies that will cause people get cancer. You have argued many times against government interventions in the market because they usually hurt the people they try to help (e.g. import quotas on Japanese cars). Why the about face when it comes to this issue?

The relevant point is that we should not use the environment to try to spread the wealth.

You are assuming that CO2 emissions represent a environmental problem that is serious enough to justify the policy actions. Any action to protect the environment must be subject to a cost-benefit analysis. For example, the negative effect of smog is indisputable yet most would never consider banning cars in order to 'protect the environment' because the cost outweighs the benefits.

At this point in time the actual weather data strongly suggests that the AGW alarmists have over estimated the amount of warming from CO2. This data should be telling us that we need to wait and see before introducing economically damaging policies to fix an environmental problem that may not exist.

The bottom line here is that the Liberal proposal will achieve the same results as the Conservative proposal (of regulations) but at lower cost.

Perhaps. I oppose all action on CO2 that increases the cost of electricity because we need practical alternatives to oil. Edited June 20, 2008 by Riverwind

[eyeball]

The relevant point is that we should not use the environment to try to spread the wealth.

I agree, after all it is the prime source of most of the wealth in the world. You can have a natural ecosystem without a human economy but you can't have it the other way around.

[capricorn]

You could always tax rich people extra and use it for more welfare.

Seriously? More income re-distribution to encourage more able-bodied people to do nothing?

Programs that provide funding for upgrades to low income housing could also be used.

Why would the feds absorb these expenses? After all, municipalities need only raise property taxes to pay for the upgrades to social housing units in their jurisdiction. What better excuse could they bring to ratepayers for a tax increase?

[capricorn]

I'm no fan of the Liberals but I did hear Dion put in a way that sounded quite sane to me.

I must admit Mr. Dion was quite ebullient in his presentation and it was hard not to get carried away faced with such enthusiasm. I've never seen him this excited.

The green shift plan reminds me of the carrot and stick approach. We'll hit you with the stick throughout the year, and if you're good we'll give you a carrot at tax time.

Carrot and stick (also spelled "carrot-and-stick")[1] is an idiom used to refer to the act of rewarding good behavior and punishing bad behavior. The carrot represents the edible reward, while the stick refers to a punishing switch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrot_and_stick

[Wilber]

Nothing is easier or shows less imagination than simply applying a tax to something. Dion should look at recent poles in BC concerning the impending carbon tax there. 71% don't believe it will be revenue neutral. People aren't stupid and realize that it is just another "we will take your money up front and then decide if and how we will give it back" scheme just like the 1.5% a liter deficit reduction tax applied by the Liberals and still hasn't been rescinded by the Conservatives even though the deficit disappeared over a decade ago. It will just go into that big bucket to be doled out on the pet projects of future governments whatever stripe they may be.

The market is already changing people's habits, Dion and Campbell haven't figured that out yet and by further increasing the already mounting pain of inflation due to high energy costs, it will cost them at the poles. They are already yesterdays men and don't even know it.

[jdobbin]

Poorer people. Lower income people who live in rental housing which does not have the best insulation, by far, and who either pay their own heating, or who pay it through rent.

Older people: Seniors living in fifty year old bungalows on fixed incomes who can't afford twenty thousand to retrofit them with better doors, windows and insulation.

The optics are not good, especially coming off two years worth of massive price increases in home heating fuels.

The Liberal plan addresses how lower income will get tax decreases and tax credits.

It will be interesting to see what the costing of the Tory and NDP plans will be.

[jdobbin]

Harper will come back with an actual tax cut and a middle of the road green initiative as well as a shopping basket of items for a broad cross section of canadians.

The Tory plan is reported to end costing 30 to 40 cents a litre at the pumps.

I guess one thing will come from Dion's announcement and that is a more substantive debate on what policies each party will present on climate change.

[jdobbin]

I was thinking I'd use kelp.

4 lbs of kelp equals 1 lb of coal by the way but it can grow up to two feet a day, so its a tad more renewable.

I have no idea where I'd find kelp living where I do. Garbage is still plentiful though.

[Riverwind]

The market is already changing people's habits, Dion and Campbell haven't figured that out yet and by further increasing the already mounting pain of inflation due to high energy costs, it will cost them at the poles. They are already yesterdays men and don't even know it.

If the Campbell government survives its carbon tax it will only be because right of center voters have no other place to go and hold their nose when they vote. Dion does not have that base and will find it a tough sell outside of the ridings which the liberals already hold.

The NP makes an excellent point today: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=599705

There are no targets attached to Mr. Dion's plan, so we have no clue about the reductions in emissions that are likely to result. More importantly, neither does he. This is dangerous because if the plan is wildly successful, the revenue generated from the carbon tax will start to tail off dramatically. Since the Liberals will have to keep paying for their broad-based tax cuts and various targeted benefits, new revenue streams will have to be found.

In other words, the tax is loser if it fails to reduce CO2 and a loser if it succeeds. Edited June 20, 2008 by Riverwind

[August1991]

the cost of the bureaucracy to administer the plan may rival the cost of the gun registry bureau,

...

It seems to me the Conservatives are on to something in labeling it a "tax on everything". Harper called it "crazy economics". Of course these are exaggerations but it is language Canadians can understand.

Compare the bureaucratic cost of Dion's Plan (essentially tax colection) to the bureaucratic cost of Harper's Plan (regulation of major emitters). Regulation is very costly once you add in the tribunals and appeals.

As to "crazy economics", Harper knows better and he's appealing to the gallery here. In economics, Dion is proposing a Pigouvian tax.

[Riverwind]

Compare the bureaucratic cost of Dion's Plan (essentially tax collection) to the bureaucratic cost of Harper's Plan (regulation of major emitters). Regulation is very costly once you add in the tribunals and appeals.

Dion's tax will inevitably lead to 'carbon bureaucrats' who will be responsible for assessing appropriate carbon tariffs on imported goods. The mishmash of exclusions and credits designed to appeal political constituencies will only increase over time. In the end the carbon tax will be far from simple and will most likely rival income taxes when it comes to complexities and bureaucratic costs.

[Topaz]

Well today Union Gas is again upping their rates and I'm tired of ME paying when they keep raining in the money. 12X they have gotten more money from its customers, I wonder if being owned by a US Duke Energy has anything to do with it. We all now in Ontario the rates for hydro will be going up and at least with Dion plan we'll some get some money back.