The Liberal Green Shift

[fellowtraveller]

The Green Shift is simply a revenue transfer from petro producing provinces- mostly the West - back to the center where all the money rightfully belongs in Liberal minds. Dion could care less how it plays in Alberta, no votes now or ever for him there. Plenty in the GTA though, which is the political target and economic beneficiary. It s a winner for him to take money fromSakatchewan to build public transit in GTA.

LiberalJim, do you agree or disagree that the conduct of the Liberal Party of Canada is illegal, immoral and disgraceful in stealing the trademarked and copyrighted 'Green Shift' signature from the legal owners, a Tornto environmental firm? Without any compensation or apology or explanation?

And a sure sign of election looming: new Liberal shills appear on websites like this.

[Riverwind]

It seems to me that you would be opposed to that to and say the market could do that. Why tax something when you can regulate it? And why regulate it when you don't even believe it is a problem?

If one wishes to reduce CO2 then one should introduce programs that will actually accomplish that objective. The Green Shift will not accomplish that objective because it uses the tax to fund a huge increase in social programmes directed for lower income people instead of using the money to reduce emissions (the idea that low income people would "invest" the money in reducing income is fanciful). A plan that regulates industrial emitters and uses the proceeds of any tax to fund R&D will actually reduce emissions. That is way people say denmark's carbon tax succeeded where carbon taxes in other countries failed. When considering changes in policy it usually makes sense to look at what has succeeded elsewhere and avoid what has failed. By that measure the conservative plan is an order of magnitude better than the green shift.

BTW: in a earlier discussion with stevoh I agreed that some measure of CO2 regulation coud be justified even if I think the risk is minimal. However, agreeing that some CO2 regulation can be justified does not mean that every harebrained policy is acceptable.

Edited September 3, 2008 by Riverwind

[Oleg Bach]

If one wishes to reduce CO2 then one should introduce programs that will actually accomplish that objective. The Green Shift will not accomplish that objective because it uses the tax to fund a huge increase in social programmes directed for lower income people instead of using the money to reduce emissions (the idea that low income people would "invest" the money in reducing income is fanciful). A plan that regulates industrial emitters and uses the proceeds of any tax to fund R&D will actually reduce emissions. That is way people say denmark's carbon tax succeeded where carbon taxes in other countries failed. When considering changes in policy it usually makes sense to look at what has succeeded elsewhere and avoid what has failed. By that measure the conservative plan is an order of magnitude better than the green shift.

There will never be a greening of North America until we shut down that dirt breathing dragon China. It's a closed environ - and for us to go on about carbon foot prints and support the greatest polluter in human history is dellusionizm at it's grandest.

[segnosaur]

I live in Ottawa, and it will increase my tax burden by several hundred dollars per year.

Wow, that number keeps growing.

Uhhh... no, it doesn't.

I've provided an accounting for the potental increases in costs several times on this forum, including here... http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....mp;#entry324890

Direct carbon taxes will add approximatly $400-500 to my tax bill. Even with potential rebates, I'll still end up out of pocket by around $150 to $200.

$200 sounds a lot like 'several hundred' to me.

[segnosaur]

The Green Shift is simply a revenue transfer from petro producing provinces- mostly the West - back to the center where all the money rightfully belongs in Liberal minds. Dion could care less how it plays in Alberta, no votes now or ever for him there. Plenty in the GTA though, which is the political target and economic beneficiary. It s a winner for him to take money fromSakatchewan to build public transit in GTA.

Actually, that's not completely true.

Yes, its correct that Alberta will be hardest hit... however, Ontario (with large numbers of coal and oil generating plants) will not necessarily benefit. In fact, Ontario will suffer too. (Quebec and Manitoba, on the other hand, will benefit.)

Of course, anything that benefits Quebec will be seen as a 'good thing' to politicians of all parties. What I can't understand is why any Ontario voters would actually accept the liberal green plan. How gullible are we? Do we not recognize that the tax will end up punishing Ontario and provides no benefit?

[Oleg Bach]

Actually, that's not completely true.

Yes, its correct that Alberta will be hardest hit... however, Ontario (with large numbers of coal and oil generating plants) will not necessarily benefit. In fact, Ontario will suffer too. (Quebec and Manitoba, on the other hand, will benefit.)

Of course, anything that benefits Quebec will be seen as a 'good thing' to politicians of all parties. What I can't understand is why any Ontario voters would actually accept the liberal green plan. How gullible are we? Do we not recognize that the tax will end up punishing Ontario and provides no benefit?

Green shift = money shift - with no real green living thing in the equation..just dead paper with numbers on it.

[blueblood]

Actually, that's not completely true.

Yes, its correct that Alberta will be hardest hit... however, Ontario (with large numbers of coal and oil generating plants) will not necessarily benefit. In fact, Ontario will suffer too. (Quebec and Manitoba, on the other hand, will benefit.)

Of course, anything that benefits Quebec will be seen as a 'good thing' to politicians of all parties. What I can't understand is why any Ontario voters would actually accept the liberal green plan. How gullible are we? Do we not recognize that the tax will end up punishing Ontario and provides no benefit?

I am a manitoba ag producer and the Carbon tax will hurt me more than the average person in Ontario. Manitoba also has oil in the Southwest corner and a decent mining industry.

This tax is geared towards urban dwellers. The average person living in the GTA does not emit as much carbon as I do. It seems like a lot of voters in the GTA are about sticking it to big oil and gas, the carbon tax does this, and at the same time sticks it to everybody else. The carbon tax won't effect the average Ontarian as it does myself.

[jdobbin]

$200 sounds a lot like 'several hundred' to me.

It does, does it? Sounds like $200 to me.

[jdobbin]

By that measure the conservative plan is an order of magnitude better than the green shift.

How? By raising gas and diesel 40 cents a litre with a flexible emissions policy?

[Chuck U. Farlie]

How? By raising gas and diesel 40 cents a litre with a flexible emissions policy?

jodobbin... I haven't been following this issue very closely, so I was wondering if you could explain to me the Conservative's policy and where/how it would increase prices by 40 cents a litre?

I looked at their website but couldn't find many specifics.

So far I am not convinced with Dion's Green Shift, but I have not heard any of the opposing party's ideas.

[eyeball]

THE GREEN SHIFT

The thing people don't understand is that the green shift will cut taxes and create jobs. Not only that, it will create GOOD, DECENT and PROGRESSIVE jobs. It's a fantastic and innovative piece of politics. Doing Canada proud and putting us ahead of the rest of the world.

It sounds good on paper, these things always do.

Before anything else the thing the Liberals need to do most is propose new transparency legislation, Harper's accountability act just doesn't cut it, in fact it doesn't even scratch the surface. I think this new legislation would also have to include a section dealing with elections and promises, i.e. if you can't keep them don't make them, its that simple.

What do I mean by transparency? You won't have to wear your cameras at home, but anytime a Cabinet Minister or senior bureaucrat meets with a lobbyist of any stripe, its lights, cameras, action...

If you want my vote you're going to have to pay dearly I'm afraid. That said the lobbyists will probably hate your guts.

[jdobbin]

jodobbin... I haven't been following this issue very closely, so I was wondering if you could explain to me the Conservative's policy and where/how it would increase prices by 40 cents a litre?

I looked at their website but couldn't find many specifics.

The Globe and Mail and National Post both did a break down of all the parties and how their plans would play out.

The experts on both panels said that the one thing about a carbon tax is that the price on carbon would be a known whereas the price of cap and trade would cause fuel prices to rise upwards of 40 cents a litre. The difference between the NDP and Tory plans really only comes down to how fast their plans would do that.

So far I am not convinced with Dion's Green Shift, but I have not heard any of the opposing party's ideas.

It has been easy to criticize his plan which indicates what the costs will be when the NDP and Tory plan don't mention costs passed on to the consumers.

[Moonbox]

The Globe and Mail and National Post both did a break down of all the parties and how their plans would play out.

The experts on both panels said that the one thing about a carbon tax is that the price on carbon would be a known whereas the price of cap and trade would cause fuel prices to rise upwards of 40 cents a litre. The difference between the NDP and Tory plans really only comes down to how fast their plans would do that.

It has been easy to criticize his plan which indicates what the costs will be when the NDP and Tory plan don't mention costs passed on to the consumers.

The difference is that the NDP's plan is irrelevant and they can say whatever they want, and the Conservatives are not really making it a central point for their government. Even if re-elected, I highly doubt that the CPC will even bother to implement their own plan.

The Liberals on the other hand, have basically staked their fortunes on the Green Shift and Canadian's acceptance of it. It WILL cost people money indirectly or directly, and it's a stupid thing to be worrying about right now in a sluggish world economy especially when Canada's carbon emissions are negligible compared to China or India's. Both countries, as it may happen, will not be joining the Green Shift.

All it is going to do is force industry to shift production even more overseas or raise prices and there will be virtually no net reduction in carbon emissions...period. It will mean higher prices in Canada and more money wasted/lost.

[jdobbin]

The difference is that the NDP's plan is irrelevant and they can say whatever they want, and the Conservatives are not really making it a central point for their government. Even if re-elected, I highly doubt that the CPC will even bother to implement their own plan.

And people say that the Tories don't have a secret agenda. Yeesh.

The Liberals on the other hand, have basically staked their fortunes on the Green Shift and Canadian's acceptance of it. It WILL cost people money indirectly or directly, and it's a stupid thing to be worrying about right now in a sluggish world economy especially when Canada's carbon emissions are negligible compared to China or India's. Both countries, as it may happen, will not be joining the Green Shift.

All it is going to do is force industry to shift production even more overseas or raise prices and there will be virtually no net reduction in carbon emissions...period. It will mean higher prices in Canada and more money wasted/lost.

And if Canada doesn't do anything, we will be punished by the U.S. and Europeans. You can read that on the McCain website.

[Moonbox]

And people say that the Tories don't have a secret agenda. Yeesh..

There's no secret agenda. The Conservatives can come up with as many alternative plans as they want. They're not really making the environment a central issue for their government. They're making other things the priority. Sure, maybe if everything else is all worked out they'll look into it, but the CPC constituency is not counting/caring about additional environmental initiatives right now. I may be speaking for people that don't want to be spoken for, but I don't think the average CPC voter is going to start crying about broken promises if the government doesn't implement some sort of carbon tax.

And if Canada doesn't do anything, we will be punished by the U.S. and Europeans. You can read that on the McCain website.

As if McCain's website means anything. What he's saying is about as realistic as Hilary and Obama threatening to drop NAFTA. Campaign rhetoric. Americans love to hear their politicians talk tough about other countries. Most of them, however, don't realize that the Americans have placed their balls in our hands as far as energy goes right now, and they're not about to jeapordize that.

Europe (which matters relatively little in comparison in terms of trade) will also do nothing, because their truckers are blocking roads and their freighters are blocking ports because of prohibitively high fuel costs right now. The people there aren't really any more thrilled than most Canadians are about carbon taxes.

Edited September 4, 2008 by Moonbox

[Riverwind]

And if Canada doesn't do anything, we will be punished by the U.S. and Europeans.

You mean the Europeans who have decided to build more coal plants because they are worried about depending too much on Russian gas? I will believe it when I see it.

[jdobbin]

You mean the Europeans who have decided to build more coal plants because they are worried about depending too much on Russian gas? I will believe it when I see it.

I think I pointed out the spot on McCain's website where he said he would penalize free-riders.

Seems you believe everything the Liberals say and none of what your Conservative and Republican friends say. Weird.

[jdobbin]

There's no secret agenda. The Conservatives can come up with as many alternative plans as they want. They're not really making the environment a central issue for their government. They're making other things the priority. Sure, maybe if everything else is all worked out they'll look into it, but the CPC constituency is not counting/caring about additional environmental initiatives right now. I may be speaking for people that don't want to be spoken for, but I don't think the average CPC voter is going to start crying about broken promises if the government doesn't implement some sort of carbon tax.

Look, you can't keep saying the Tories don''t mean what they say and the Liberal do. Sounds like you are saying the Tories are liars.

As if McCain's website means anything. What he's saying is about as realistic as Hilary and Obama threatening to drop NAFTA. Campaign rhetoric. Americans love to hear their politicians talk tough about other countries. Most of them, however, don't realize that the Americans have placed their balls in our hands as far as energy goes right now, and they're not about to jeapordize that.

Many legal experts have already said that it entirely possible and legal for penalties to be enacted for "dumping" which is what emissions based advantage might be regarded as.

Europe (which matters relatively little in comparison in terms of trade) will also do nothing, because their truckers are blocking roads and their freighters are blocking ports because of prohibitively high fuel costs right now. The people there aren't really any more thrilled than most Canadians are about carbon taxes.

The taxes in Europe have been used for far more than carbon. They fund a richer social services agenda.

This idea that the right is lying about its environment policy or have no intention of doing anything certainly doesn't inspire confidence.

Makes people think that this dishonesty extends to a whole lot of policies.

Edited September 4, 2008 by jdobbin

[Riverwind]

I think I pointed out the spot on McCain's website where he said he would penalize free-riders.

McCain is one person. His climate change policies are firmly opposed by many Republicans - including his VP. His climate change policy has been re-written at the RNC this week.

The tories have not made it a central issue for their campaign. If they choose to do so then I would expect them to implement. However, it is a reasonably balanced plan which focuses on the allegded problem rather than trying to create a new social program.

Edited September 4, 2008 by Riverwind

[jdobbin]

McCain is one person. His climate change policies are firmly opposed by many Republicans - including his VP. His climate change policy has been re-written at the RNC this week.

Still the same position ion his website. If he wins, he's the boss not the Republican party.

The tories have not made it a central issue for their campaign. If they choose to do so then I would expect them to implement. However, it is a reasonably balanced plan which focuses on the allegded problem rather than trying to create a new social program.

Harper has said he will be implement his plan. Your reasonably balanced approach is your own partisan spin on the plan.

[Keepitsimple]

The taxes in Europe have been used for far more than carbon. They fund a richer social services agenda.

And therein lies the problem. The Liberals have openly rolled their Poverty Agenda into their Green Shift Plan......and that's likely just the tip of the iceberg. Don't forget the promise that Dion made - to reduce poverty by 30% over the next 5 years and overall child poverty by 50% - the 30/50 plan - introduced with much media fanfare. Liberals and their media friends have gone to great lengths to tout Mr. Dion as a man of great integrity. So where will he find the money? - just like the Europeans - a shell game with environment taxes.

Edited September 4, 2008 by Keepitsimple

[Argus]

THE GREEN SHIFT

The thing people don't understand is that the green shift will cut taxes and create jobs. Not only that, it will create GOOD, DECENT and PROGRESSIVE jobs. It's a fantastic and innovative piece of politics. Doing Canada proud and putting us ahead of the rest of the world.

This reads like something put out by a member of some Liberal Party propaganda squad; a mindless, drive by "rah-rah for us"

There is nothing in the Green Shift plan about job creation, merely the hope that for some unexplained reason, private industry will decide to create tons of jobs in some hitherto non-existent industry related to conservation.

It does not cut taxes. It doesn't even promise to cut taxes. At most the Liberals say it will be "tax neutral", in that the amount of taxes collected will be the same - not the same to individual taxpayers, of course, but the same to the government.

By the way, assuming you ever come back, would you like to tell us what a BAD, INDECENT and... what CONSERVATIVE job entails?

[Argus]

Leave it to a right winger to call a liberal tax cut "income redistribution".

Perhaps you only read the headlines. Most Liberals do. If you delve a little deeper you'll find that this is unabashedly an income redistribution program with only a peripheral aim of reducing carbon emissions.

For example, removing the employment tax credit for workers who earn $50,000 or more a year. Can you tell me exactly how that relates to carbon emissions or pollution? That's a $1000 credit removed from every middle class working man and woman - on top of the fact we're going to be paying higher energy prices, and more for goods and services. And that $1000? Where's it going to? To CO2 emission reduction programs? Nope. It's going to be flat out given to poorer people, many of whom don't work. Good for them, I suppose, but do you actually expect me to feel this is related to pollution and the environment because the Liberals call it a "Green" shift? It's just more Liberal lies.

Edited September 4, 2008 by Argus

[Argus]

Wow, that number keeps growing.

Actually, if he makes $50k or more it will cost him $1000 just to start, with the removal of the employment tax credit. On top of that, Ontario Hydro has already said it will increase electricity costs by at least 20%. On top of that, of course, already sky-high fuel costs for heating oil and natural gas will rise as the tax is applied to them. And industry, faced with higher electricity, heating and transport costs (the tax will apply to diesel fuel used by trucks, will have to raise the price of goods, as well.

[Smallc]

and transport costs (the tax will apply to diesel fuel used by trucks, will have to raise the price of goods, as well.

Exactly. Food, gas, and so many other thing will have to go up because it will cost more to ship them.