Ontario Needs a Carbon Tax

[kengs333]

Interesting, TD seems to think that Ontario needs a carbon tax to get its economy back on track...

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=846904

[geoffrey]

TD has been off track with this announcement and the annoucement today that Ontario deserve $11b in additional transfers. They seem to think that because the banks are located there, all bank taxes should be paid to Ontario.

Putting a carbon tax on a struggling manufacturing industry surely would be the final nail in the coffin on GM/Ford.

Therefore, I encourage it. Get those piece of crap domestic cars off the roads once and for all.

[Smallc]

Therefore, I encourage it. Get those piece of crap domestic cars off the roads once and for all.

Ford quality numbers don't seem to back up your assertion.

[Argus]

Interesting, TD seems to think that Ontario needs a carbon tax to get its economy back on track...

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=846904

Ah yes, a big bank wants the government to introduce a carbon tax on industries that pollute so it can use the money for tax cuts for - the big banks. What a shocker that is.

[Mad_Michael]

Ford quality numbers don't seem to back up your assertion.

Ford's sales figures do.

[Mad_Michael]

TD has been off track with this announcement and the annoucement today that Ontario deserve $11b in additional transfers. They seem to think that because the banks are located there, all bank taxes should be paid to Ontario.

Putting a carbon tax on a struggling manufacturing industry surely would be the final nail in the coffin on GM/Ford.

Therefore, I encourage it. Get those piece of crap domestic cars off the roads once and for all.

The principle opposition to carbon taxes in Canada comes from the Alberta oil & gas industry. They are the ones who are most likely to be seriously affected by any introduction of any kind of carbon taxes.

[Oleg Bach]

What ever happened to organizations like Pollution Probe? If a factory sneakily spewed out pollutants during a foggy day or at night - they paid dearly with a shut down - Carbon tax is a licence to crap in the living room on the carpet...this is not the solution - Enforcement of existing laws is the solution. Destruction of the environment stems from greed and using money to cure money problems will not work. You must make it clear if you are to cheap to contain your industrial human waste then you are out of buisness. Passing the buck around will cure nothing.

[Mad_Michael]

What ever happened to organizations like Pollution Probe? If a factory sneakily spewed out pollutants during a foggy day or at night - they paid dearly with a shut down - Carbon tax is a licence to crap in the living room on the carpet...this is not the solution - Enforcement of existing laws is the solution. Destruction of the environment stems from greed and using money to cure money problems will not work. You must make it clear if you are to cheap to contain your industrial human waste then you are out of buisness. Passing the buck around will cure nothing.

Destruction of the environment is caused by the status quo existing laws that protect private capital's right to pollute. It also protects the consumer's right to pollute. Our economy is built on this principle. Carbon taxes are a way to (theoretically) address this growing problem.

[Smallc]

Ford's sales figures do.

Nissan - Inifiniti was down by over 30% last month...every auto company is down. When times were good, it was that perception lagged reality. Ford has somewhat of a quality problem in the past, and they fixed it, but it takes time to convince people of such things. Then came high gas prices. Now the credit crunch. Even the focus that was selling faster than Ford could build a few months ago is now not selling south of the border. It was just one thing after another. Ford improved its quality, its product, and changed its entire way of doing business. It was just getting back into the swing of things....and then the floor fell out from under it.

GM and Chrysler are a different story though. GM is too big, too heavy, and has not tried to fix any of the quality or efficiency problems that they have. Chrysler has done some work, but not the extent of Ford. I wouldn't be surprised if GM needed a bailout in about a year. Ford may, but they may not, its a wait and see thing.

[Mad_Michael]

Nissan - Inifiniti was down by over 30% last month...every auto company is down. When times were good, it was that perception lagged reality. Ford has somewhat of a quality problem in the past, and they fixed it, but it takes time to convince people of such things. Then came high gas prices. Now the credit crunch. Even the focus that was selling faster than Ford could build a few months ago is now not selling south of the border. It was just one thing after another. Ford improved its quality, its product, and changed its entire way of doing business. It was just getting back into the swing of things....and then the floor fell out from under it.

GM and Chrysler are a different story though. GM is too big, too heavy, and has not tried to fix any of the quality or efficiency problems that they have. Chrysler has done some work, but not the extent of Ford. I wouldn't be surprised if GM needed a bailout in about a year. Ford may, but they may not, its a wait and see thing.

Check out Toyota profits vs Ford profits at this 'reduced' sales level. Ford has huge problems of their own making (as does GM and Crysler). One cannot blame market conditions for Ford, GM or Crysler's enormous financial difficulties. Present conditions are cyclical - Ford, GM and Crysler's problems are structural and endemic, not cyclical. Toyota's problem is entirely cyclical.

No sympathy from me for the Big-three. All three deserve to hit bankruptcy. According to classical economic theory, the Canadian economy (and the Canadian auto industry) will be stronger when this eventually happens. Too much capital is tied up in these massively unprofitable and dead-end companies. Toyota could do wonders if they were able to acquire some of these assets at firesale prices.

Edited October 13, 2008 by Mad_Michael

[Smallc]

Check out Toyota profits vs Ford profits at this 'reduced' sales level. Ford has huge problems of their own making (as does GM and Crysler). One cannot blame market conditions for Ford, GM or Crysler's enormous financial difficulties. Present conditions are cyclical - Ford, GM and Crysler's problems are structural and endemic, not cyclical. Toyota's problem is entirely cyclical.

We haven't seen Toyota's profit at this reduced sales level. I can pretty much tell you right now that conditions are going to bite into their profits by a huge margin. Most of the losses that Ford and even GM incur are related to restructuring costs. Ford no longer has a structural problem, though GM does. Alan Mulally made , Bill Ford, and Mark Fields made the hard choices that need to be made in order to turn the boat around. Ford was just returning to a profit situation and then the bottom fell out. You also have to realize that Ford and GM have very large operations over seas. Those operations were quite profitable until this crisis hit. It is very correct to blame much of the current problems on the situation.

[Mad_Michael]

We haven't seen Toyota's profit at this reduced sales level. I can pretty much tell you right now that conditions are going to bite into their profits by a huge margin. Most of the losses that Ford and even GM incur are related to restructuring costs. Ford no longer has a structural problem, though GM does. Alan Mulally made , Bill Ford, and Mark Fields made the hard choices that need to be made in order to turn the boat around. Ford was just returning to a profit situation and then the bottom fell out. You also have to realize that Ford and GM have very large operations over seas. Those operations were quite profitable until this crisis hit. It is very correct to blame much of the current problems on the situation.

Your assertion is predicated on the assumption that everything was just peachy for Ford 12 months ago. That just isn't credible.

[Smallc]

Your assertion is predicated on the assumption that everything was just peachy for Ford 12 months ago. That just isn't credible.

No, but the financials show small profits starting to come in, something that had been absent for several years. They were well on their way to meet their profitability goals. They would be just getting there consistently now if not for the sharp rise in gas prices followed closely by the credit crunch.

[Smallc]

This argument is going nowhere though, and it really highlights Ford's main problem....perception.

[pfezziwig]

We don't need more taxes on an incompetent automotive industry, Ford and GM are already paying a price for producing cars few people want, unfortunately it is the workers on the frontlines paying the price and not executives who made the decisions to produce gas guzzlers.

How about providing incentives for more efficient (cleaner) practices instead? If Ford and GM don't want to adopt the cleaner and more efficient practices let the free market punish them. Staff, GreenCarsNow.com

[madmax]

We don't need more taxes on an incompetent automotive industry, Ford and GM are already paying a price for producing cars few people want, unfortunately it is the workers on the frontlines paying the price and not executives who made the decisions to produce gas guzzlers.

How about providing incentives for more efficient (cleaner) practices instead? If Ford and GM don't want to adopt the cleaner and more efficient practices let the free market punish them. Staff, GreenCarsNow.com

All Auto Manufacturers have driven down the same path.

Here are two cars I owned in the 80s.

1980 Toyota Corolla 4 cylinder (M4) Manual 33 43 mpg

1980 Toyota Corolla 4 cylinder (M5) Manual 31 43 mpg

Vs a 2008

2008 Toyota Corolla 4 cylinder 1.8 liter R (M5) Manual 28 37 MPG

2008 Toyota Corolla 4 cylinder 1.8 liter R (L4) Auto 26 35 MPG

Do you see what I see???

In the late 80s until 2001 I drove two Dodge TC3, (Omni and a Charger style)

Excellent gas milelage.

1982: A Banner Year for High MPG Cars

October 9th, 2007 | chevrolet, dodge, mazda, cheap, gas mileage, gm, toyota, honda, ford, vw, diesel

There’s no question that the gas crisis of the 1970s spurred the automakers into action, as the 1982 model year bustled with high mileage cars. Small cars that eclipsed 40 miles per gallon on the highway weren’t the exception in 1982 … they were the norm … with a good number of cars breaking the magic 50 miles per gallon mark.

The Japanese automakers lead the way, with the Isuzu I-Mark, Toyota Starlet, and Honda Civic all hitting the magic 50 MPG mark.

Mopar had more than its fair share of fuel-thrifty 50+ MPG vehicles in the 1982 model year, in stark contrast to today’s lineup. Dodge’s 1982 Omni and 024 got the groceries with a thimble full of gas, as did their 1982 Plymouth Horizon and TC3/Turismo stablemates.

While many of the General Motors economy cars built in this time period were truly forgettable, there was no end to the selection, with a host of GM vehicles beating 40 MPG highway, not just from Chevrolet, but from Pontiac, Buick, Oldsmobile, and yes … even Cadillac.

The Cadillac Cimmeron is perhaps the most unlikely of the GM offerings … who could possibly recall that there was a Caddy that pulled down 40 MPG on the highway?

Compare these figures, and remember those 1980 cars sold for dirt cheap back then, to the overpriced underpowered and not really that great comparatively smart car. And we will determine that there are alot of people with too much money.

2008 Smart Fortwo

EPA mpg estimates: 33 city/41 highway/36 combined Base engine: 1-liter, three-cylinder

The auto industry will cater to its market. The market in the 80s and 90s was well tuned for high milelage low cost vehicles.

Today a high milelage car is too expensive for the average consumer.

Could this be market gouging... much like market gouging on the gas guzzling trucks of Toyota, Honda, GM, ???

OF course.

What happened in the 80s is that all the cars and trucks sat on the lots unable to move because of high gas prices, and interest rates.

The auto industry changed in short order, and provide affordable low cost vehicles with high gas milelage.

Don't expect the industry to ever sell vehicles for less then people are willing to pay for them.

As for providing incentives to the automanufacturers.

Perhaps you live in the dark. THe Ontario Provincial GOvernment has been providing a slush fund of money in the form of technology grants which was to be spent on having Ontario operations provide the new emmisions friendly vehicles. However, the companies have chosen to use this money to relocate operations instead. Tax dollars at work.

The Federal COnservatives have an adhoc system, where they drop money in ridings they think they can win and call it an industrial policy.

Essentially the real conservative policy is to allow operations to leave the country and build vehicles elsewhere. In order to help facilitate that arrangement, they offer tax cuts for profitable ventures leaving the region as a parting gift.

If the operations has operated at a previous loss, or pays no taxes because of tax write offs from past years, then the corporate tax cut does nothing. It is not a reinvestment or transition to Environmentally Friendly technology within the Canadian Industry. Those companies are being lured to other countries where they can meet lower environmental, safety and quality standards, as well as lots of fiscal graft for the relocation.

Our government believes that this is great for Canada. It is a policy supported by both the Liberal and Conservatives, so there shouldn't be to much controversy over this policy.

Why this thread title has fixated upon the auto industry surprises me, but only from the standpoint that most people do not realize that the Auto Industry is in far better shape then most of the industry in Ontario which have been closing their doors at a record pace under Liberal and Conservative governments.

Ontario needs another tax.....

Go ahead make my day.

[Wilber]

Today's engines are far more efficient and cleaner than those of the eighties, not to mention much more powerful for the same displacement. Back then, 1 HP per cubic inch displacement was a hot engine, now there isn't an econobox built that doesn't do much better than that. Todays small cars also come with much more efficient transmissions. Electronically controlled five and six speed automatics and CVT's are available in some of the smallest cars. The average"small" car they power is larger heavier and is far better equipped than cars of that era, negating much of the added efficiency these propulsion systems provide.

[drewski]

Check out Toyota profits vs Ford profits at this 'reduced' sales level. Ford has huge problems of their own making (as does GM and Crysler). One cannot blame market conditions for Ford, GM or Crysler's enormous financial difficulties. Present conditions are cyclical - Ford, GM and Crysler's problems are structural and endemic, not cyclical. Toyota's problem is entirely cyclical.

No sympathy from me for the Big-three. All three deserve to hit bankruptcy. According to classical economic theory, the Canadian economy (and the Canadian auto industry) will be stronger when this eventually happens. Too much capital is tied up in these massively unprofitable and dead-end companies. Toyota could do wonders if they were able to acquire some of these assets at firesale prices.

profits are not necessarily an indication of quality. The Big 3 have a lot of legacy cost the Japanese automakers don't. Fiscally they definitely have to restructure, but current product, especially GM has been quite good and if they can get through fiscally, they will be in a good psoition

[madmax]

Today's engines are far more efficient and cleaner than those of the eighties, not to mention much more powerful for the same displacement. Back then, 1 HP per cubic inch displacement was a hot engine, now there isn't an econobox built that doesn't do much better than that. Todays small cars also come with much more efficient transmissions. Electronically controlled five and six speed automatics and CVT's are available in some of the smallest cars. The average"small" car they power is larger heavier and is far better equipped than cars of that era, negating much of the added efficiency these propulsion systems provide.

No disagreement.