The Carbon Tax and lies

[Argus]

I think the reason both can say the other is lying is that both are lying - but I think the Liberals are lying more, a lot more.

First off the difference in terms. From what I can gather, the Liberals' take on this is that they will cut your income tax, and the amount you will have to pay extra in carbon tax will not, in most cases, be greater than the amount you gained from the income tax cut. This may or may not be true depending on your situation.

The Tories take on this appears to be that even if the amount you pay DIRECTLY in carbon taxes is not greater than the amount you get back from an income tax cut, you will be paying extra tax second hand, in increased prices for goods and services. For example, Ontario Hydro has stated that a carbon tax on it, due to its coal fired generating plants, would require a 20% increase in electricity fees it charges to end users. The Tories consider that to be a tax you'll be paying - with reason, in my opinion, and the Liberals don't. You'll be paying a little more for everything because transportation costs will go up, and because the cost of mining, the cost of manufacturing, all that will go up. The costs will be passed along to the consumer. I think this is the basic different in terms. The Tories consider all those added costs to be part of the taxes you'll now be paying, and the Liberals are not counting that.

Also, I have to say that a closer look at the Green Shift makes me question their numbers. Just to start with, the idea they will get a $12 billion savings from "improved efficiencies" in government strikes me as absurd. They won't, not unless they go on a wholesale slash and burn which would be greater than what Mike Harris did to the Ontario government in his first term in office. I think this is where the Tories say the plan would lead to a deficit.

[Riverwind]

From what I can gather, the Liberals' take on this is that they will cut your income tax, and the amount you will have to pay extra in carbon tax will not, in most cases, be greater than the amount you gained from the income tax cut. This may or may not be true depending on your situation.

Dion's numbers don't appear the cost of creating and maintaining the bureaucracy required to collect and police the carbon tax which creates many new opportunities for tax fraud (i.e. misreporting the volume of goods sold but reporting the correct transaction price). Edited October 12, 2008 by Riverwind

[noahbody]

Also, I have to say that a closer look at the Green Shift makes me question their numbers. Just to start with, the idea they will get a $12 billion savings from "improved efficiencies" in government strikes me as absurd. They won't, not unless they go on a wholesale slash and burn which would be greater than what Mike Harris did to the Ontario government in his first term in office. I think this is where the Tories say the plan would lead to a deficit.

Dion was asked where he was going to get the $12 billion since he'd criticized Harper for bare-bone cutting. He replied he didn't know at present, but it the responsible for every government to find efficiencies.

[eyeball]

Why get hung up on the complex lies when there are so many simple one's at hand like the Cadman bribe and fixed election dates?

[kengs333]

Argus: you seem to spend much time preaching to the choir with your long, useless posts.

[kengs333]

Why get hung up on the complex lies when there are so many simple one's at hand like the Cadman bribe and fixed election dates?

And income trust, accountable and transparent government, etc...

[noahbody]

And income trust, accountable and transparent government, etc...

The decision to tax income trusts was based on a change in circumstances. It was about doing what was in the best interest of Canada, versus what was popular. I could point out that Dion vowed never to support a carbon tax, but it's petty.

Dion has said he's going to implement the greenshift no matter what. Even though the economic circumstances have greatly changed. Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead, isn't the best approach in uncertain times IMO, especially in the context of a global problem.

A global solution without China, India and the US is like having a national solution without targeting the tar sands, oil and gas and coal-fired plants. You're doing something, but achieving nothing.

Sure be cautious, but be practical. The best approach IMO was the original Clean Air Act that intended to meet targets within the next 40 or 50 years. No pain, no gain need not apply. But it does, because it is now a political problem more than anything.

Since all the hysteria began, the circumstances have changed. Temperature warming is not alarming or unprecedented. If it is even warming at all. Only a nation of fools would risk their economy for something so uncertain. But as Elizabeth May noted, Canadians are stupid.

[Argus]

Argus: you seem to spend much time preaching to the choir with your long, useless posts.

Anything that doesn't insult Harper is "useless" to you. But my posts are aimed at those with a somewhat higher maturity level than yours.

[Bryan]

Why get hung up on the complex lies when there are so many simple one's at hand like the Cadman bribe and fixed election dates?

The Cadman allegation is nowhere close to being proven, and fixed elections very specifically applies to majority governments only. If you hate Harper so much, you should be HAPPY that he values your concern so much that he gave you a chance to replace him.

Besides, neither of those things take money directly out of my pocket for the express purpose of supporting a fictitious doomsday cult. I can overlook a lot of things I might not approve of if the real basics like taking less of my money and paying the bills are in order.

Edited October 12, 2008 by Bryan

[eyeball]

If you hate Harper so much...

I fear Harper, I don't hate him. I actually loath the Liberals but fear usually trumps loathing. Sorry.

...you should be HAPPY that he values your concern so much that he gave you a chance to replace him.

I'd be a lot happier if he gave me the chance to replace FPTP with Proportional Representation. I'd vote for him at the drop of a hat if he did that.

Of course I'd probably turn right around and vote him out again.

[Argus]

I fear Harper, I don't hate him. I actually loath the Liberals but fear usually trumps loathing. Sorry.

Unreasoning fear is idiocy.

I've asked before what it is you lefties fear and no one has come up with anything.

[capricorn]

I've asked before what it is you lefties fear and no one has come up with anything.

Leftists panic easily. Look at their reaction to bad economic news. This further reinforces the notion that leftists react with emotion, not reason. Emotion is more difficult to rationalize, explain and defend than reason. All they come out with is blather.

[Mad_Michael]

I think the reason both can say the other is lying is that both are lying - but I think the Liberals are lying more, a lot more.

And why are we not surprised? Does one really need to read what you've posted to justify your partisan opinion? Will it tell us anything we don't know already? Does it say anything that can actually be backed up with facts or sources?

[independent]

I think the reason both can say the other is lying is that both are lying - but I think the Liberals are lying more, a lot more.

First off the difference in terms. From what I can gather, the Liberals' take on this is that they will cut your income tax, and the amount you will have to pay extra in carbon tax will not, in most cases, be greater than the amount you gained from the income tax cut. This may or may not be true depending on your situation.

The Tories take on this appears to be that even if the amount you pay DIRECTLY in carbon taxes is not greater than the amount you get back from an income tax cut, you will be paying extra tax second hand, in increased prices for goods and services. For example, Ontario Hydro has stated that a carbon tax on it, due to its coal fired generating plants, would require a 20% increase in electricity fees it charges to end users. The Tories consider that to be a tax you'll be paying - with reason, in my opinion, and the Liberals don't. You'll be paying a little more for everything because transportation costs will go up, and because the cost of mining, the cost of manufacturing, all that will go up. The costs will be passed along to the consumer. I think this is the basic different in terms. The Tories consider all those added costs to be part of the taxes you'll now be paying, and the Liberals are not counting that.

Also, I have to say that a closer look at the Green Shift makes me question their numbers. Just to start with, the idea they will get a $12 billion savings from "improved efficiencies" in government strikes me as absurd. They won't, not unless they go on a wholesale slash and burn which would be greater than what Mike Harris did to the Ontario government in his first term in office. I think this is where the Tories say the plan would lead to a deficit.

Why not give us a comparison to Harpers Green plan and The Liberals green plan. Harper has not even come up with the cost. Why is Harper not telling you what the cost of his getting tough on Crime will cost?

[eyeball]

Unreasoning fear is idiocy.

I've asked before what it is you lefties fear and no one has come up with anything.

Harper's social conservatism mostly, followed by his urge to be a big player on the world's stage.

I think Harper's attitudes towards vice and crime say the most about the man. He is more interested in delivering vengence than justice. More interested in reacting to crime than preventing it. He is not wise enough to simply change the things he can and accept the things he can't. Harper's policies will result in a more dangerous and hardened underground meaning more resources will be redirected away from social programs and towards cracking down and getting tough on it. This self-perpetuating cycle will result in a ill-tempered unforgiving society that is increasingly left to fend for itself.

As for strolling the world's catwalk...nothing seems to have morally, socially or economically bankrupted a nation faster. Our governments loss of control over military spending in Afghanistan indicates what is coming. The need to meet the grandiose costs of Harper's military adventures abroad while staying within budget will mean less money for domestic social spending, notwithstanding any that's earmarked for cracking down and getting tough on crime of course.

What can I say? I just think the world is bound to be a shittier place with people like Harper in charge of it.

[independent]

Harper's social conservatism mostly, followed by his urge to be a big player on the world's stage.

I think Harper's attitudes towards vice and crime say the most about the man. He is more interested in delivering vengence than justice. More interested in reacting to crime than preventing it. He is not wise enough to simply change the things he can and accept the things he can't. Harper's policies will result in a more dangerous and hardened underground meaning more resources will be redirected away from social programs and towards cracking down and getting tough on it. This self-perpetuating cycle will result in a ill-tempered unforgiving society that is increasingly left to fend for itself.

As for strolling the world's catwalk...nothing seems to have morally, socially or economically bankrupted a nation faster. Our governments loss of control over military spending in Afghanistan indicates what is coming. The need to meet the grandiose costs of Harper's military adventures abroad while staying within budget will mean less money for domestic social spending, notwithstanding any that's earmarked for cracking down and getting tough on crime of course.

What can I say? I just think the world is bound to be a shittier place with people like Harper in charge of it.

Canada has gone to alternate sentencing and shorter sentences largely because of the huge cost of keeping people in prison. Why would Harper not include the cost of such an expensive promise?

[eyeball]

Canada has gone to alternate sentencing and shorter sentences largely because of the huge cost of keeping people in prison. Why would Harper not include the cost of such an expensive promise?

Because he might be asked which social programs he'd have to cut.

[Argus]

And why are we not surprised? Does one really need to read what you've posted to justify your partisan opinion? Will it tell us anything we don't know already? Does it say anything that can actually be backed up with facts or sources?

Well, if you HAD read it, which you clearly didn't bother to do, you wouldn't ask that because the post rather clearly explained to anyone other than Stephan Dion, I suppose, why I believed that.

[Argus]

Harper's social conservatism mostly, followed by his urge to be a big player on the world's stage.

There are social conservatives in the Liberal party too. People seem to forget that. When the Liberals proposed the last changes to the marriage act, it wasn't the Tories who stalled them. It was Liberal's worried that the changes would encourage the courts to think same-sex marriage should be legalized. There was so much opposition within the Liberal

Party they had to change the bill to assure people that the new marriage act in now way condoned gay marriage, and also replace people on committees in order to get it passed. A number of Liberal MPs are openly anti-abortion, as well.

But in neither part are the social conservatives in charge. And the relatively greater strength of the social conservatives in the Tory party is probably due to so many of their MPs being western based - where society is more conservative. The only way they'll get a majority is with a large number of Ontario and Quebec MPs, which would tend to ease that number.

I think Harper's attitudes towards vice and crime say the most about the man. He is more interested in delivering vengence than justice

.

Sometimes vengeance IS justice. Certainly we see a lot of injustice in today's criminal courts. We see violent people given meager sentences which we know they won't serve in their entirety, returning to the streets and committing more violence.

I am completely against disproportionate punishment, in either direction. But what I see now is all the disproportionate sentences in violent cases falling on the weak side. And I don't like it.

Harper's policies will result in a more dangerous and hardened underground

I disagree. I think violent people are already as hardened as they get. I think if you're shooting at people in drive-bys, if you're dragging women into bushes to rape and beat them, if you're molesting children, then you're past the point where I want to "heal" you and into the point I want you locked away for a very, very long time.

As for strolling the world's catwalk...nothing seems to have morally, socially or economically bankrupted a nation faster. Our governments loss of control over military spending in Afghanistan indicates what is coming.

I foresee no further military adventures in the near future. The military couldn't handle any and is committed to Afghanistan for three more years. Nor are costs out of control. Harper had said the costs to date were around $8billion, and the report, to quote it, says "Canada has spent $7.7 billion to $10.5 billion on costs related to its mission in the past six years, and may spend $13.9 billion to $18.1 billion by the end of the 2010-11 budget year." The parliamentary report includes items the Tories had not been including, such as foreign aid to Afghanistan and veterans' benefits.

And I, for one, like the government's moral tone with dictators, be they from China or Iran, and I like it supporting Israel (not unreasoning support) against the same old nasty Arab dictators who have taken advantage of the west's soft headedness for decades.

But in any event, nothing you've listed is irreversible. If Canadians don't like the direction the government has taken then after four years they can bring the Liberals back and they can change it all back again.

[TCCK]

I am so waiting fopr Dion to become Prime Minister and he lowers our "personal taxes" by say $10/year and then he bends every single Canadaian over his desk and gives them the big Carbon tax bill for $1,000 to $50,000 per person depending on your cash status. Wo that $10 is really going to help there.

Dion's wording and rules on what will have the carbon tax on it is so open ended and unclear he could add a 10% straight across the board carbon tax on almost anything and then keep upping the tax rate anytime he wants.

I cannot trust that lying Quebcec Liberal anymore than I could trust Trudaeu, Chretien or Paul Martin. You may all say the Liberals in the past have done such awesome stuff for this country but I have been around for 1/2 a century and I have not seen it.

You also want them to penalize BIG BUSINESS and make them pay all the taxes while removing or slashing taxes to the individual. Well this does not work either, basic economic history shows time and time again here big business is taxed to the brink it fails and business goes elsewhere then the tax burden is greater on the individual.

BUT history shows us when you lighten the tax rate on big business that big business profits more (not a bad thing, read on) then big business hires more people, big business (called BB from now on to save time) gives to charities more, BB pays more taxes because they made more money, BB gives better benefits to their employees, BB shows strength in economy so more companies come to that country because it is a good country to have investements in, BB promotes the country as an awesome place and then people come to vacation there and spend money, BB hires more people again and in turn more people are making more money so MORE TAXES

AND THEREFORE: the small amount you gave in tax breaks to the BB is now more than made up by income from other sources and the country as a whole is in a better place finacially because of those tax breaks.

THIS IS ECONOMIC HISTORICAL FACT PEOPLE DO THE RESEARCH!!!!

The Liberals, NDP and the Greens say "Punish the big bad corporations for making money and polluting by taxing them to death" THIS WILL NOT WORK! BB will move away.

The Liberals, NDP and Green's plans sound awfully like the start of communist state to me personally!

And on the Enviroment, do a quick study on why Mars, Mecury, Earth and Jupiter are all having the smae climate change problem, is our polluting here on earth causing Mar's problems? NO, I challenge you it is the SUN and solar flare activity.

[independent]

I am so waiting fopr Dion to become Prime Minister and he lowers our "personal taxes" by say $10/year and then he bends every single Canadaian over his desk and gives them the big Carbon tax bill for $1,000 to $50,000 per person depending on your cash status. Wo that $10 is really going to help there.

Dion's wording and rules on what will have the carbon tax on it is so open ended and unclear he could add a 10% straight across the board carbon tax on almost anything and then keep upping the tax rate anytime he wants.

I cannot trust that lying Quebcec Liberal anymore than I could trust Trudaeu, Chretien or Paul Martin. You may all say the Liberals in the past have done such awesome stuff for this country but I have been around for 1/2 a century and I have not seen it.

You also want them to penalize BIG BUSINESS and make them pay all the taxes while removing or slashing taxes to the individual. Well this does not work either, basic economic history shows time and time again here big business is taxed to the brink it fails and business goes elsewhere then the tax burden is greater on the individual.

BUT history shows us when you lighten the tax rate on big business that big business profits more (not a bad thing, read on) then big business hires more people, big business (called BB from now on to save time) gives to charities more, BB pays more taxes because they made more money, BB gives better benefits to their employees, BB shows strength in economy so more companies come to that country because it is a good country to have investements in, BB promotes the country as an awesome place and then people come to vacation there and spend money, BB hires more people again and in turn more people are making more money so MORE TAXES

AND THEREFORE: the small amount you gave in tax breaks to the BB is now more than made up by income from other sources and the country as a whole is in a better place financially because of those tax breaks.

THIS IS ECONOMIC HISTORICAL FACT PEOPLE DO THE RESEARCH!!!!

The Liberals, NDP and the Greens say "Punish the big bad corporations for making money and polluting by taxing them to death" THIS WILL NOT WORK! BB will move away.

The Liberals, NDP and Green's plans sound awfully like the start of communist state to me personally!

And on the Enviroment, do a quick study on why Mars, Mecury, Earth and Jupiter are all having the smae climate change problem, is our polluting here on earth causing Mar's problems? NO, I challenge you it is the SUN and solar flare activity.

Would you give us a list of the businesses that hire people they do no need. That pay people more than they have to pay them. You telling me business people are that stupid. You want to complain about green plans include Harper in your list too. And stop acting like your suffering. You have said you run a successful business. You can pay your taxes like everybody else.

[TCCK]

Would you give us a list of the businesses that hire people they do no need. That pay people more than they have to pay them. You telling me business people are that stupid. You want to complain about green plans include Harper in your list too. And stop acting like your suffering. You have said you run a successful business. You can pay your taxes like everybody else.

Hey Independant my businesses pay more in a year in taxes than you will make in your lifetime!!

Businesses do not hire more people or pay more than they need to

BUT Businesses that are doing well are going and NEED more employees, they reward their employees for helping them to be more profitable. That is what I do.

I NEVER said I was suffering (Except under the reign of John" I'll stab you in the back" Chretien).

Independant: You sound like the stereotypical 30 year employee of a union company that things the employer owes him the world and does not want to put more than 40% of your effort in to work for your employer.

"Business and money run the world, business profits and all will be better off for it. Penalize big business and all will suffer for it."

[independent]

Hey Independant my businesses pay more in a year in taxes than you will make in your lifetime!!

Businesses do not hire more people or pay more than they need to

BUT Businesses that are doing well are going and NEED more employees, they reward their employees for helping them to be more profitable. That is what I do.

I NEVER said I was suffering (Except under the reign of John" I'll stab you in the back" Chretien).

Independant: You sound like the stereotypical 30 year employee of a union company that things the employer owes him the world and does not want to put more than 40% of your effort in to work for your employer.

"Business and money run the world, business profits and all will be better off for it. Penalize big business and all will suffer for it."

Last job evaluation I got they said I am making a 28% profit for the company. And know I did not profit from it.

[Slim MacSquinty]

When I was in the consulting business, I was expected to make at least 100% profit, and I did benefit from it.

[TCCK]

When I was in the consulting business, I was expected to make at least 100% profit, and I did benefit from it.

That is right Slim. See Independant you only gave 28%, I as a business owner ould expect 100% just like I give everyday.

And my employees profit when I do. Do some research into companies in Canada and the best to work for in this country. You'll find my companies there. They are voted for by the employees of those companies.