NDP to back Conservative motion calling for carbon tax pause on all home heating fuels

[Nefarious Banana]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Parliamentarians had an opportunity to do something but, as usual, the Bloc, the Quebecers decided they want diddly to do with Canada and not play with the grown ups.

No matter how many times Canada scrapes its shoe, the stench of Quebec remains.  

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

 Back to topic "NDP to back Conservative motion calling for carbon tax pause on all home heating fuels"

Parliamentarians had an opportunity to do something but, as usual, the Bloc, the Quebecers decided they want diddly to do with Canada and not play with the grown ups.

Yeah.  As canada's population grows and quebec's doesn't (due to their concerns over french) they will wind up with fewer and fewer seats and the day will come when they look around and go "wait - why does nobody care what we want anymore"?

[ExFlyer]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

Yeah.  As canada's population grows and quebec's doesn't (due to their concerns over french) they will wind up with fewer and fewer seats and the day will come when they look around and go "wait - why does nobody care what we want anymore"?

Quebec will never lose seats. It is guaranteed 78 seats no matter what.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/liberals-table-bill-to-protect-number-of-quebec-seats-in-parliament-a-condition-of-deal-with-ndp

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-feds-to-protect-number-of-quebecs-commons-seats-stop-province-losing/

[CdnFox]

16 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Quebec will never lose seats. It is guaranteed 78 seats no matter what.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/liberals-table-bill-to-protect-number-of-quebec-seats-in-parliament-a-condition-of-deal-with-ndp

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-feds-to-protect-number-of-quebecs-commons-seats-stop-province-losing/

Sure they will.  That was one deal and isn't permanent.  ANd they don't have to actually LOSE a seat as long as everyone else gets some more'  

The next seat redistribution will happen while the CPC is in power and i doubt they'd be interested in giving quebec a deal like that.  And if they do - fine, how about a deal to repay alberta for it's abbuses where they get another 5 extra seats and what the heck - 5 more for bc too  

Doing a little math quebec could find itself with only 18 percent of the seats next go around, and with the bloc chewing up most of those seats their actual impact on elections will be greatly reduced from the 'old days'.

[ExFlyer]

42 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Sure they will.  That was one deal and isn't permanent.  ANd they don't have to actually LOSE a seat as long as everyone else gets some more'  

The next seat redistribution will happen while the CPC is in power and i doubt they'd be interested in giving quebec a deal like that.  And if they do - fine, how about a deal to repay alberta for it's abbuses where they get another 5 extra seats and what the heck - 5 more for bc too  

Doing a little math quebec could find itself with only 18 percent of the seats next go around, and with the bloc chewing up most of those seats their actual impact on elections will be greatly reduced from the 'old days'.

No, Quebec is guaranteed never to lose any seats

https://www.sqrc.gouv.qc.ca/relations-canadiennes/institutions-constitution/place-qc/chambre-communes-en.asp

 

You know there is not a leader in Canada that would threaten Quebec on anything LOL

Quebec is more sacred in Canada than a cow in India

Edited November 7, 2023 by ExFlyer

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

No, Quebec is guaranteed never to lose any seats

https://www.sqrc.gouv.qc.ca/relations-canadiennes/institutions-constitution/place-qc/chambre-communes-en.asp

 

So in your opinion an act of parliment cannot possibly be overwritten with another act of parliament?

Make no mistake - it's not only not guaranteed but the same act that will be necessary to bring in any new seats next time can erase that.  it's largely symbolic.  But hey - if they don't like it they 'should elect more conservatives'.

And remember - even with keeping their seat their total percent of seats just went from 23.3 to 22.5

Quote

You know there is not a leader in Canada that would threaten Quebec on anything LOL

Well harper did.  And he won a majority without counting any seats in quebec.

With the bloc in play quebec is largely neutralized. The bloc will never form gov't, and they take seats away from the libs. So as long as they're relatively strong quebec means far less - right now the libs have about 36 seats there as i recall, which is about the same as the seat count in alberta. It' s not very much. It's not NOTHING and it's still important but not as much as it used to be.  And as they reduce in power or the other provinces like alberta and bc grow they become less and less relevant.

Quebec thinks they're untouchable, But they're wrong,

 

[ExFlyer]

12 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So in your opinion an act of parliment cannot possibly be overwritten with another act of parliament?

Make no mistake - it's not only not guaranteed but the same act that will be necessary to bring in any new seats next time can erase that.  it's largely symbolic.  But hey - if they don't like it they 'should elect more conservatives'.

And remember - even with keeping their seat their total percent of seats just went from 23.3 to 22.5

Well harper did.  And he won a majority without counting any seats in quebec.

With the bloc in play quebec is largely neutralized. The bloc will never form gov't, and they take seats away from the libs. So as long as they're relatively strong quebec means far less - right now the libs have about 36 seats there as i recall, which is about the same as the seat count in alberta. It' s not very much. It's not NOTHING and it's still important but not as much as it used to be.  And as they reduce in power or the other provinces like alberta and bc grow they become less and less relevant.

Quebec thinks they're untouchable, But they're wrong,

 

Nope, not at this stage of Canadian development.

If we get more seats in Canada, Quebec will still get another. They were initially guaranteed 25% and while they are below that now, they will get it back. They went from 65 waaaay back to 78 now.

There was no need to "count" seats for the election win, Quebec still has the seats and do what they want. Didn't the NDP take them from Harper??

Anyway, no chance in hell that Quebec will allow it to be less than what they have now and, if the rest of the country gets more, Quebec will get some too..

Quebec is untouchable.

Edited November 7, 2023 by ExFlyer

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Nope, not at this stage of Canadian development.

If we get more seats in Canada, Quebec will still get another. They were initially guaranteed 25% and while they are below that now, they will get it back. They went from 65 waaaay back to 78 now.

No chance in hell that Quebec will allow it to be less.

Quebec is untouchable.

LOL - well hopefully they're just as ignorant and don't see it coming    As i noted - they actually did just lose ground and have less power than they did.

[Legato]

4 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Nope, not at this stage of Canadian development.

If we get more seats in Canada, Quebec will still get another. They were initially guaranteed 25% and while they are below that now, they will get it back. They went from 65 waaaay back to 78 now.

No chance in hell that Quebec will allow it to be less.

Quebec is untouchable.

Lets start a GoFundme to construct an enormous chainsaw. Use it cut around the Quebec borders and then give it a gentle push out into the Atlantic.

[ExFlyer]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

LOL - well hopefully they're just as ignorant and don't see it coming    As i noted - they actually did just lose ground and have less power than they did.

I always felt Quebecers were ignorant but, they know they got us by the balls.

They never had political power, they have fluer des lis...French power.

They get what the want, when they want it and demand more.

The do what they want, when they want and damn Canada.

[ExFlyer]

Just now, Legato said:

Lets start a GoFundme to construct an enormous chainsaw. Use it cut around the Quebec borders and then give it a gentle push out into the Atlantic.

As was said when they had the referendum to separate, it was a good thing the rest of Canada never got to vote cause they would have easily had enough votes to separate LOL

The Newfies wanted them to separate, they would have been 2 1/2 hours closer to Toronto :)

[I am Groot]

On 11/5/2023 at 10:50 AM, Queenmandy85 said:

The purpose of the carbon tax is to get people to reduce their carbon emissions. If we refuse to make the sacrifice, the losers will be future generations. We are using up the petroleum and coal that belongs to future generations. We are also pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere at a rate rarely seen in the past. It is our decendents who are going to suffer.

It's been explained to you many times, I'm sure, that nothing we do will make the slightest difference to global warming. Given that the big emitters have no intention of cutting back, or even stopping the growth of emissions for at least another ten years, the next fifty years are now set in stone.

The world's climate is like a giant supertanker. It takes quite a while to turn. Nothing we do, barring a massive volcanic eruption, is going to have much impact for forty years. That's when it shows up. So the weather we're going to get in 2080 is already settled.

And by about 2040-2050 we'll have nuclear fusion anyway. So stop worrying. We got this.

 

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, I am Groot said:

And by about 2040-2050 we'll have nuclear fusion anyway. So stop worrying. We got this.

(side note - we have nuclear fusion now.  I think you meant either cold fusion or plasma fusion   )   Hey - i gotta bug you ONCE in a while  

[I am Groot]

On 11/7/2023 at 8:42 PM, CdnFox said:

(side note - we have nuclear fusion now.  I think you meant either cold fusion or plasma fusion   )   Hey - i gotta bug you ONCE in a while  

I mean nuclear fusion producing energy. Nuclear fusion plants.

[eyeball]

8 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

I mean nuclear fusion producing energy. Nuclear fusion plants.

We're still decades away from that. You're still likelier to get a bigger bang for your buck denying there's anything wrong with the climate.

Nuclear fusion won’t arrive in time to fix climate change, but it could be essential for our future energy needs

...scientists continually promise that fusion is just 20 years away (or 30 or 50, take your pick).

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-the-future-of-fusion-energy/#:~:text=Most experts agree that we,might add on another decade).

 

 

Edited November 9, 2023 by eyeball

[OftenWrong]

21 minutes ago, eyeball said:

We're still decades away from that. You're still likelier to get a bigger bang for your buck denying there's anything wrong with the climate.

Nuclear fusion won’t arrive in time to fix climate change, but it could be essential for our future energy needs

...scientists continually promise that fusion is just 20 years away (or 30 or 50, take your pick).

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-the-future-of-fusion-energy/#:~:text=Most experts agree that we,might add on another decade).

 

 

They have recently revised expectations as to the date it will be ready to work. I say it will never work, will have immense maintenance issues and costs.

So far they actually have nothing. The goal is to produce a few hundred MW for a duration of 40 seconds, to give an idea of where they are at. This is, literally, a high-level smoke and mirrors game.  

I'm putting my bets on Star Trek "transporter beam" technology myself. That'll solve everything.

Edited November 9, 2023 by OftenWrong

[eyeball]

4 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

I'm putting my bets on Star Trek "transporter beam" technology myself. That'll solve everything.

But I thought PP was the ticket to the promised land where everything will be solved. In any case the only thing that has proven to be effective at slowing down CO2 emissions is an economic slowdown. See 2008 financial collapse.

Should be easy enough for PP to engineer that given the pile of shit he'll be left to work with.

[OftenWrong]

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

But I thought PP was the ticket to the promised land where everything will be solved. In any case the only thing that has proven to be effective at slowing down CO2 emissions is an economic slowdown. See 2008 financial collapse.

Should be easy enough for PP to engineer that given the pile of shit he'll be left to work with.

I understand The covid shutdown had a profound effect. 

Figured you would like that.  

[eyeball]

13 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

I understand The covid shutdown had a profound effect.

Perhaps but it was apparently negated by the profound effect reducing sulphur from freighter traffic around the world has had at changing the climate. Which ironically enough proves human beings can in fact change it should we choose to.

Edited November 9, 2023 by eyeball

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

But I thought PP was the ticket to the promised land where everything will be solved. In any case the only thing that has proven to be effective at slowing down CO2 emissions is an economic slowdown. See 2008 financial collapse.

Should be easy enough for PP to engineer that given the pile of shit he'll be left to work with.

Well not climate change, climate change is ALREADY solved - we paid our tax so now it's gone right?

[eyeball]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well not climate change, climate change is ALREADY solved - we paid our tax so now it's gone right?

Notwithstanding Ottawa's efforts to date, according to early studies BC's carbon tax does seem to have had the effect of reducing emissions without harming the economy.

I suspect you'll use your dental plan and inflation logic to show the reduction has nothing to do with the tax. I'd suggest you send your conclusions to these folks.

Carbon taxation, widely supported by economists, has been implemented in several jurisdictions around the world.1 In 2008, the Canadian province of British Columbia (B.C.) became one of the first jurisdictions to introduce such a tax, applicable to a broad range of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions originating from fossil fuel use. A notable aspect of the B.C. carbon tax design is its revenue-neutrality.2 A number of studies have since researched the effects of this tax.

Some examine impacts on selected macroeconomic variables of the province. For example, Elgie and McClay (2013) note that, over the 2008 to 2011 period, despite the presence of the B.C carbon tax, GDP per capita decreased less in B.C. compared to the rest of Canada (ROC). They thus conclude that the B.C carbon tax had no noticeable negative impact on the province's GDP.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301421519302708

[OftenWrong]

29 minutes ago, eyeball said:

They thus conclude that the B.C carbon tax had no noticeable negative impact on the province's GDP.

Or it did have an effect, as the GDP per capita may have decreased even less without the carbon tax.

Sounds like horse-hockey to me.    

[CdnFox]

24 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Notwithstanding Ottawa's efforts to date, according to early studies BC's carbon tax does seem to have had the effect of reducing emissions without harming the economy.

 

 

It's failed for the most part. A number of studies show that it's at best slowed growth by 5- 10 percent, it's not reduced anything like it was supposed to. Including the study you posted.

From your own study which ONLY looked at diesel. 

The average annual reduction amounts to 1.3% of B.C. 2008 diesel emissions and 0.2% of total emissions in the province in that same year. '

So the carbon tax cut back  O.2 percent of emissions. Not 2 percent - 0.2 percent.  So a twentieth of one percent.

It was supposed to cut emissions back - to reduce them . Instead by the time the report was written  out put had risen by 4.5 percent.

Sooo-  all that carbon tax and there was less than a fifth of one percent reduction in the RISE of carbon in one of the most carbon intense categories.

Utter failure. 

Why would you even post that? it clearly shows it was a failure entirely.  Which shows you were a failure entirely for defending it, especailly with that report in hand.

Quote

I suspect you'll use your dental plan and inflation logic to show the reduction has nothing to do with the tax. I'd suggest you send your conclusions to these folks.

Oh you mean facts and things.  well - the ones you've presented are more than enough in this case.

According to YOUR source it was an absolute failure.  It was supposed to reduce overall emissions - it barely even put a dent in growth.

And it's not revenue neutral and hasnt' been for many years now.  THe gov't pockets the money.  Nobody gets it back.  which is aslo what is now happening with the federal tax according to the budget officer.

 

But hey - if you say it's working great then i guess our climate change problems are solved!!! Yay  no need to worry about it any more  

[CdnFox]

7 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Or it did have an effect, as the GDP per capita may have decreased even less without the carbon tax.

Sounds like horse-hockey to me.    

Actually he's more or less correct. It's a little hard to be sure because it came out right at the start of the great recession but as near as most people can tell, The GDP wasn't seriously impacted.  THis lead the sierra group and other environmental types to publish documents saying that it must be increased UNTIL IT DID - because as it was people just spent less on other things and the same fuel was used.  They said it would have to HURT before it would work.

In other words, if it's NOT damaging the economy then it's not working.  And it didn't work so maybe they're right.

Now it's high enough to hurt and as we've seen in Canada it does impact productivity. quality of life and gdp.

 

[eyeball]

9 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

But hey - if you say it's working great then i guess our climate change problems are solved!!!

As I've made it clear many times around here you guys won the war against climate action years ago. You fail to realize what an ally Trudeau just was in turning the tables on action even farther.

I've also said no one is better at inaction than Canada's Liberals - even you're still convinced he's trying. 

Edited November 9, 2023 by eyeball