Clueless Canadian politics and the climate change

[myata]

This is f-ing disaster. The carbon tax bill in just one month came to over $70 plus $12 the tax on guess what, a "service". Just under a half of what it used to be with a similar level of consumption. This is just crazy. How can one have a 30%-50% increase in a cost of product in a matter of handful of years?

If you want to screw something up you couldn't avoid doing this same way.

The climate change is real because the science is real and you know it if you're using you iPhone or android, etc. It is most likely human caused because though warmings did happen in the global history, never did they occur this precipitously, taking tens, hundreds of thousands, or million years instead.

But you can do a stupid, brainless thing and hope for a positive outcome. Just doesn't work that way. Stupidity, mental laziness and entitlement produces only disastrous failures. Something that this country does not have any clue how to deal with because it's political system is built on 100% entitlement and about 0%, accountability.

What is the largest source of the emissions? Shouldn't one

1. Begin with the largest source(s)

2. Demonstrate actual, positive result

3. Make sure that the change is sustainable.

4. Turn to the next level of sources and so on.

This process will produce a measurable positive outcome. Let's just do something and see what happens! will produce only disappointment and resounding failure.

We have to draw some essential line here: the system of public governance has gone over the crest of its abilities and is entering the phase of impotence and mental decline. Can't explain it any other way.

Yeah and who is pocketing the tax on the charge aka "the service"? What laws and rules is it regulated by, any - or just pocketed? Who cares how many questions if there's no answers.

[Moonbox]

On 1/26/2024 at 1:17 PM, myata said:

This is f-ing disaster. The carbon tax bill in just one month came to over $70 plus $12 the tax on guess what, a "service". Just under a half of what it used to be with a similar level of consumption. This is just crazy. How can one have a 30%-50% increase in a cost of product in a matter of handful of years?

Without seeing the bill, nobody can tell wtf you're talking about.  The only thing for certain is that the carbon tax didn't increase it by 30-50%.  😑

On 1/26/2024 at 1:17 PM, myata said:

The climate change is real because the science is real and you know it if you're using you iPhone or android, etc. It is most likely human caused because though warmings did happen in the global history, never did they occur this precipitously, taking tens, hundreds of thousands, or million years instead.

But you can do a stupid, brainless thing and hope for a positive outcome. Just doesn't work that way. Stupidity, mental laziness and entitlement produces only disastrous failures. Something that this country does not have any clue how to deal with because it's political system is built on 100% entitlement and about 0%, accountability.

You're absolutely right about this.  Most of the solutions we've seen so far have been grifts that funnel money to special interests (usually wealthy investors or landowners) and do next to nothing to fix the problem.  All the billions in solar investments Ontario did during the Dalton McGuinty days amounted to nothing.  Farmers got subsidized to put inefficient and useless panels on their property, and Samsung investors got a handout, but we generate next to nothing in solar power. The solar manufacturing jobs that were promised disappeared as quickly as the subsidies did.  

These are the sorts of feel-good but braindead things our governments have done over the years.  

On 1/26/2024 at 1:17 PM, myata said:

We have to draw some essential line here: the system of public governance has gone over the crest of its abilities and is entering the phase of impotence and mental decline. Can't explain it any other way.

Mainly because we let them.  People are concerned with dumb things instead of real things.  

[cougar]

On 1/26/2024 at 10:17 AM, myata said:

Stupidity, mental laziness and entitlement produces only disastrous failures. Something that this country does not have any clue how to deal with because it's political system is built on 100% entitlement and about 0%, accountability.

 

It is not stupidity; it is the inherent need for growth of a system based on greed and endless expansion.

You  would need to change the system before any meaningful gains could be made, but this also seems impossible, because countries around the world are still using this same system as a model.

As for the "mental illness", it has been fostered by the system over generations and this is the result.

Edited January 30 by cougar

[myata]

21 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Mainly because we let them.

I can't disagree here. With the slightest of checks this country ever had on its elites and governments, it neglected even them almost entirely with the election show little more than a tradition with meaning long forgotten. That gives the governments exactly zero incentive to do things that makes sense and will produce meaningful result as opposed to those that catch the attention of the crowd in the short interval of its attention span. And nothing matter after this. Anyone can be dumbest of fools to let folks manage their property like that. Yet it's perfectly fine with the country. Astounding.

[I am Groot]

I could speculate on what could be done, but as long as three-quarters of the planet is building coal power plants there isn't a hope in hell any of it will be of much use in lowering carbon emissions. The EU alone is spending $200 billion a year on climate change initiatives, and has been for years now. But carbon emissions keep rising as hundreds more coal plants go up in the developing world.

Under those circumstances I'm not willing to spend a bloody dime on carbon reduction. I do believe in nuclear power and we should continue refurbishing old reactors and building new ones, especially those little ones. I think we should have a good look at building codes and what should be strengthened, what flood control initiatives might be needed, and whether irrigation systems need to go in in other areas. We should also consider what trees we have might be most vulnerable to rising temperatures and which would be least vulnerable and plant more of that second kind. And we might want to invest in a fleet of new water bombers since ours are mostly older than I am.

As for the developing world - screw em. 

 

[August1991]

On 1/26/2024 at 1:17 PM, myata said:

This is f-ing disaster. The carbon tax bill in just one month came to over $70 plus $12 the tax on guess what, a "service". Just under a half of what it used to be with a similar level of consumption. This is just crazy. How can one have a 30%-50% increase in a cost of product in a matter of handful of years?

===

From what I understand, as measured by a place in Hawaii, CO2 in the atmosphere has risen from 320 ppm to 400 ppm.

Apparently, we have to reduce our CO2 emissions.

There are several ways to stop something: tax, regulate or subsidise an alternative. I favour a tax on CO2 emissions.

To me, Teslas and EVs are subsidiised, expensive toys for rich people. When asked, they still have an SUV in the basement to keep the beer cold. 

[myata]

We live in an information age. Sources of carbon emissions in Canada. Would you be dumb enough to put most of the efforts in stopping a leak where only a small fraction (less than 10%) goes?

Transportation; oil sands; emission-intensive industries; trade; agriculture; industrial facilities. All these produce more emissions than residential heating. What are the results?

I have only one explanation for this: "no we can't do anything there it would hurt the pockets of our great buddies. Let's give it to Joe/Jill instead they couldn't care less anyways, they never do. Yeah, and don't forget to throw a tax on it too, every little bit helps" (to our benefits and entitlements). Great working for the future! (whose? where?) Who's listening?

Edited January 31 by myata

[Michael Hardner]

3 hours ago, myata said:

We live in an information age. Sources of carbon emissions in Canada. Would you be dumb enough to put most of the efforts in stopping a leak where only a small fraction (less than 10%) goes?

It depends.  That could be a good target if it's more easily reduceable than the others.  Not sure if it is or not.

[myata]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

It depends. 

No, and again: you cannot make people do things for you just because you think it's a good thing. It has nothing to do with democracy. We're way past that.

[Michael Hardner]

53 minutes ago, myata said:

No, and again: you cannot make people do things for you just because you think it's a good thing. It has nothing to do with democracy. We're way past that.

You cannot or you should not ?  Because, you know, clearly we can.

[Nationalist]

55 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You cannot or you should not ?  Because, you know, clearly we can.

Yes fascism is easy...right?

[admined]

The delicious thing is that the government itself (back in 2021) claimed to have already spent "more than $100B" in "clean growth"

And what did all that spending get us? I just happened to be researching that today. Here's the most recent data from the government's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program:

...In other words, $100B (and whatever else they've spent since 2021) bought us MORE emissions!

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Yes fascism is easy...right?

That's not the definition of fascism, though.

3 minutes ago, admined said:

The delicious thing is that the government itself (back in 2021) claimed to have already spent "more than $100B" in "clean growth"

And what did all that spending get us?

Your criticism is reasonable, but also there's an argument that emissions would have been worse had nothing been done.  My understanding is that we're not in the 'worst case' of past IPCC predictions because carbon emission growth has been curtailed.

[myata]

19 minutes ago, admined said:

...In other words, $100B

Yes, and where's the surprise here? Governments in Canada know only how to spend money on themselves. For a long while already. In Ottawa they've been building a light rail.

[Nationalist]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

That's not the definition of fascism, though.

Sure it is. You shouldn't but clearly can...force people to do things the don't want to do.

[Michael Hardner]

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Sure it is. You shouldn't but clearly can...force people to do things the don't want to do.

So Fascism is forcing people to do what they don't want to?

 

[Army Guy]

13 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

It depends.  That could be a good target if it's more easily reduceable than the others.  Not sure if it is or not.

Added to that list recently has been farmers fertilizers, animal farts, and wood fired pizza ovens, and bagel ovens...What we need is someone with common sense and the back ground to be running our climate change plan....and it looks like the liberals are not them...

[Nationalist]

46 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

So Fascism is forcing people to do what they don't want to?

 

Fascism is dictating to the public, regardless of laws. It's punishing the public for wanting basic freedoms. It's closing bank accounts, jailing religious ministers, controlling the media.

It's running away like a tyke, to mommy's place, while trashing the nation's constitution. 

[cougar]

On 1/30/2024 at 4:32 PM, I am Groot said:

I do believe in nuclear power

As for the developing world - screw em. 

 

Nuclear power ?  Another terrible choice.

"Screw them"  ?    We will be screwed as well at the end.  It is one planet.

[Army Guy]

12 hours ago, cougar said:

Nuclear power ?  Another terrible choice.

"Screw them"  ?    We will be screwed as well at the end.  It is one planet.

Are we in a climate crises or not ?...Can't be much of a crises if we have the option of picking and choosing what source of energy we are going to use...every source of energy we have right now has some drawbacks...By the time we pick one your right it will have been to late...Here is an idea, let's use what we have today, that includes nuclear ...and if something better comes along we will switch...

We choose to go with electrical vehs , then lithium batteries...and they are more destructive than nuclear energy becasue of the sheer number of them..., both in the mining process, and then the hazmat material itself and then the recycling process...all of it creates drawbacks. 

[Michael Hardner]

On 1/31/2024 at 9:02 PM, Nationalist said:

1. Fascism is dictating to the public, regardless of laws. It's punishing the public for wanting basic freedoms.
 

2. It's running away like a tyke, to mommy's place, while trashing the nation's constitution. 

1. Like banning drag shows ?  Taxing people ?
2. So Trump ?

Why don't you just say it's "bad people".  Then we would KNOW it's Trump.

[herbie]

So 'most Canadians' don't want to address climate change?
As you have the choice to vote for the party lacking any such policy, you just shot down your own claim of any fascism.

[James Bilodeau]

I find it very if not impossible to swallow the Trudeau version of climate change and his war on carbon. 

 Its all hard to take when he and his entourage continue to fly the skies, attending huge parties where they tut tut the peon and his polluting ways and deliver more tax measures and grand larceny, screwing everyone out of every dollar they can!

 The hypocrisy is unreal!

 Yes, climate is changing! And quite rapidly. But taxing a nation into bankruptcy and causing so much division is NOT the way to deal with it. 

 Thats a cowards way out!

[Nationalist]

7 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Like banning drag shows ?  Taxing people ?
2. So Trump ?

Why don't you just say it's "bad people".  Then we would KNOW it's Trump.

Who banned drag shows?

Because I don't think Trump is all that bad. I mean...he's better than Biden.

[cougar]

On 2/2/2024 at 11:02 AM, Army Guy said:

Are we in a climate crises or not ?...Can't be much of a crises if we have the option of picking and choosing what source of energy we are going to use...every source of energy we have right now has some drawbacks...By the time we pick one your right it will have been to late...Here is an idea, let's use what we have today, that includes nuclear ...and if something better comes along we will switch...

We choose to go with electrical vehs , then lithium batteries...and they are more destructive than nuclear energy becasue of the sheer number of them..., both in the mining process, and then the hazmat material itself and then the recycling process...all of it creates drawbacks. 

Your take is wrong on many levels.

If it is our choice to bring a million low carbon emitting migrants every year to turn them into high carbon emitters, then we have to do it at no additional harm to the planet.

No way?  Then don't bring them here!