Some ways Trudeau squanders billions of dollars in his war on climate change

[Goddess]

The thing with technology - any technology - is that it is at its most expensive when it just starts out.

Remember how expensive flat screen TV's and VHS's and Blu-Ray were when they first came out?  And technologies that everyone thought were going to be a huge HIT, but ended up petering out?  EV cars are not doing that great, really.  No one wants them, they're not better for the environment in the end, few can afford them, they don't function well in cold weather and we don't have the infrastructure to support them.

Canada is  investing very heavily and almost exclusively (all the eggs in one basket) in technologies that are very new.  We're doing this when they are at their most expensive and unproven to work fully the way we need them to.

 

[CdnFox]

23 minutes ago, Goddess said:

The thing with technology - any technology - is that it is at its most expensive when it just starts out.

Remember how expensive flat screen TV's and VHS's and Blu-Ray were when they first came out?  And technologies that everyone thought were going to be a huge HIT, but ended up petering out?  EV cars are not doing that great, really.  No one wants them, they're not better for the environment in the end, few can afford them, they don't function well in cold weather and we don't have the infrastructure to support them.

Canada is  investing very heavily and almost exclusively (all the eggs in one basket) in technologies that are very new.  We're doing this when they are at their most expensive and unproven to work fully the way we need them to.

 

Excellent post. And it is compounded by the fact that not only are we investing heavily into unstable and new markets, we are at the same time abandoning tried and true highly profitable ones.

[Goddess]

11 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Excellent post. And it is compounded by the fact that not only are we investing heavily into unstable and new markets, we are at the same time abandoning tried and true highly profitable ones.

Exactly.

This was in the news today:

Toyota shows 'an engine reborn' with green fuel despite global push for battery electric cars (msn.com)

Toyota is very well-established, able to put more money into R&D than some smaller manufacturers.  There may be better innovations coming downstream and here we are with all our eggs in one basket.

From the article:

Quote

Toyota officials also repeatedly noted that 5.5 million jobs were at stake in the overall supply chain for vehicle production in Japan nowadays, so a sudden shift to electric cars wasn’t economically possible or socially responsible

This is the problem I see with the Liberals and their climate hysteria.  There is no thought given to our economy or what is socially responsible.  

I wish they would just come out and say the truth we all know - going "green" means drastically lowering living standards.  They know this.  We all know it.  but instead they keep hyping the message that going green is going to make us all richer and better off.

No.  We are going to be poorer, our living standards will continue to plummet.  

[herbie]

11 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Doesn't sound wise.

As you can see by the immediate 'what's in it for me' response. Someone else should DO something about it... add to the hypocrisy of opposing wealth redistribution an then not only insisting it's mandatory but demanding it.
Can't even take the concept of reducing what's taxed and applying the rest to what it's supposed to be for, gotta end it 100%. Unable to distinguish wants from needs.

Don't worry, the inevitable Tory govt will push something similar under a new name and shift the tax off consumers to producers so they can hide it. No problem, those businesses will just apply it wholesale, add in their cost to collect it and mark it up a few more points because they can. Consumers will be paying 25¢ instead of 17 and think they won something.
As they delude themselves thinking sweeping it under the rug with carbon capture handouts, tax breaks a la Nestle like planting a tree for every million litres of gas sold, earning extra billions swapping carbon credits is 'helping'.

 

 

[herbie]

4 hours ago, Goddess said:

EV cars are not doing that great, really.  No one wants them, they're not better for the environment in the end, few can afford them, they don't function well in cold weather and we don't have the infrastructure to support them.

Let's perpetuate every decade old myth a little longer shall we? Your technological/mechanical knowledge is obviously as poor as your medical knowledge.

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, Goddess said:

Exactly.

This was in the news today:

Toyota shows 'an engine reborn' with green fuel despite global push for battery electric cars (msn.com)

Toyota is very well-established, able to put more money into R&D than some smaller manufacturers.  There may be better innovations coming downstream and here we are with all our eggs in one basket.

From the article:

This is the problem I see with the Liberals and their climate hysteria.  There is no thought given to our economy or what is socially responsible.  

I wish they would just come out and say the truth we all know - going "green" means drastically lowering living standards.  They know this.  We all know it.  but instead they keep hyping the message that going green is going to make us all richer and better off.

No.  We are going to be poorer, our living standards will continue to plummet.  

Yeah - it's reaction rather than reason. And unfortunately that can have a very heavy price tag for the economy

 

6 minutes ago, herbie said:

Let's perpetuate every decade old myth a little longer shall we? Your technological/mechanical knowledge is obviously as poor as your medical knowledge.

She's telling you the truth Herbie. The fact that you don't want to deal with the issues that have been raised regarding these vehicles is what discredits you from being able to offer alternatives. Nobody's going to trust anything you come up with if you can't even admit to the problems of the stuff we have.

 

[Goddess]

12 minutes ago, herbie said:

Let's perpetuate every decade old myth a little longer shall we?

🤷‍♂️  Our company has a Tesla and my boss won't use it on very cold days in the winter or drive it anywhere on holidays, for the reasons I gave above.

I'm seeing news articles about car manufacturers slowing production on EVs due to lack of sales and there was one about Hertz getting rid of their EV cars - too expensive to maintain and such.

I will say the self-driving was pretty cool when my boss took me out for a rip in the Tesla, though. 🙂

[Goddess]

I feel like the issues raised by so many of the “greens” today, who have been so consumed and eaten up by the “anthropogenic global warming” story, problematic.  Their plan impoverishes people and living standards plummet.

Because they have become the enemies of actual environmentalism and ecology by setting their goals and demands in opposition to that which actually supports the environment.  It's dangerous and counterproductive.

 

These dogmatic eco-warriors have become an actual threat to a cleaner, greener world and they are sucking all the air out of the room, the money out of the system, and both discrediting the valid aims of important "bottoms up" movements and championing "top down" actions and mandates that will set it back a century, if they don’t knock it off.

Their religion run by green-grifters and totalitarians is not progress, it’s anti-progress. It champions only the most expensive, unreliable, and unsound means of energy production to thereby makes energy hideously expensive. This will impoverish us all.

And that will harm the environment.

Progress is environmentalism.

 

It’s a function of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. People desperate to feed their children are A LOT less worried about what they dump in the river than rich people are. Always will be. It’s just a fact and there is no changing it.

Until the more basic needs are met, you cannot make people care about less pressing desires.

The only way to do this is to first evolve economies that will generate plenty.

And that takes energy because energy is wealth.

There are no nations that got rich without using a lot of energy. That’s HOW you get rich.

 

Pollution and poverty go hand in hand.  Check out India.

They have to grow out of it and that too can be messy.

Societies reach a stage of organization, see lots of opportunity to generate/acquire wealth, and they go for it.

They make the omelets and worry about the broken eggs later.

But they DO worry about it later, and that’s the important takeaway:

Once you cross an income point, the mess being made is suddenly on everyone’s mind and they not only WANT to do something about it, they can AFFORD to do something about it.

The US, UK, Germany, all crossed this line and started cleaning up.

And it’s working. Air and water quality has been on the rise for decades in the West.

I really doubt people want to go back to scratching out mud-hut level subsistence. Doing so would be such a setback in lifestyle, life expectancy, and the ability to sustain and feed humans, it would be tragic.

 

For the developing world to start caring about the environment, it’s first going to have to develop, just like we did. And we need to get out of their way and let them.

You cannot fix the environment by keeping poor people poor and “green energy for the 3rd world” is just a new way to say “let them eat cake.”

We just had a massive global experiment on this from covid lockdowns. Travel dropped precipitously, offices were empty, few people flew or drove, factories were idled. We experienced a level of human suppression and a drop in activity of unprecedented (and unsustainable) magnitude.

The effect on global CO2 levels was 0. Nothing changed. The rise was perfectly average and you cannot pick it out of the surrounding data no matter how hard you squint.

The most aggressive implementation of purported mitigation in human history occurred and it had no impact.

It was probably the most expensive intervention in human history and it did not move the needle even a micrometer. all cost, no benefit.

And now they want to try again?

“Environmentalism” = Neo-paganism. Humans must be sacrificed to appease the gods of forest, river, sea, animals and elements and to atone for their sins against the gods. Everything must be protected except Humans.

Edited May 29, 2024 by Goddess
https://ernestdlieberman.substack.com/p/climate-change-alarmists-ignore-how

[taxme]

On 5/21/2024 at 7:16 PM, blackbird said:

"Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says climate change is an “existential crisis” and the carbon tax is “the most effective way” to fight it. But he never tires of spending billions of taxpayers’ dollars in ways that show he doesn’t really believe what he says.His government boasts it has committed over $160 billion to climate spending since 2015. That’s $160 billion to what are, by the prime minister’s own labelling, relatively ineffective ways to fight an existential crisis. A reasonable person might wonder how this makes sense. There is no need to wonder too much. The answer is: Trudeau believes that both invoking climate apocalypse and wasting $160 billion so unaccountably will increase the Liberals’ votes among people who will either receive the money or are, for whatever reason, impressed by climate alarmism and reassured by government control."

Matthew Lau: $160 billion says Trudeau doesn't buy his own carbon tax pitch (msn.com)

 

Like with the covid hoax, this so called climate crisis is just another hoax and another name for covid #2. There is no real climate crisis going on anywhere in Canada. If so, where? It is all just another gigantic $160 billion tax dollars thrown in the wind hoax. The dictator in Ottawa is flying hundreds of private airplane trips all over Canada and the rest of the world every year. Tons of carbon being spewed into the atmosphere. No real worry or concern here about climate crisis. 

Wit this so called housing crisis that we supposedly have, can you imagine as to how many homes can be built with that $160 billion? There is no real housing shortage in Canada, but there is a massive immigration refugee explosion problem going on in Canada today.

The dictator in Ottawa and his immigration minister sidekick is the problem. The imbecile of a minister wants to bring in approx. a million new immigrant/refugees into Canada every year. Now how is that for fighting climate change? It's all a climate crisis joke, folks. Stop eating that climate crisis crap nonsense because all of our dear leaders already knows that it all is just a farce. 😇

[eyeball]

On 5/21/2024 at 7:16 PM, blackbird said:

"Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says climate change is an “existential crisis” and the carbon tax is “the most effective way” to fight it. But he never tires of spending billions of taxpayers’ dollars in ways that show he doesn’t really believe what he says

That's right, he sure showed that when he bought a pipeline and built another right alongside it.

Despite squandering it's benefits however he's correct about the carbon tax.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

That's right, he sure showed that when he bought a pipeline and built another right alongside it.

Despite squandering it's benefits however he's correct about the carbon tax.

Sure. Just as correct as he was about the pipeline  

The carbon tax is an absolute failure. At least from its intended stated purpose. It was never about the environment, he just knew that dolts like you would lap that up and agree with whatever they were told But in the end it was just a tax. It was a way for the liberals to put money in their pockets so that they could give it to their friends and people who would benefit them later by handing out expensive projects such as the arrivecan app or any of the stupid studies that have turned in no useful information but made millions for the !diots who supposedly wrote it.

You had your chance. And despite being told you blew it. If the climate suffers in the future it's 100% on the heads of people like you. Well done