dialamah Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: Generally in life, it's the person who is demanding people pay higher taxes and follow more regulations who should be expected to demonstrate the proposed way is worth the cost. Yet the left play idiotic games like this instead, pretending the burden of proof should be on everyone else to prove their plan sucks or it's going ahead anyway despite the clear imposition on everyone who disagrees with them. Its been demonstrated that carbon taxes succeeds in its goal to reduce the use of fossil fuels. Reducing the use of fossil fuels is part of mitigating climate change. That you refuse to accept these facts is not the fault of the plan or the people who implement it. If you have a better plan, share it. If you do not, then get out of the way of those who do have a plan, imperfect as it may be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, dialamah said: Its been demonstrated that carbon taxes succeeds in its goal to reduce the use of fossil fuels. Reducing the use of fossil fuels is part of mitigating climate change. That you refuse to accept these facts is not the fault of the plan or the people who implement it. If you have a better plan, share it. If you do not, then get out of the way of those who do have a plan, imperfect as it may be. Its been demonstrated that carbon taxes will not reduce the use of fossil fuels to reduce climate change to any meaningful degree, yet you want people to pay the taxes anyway. No plan is better than a counter-productive plan, and if I come up with a plan that doesn't give the government way more power, you'll just shit on the plan and demand the government be more involved as the only real solution. The environmentalist left's solutions are oriented to making lefties feel like they are helping the environment, even when they hurt the environment or aren't helping in any meaningful way and burdening the economy. It's not results based, it's feels based. I ain't getting out of the way of your shitty feels based plans, get a better results based plan, or f*ck off. Edited June 12, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 3 minutes ago, dialamah said: Its been demonstrated that carbon taxes succeeds in its goal to reduce the use of fossil fuels. Reducing the use of fossil fuels is part of mitigating climate change. That you refuse to accept these facts is not the fault of the plan or the people who implement it. If you have a better plan, share it. If you do not, then get out of the way of those who do have a plan, imperfect as it may be. I think the refusal to accept the fact that, while any reduction in fossil fuel use will reduce the amount of greenhouse gases going into the atmosphere, a carbon tax is so utterly irrelevant to the fate of the species without much, much, more, on a scale that is inconceivable at the moment, is a result of much larger and more heavy duty set of blinkers. I don't mind paying taxes, and our cities could certainly be cleaner, but it's not fighting climate change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 (edited) Could always level the playing field when it comes to energy subsidies, which will allow the market to innovate it's way to a better environment, and it could reduce government involvement in people's lives. But nope, the environmentalist left would rather just tax and spend, pick winners and losers, and seek to give the government ever expanding powers to make themselves feel like they are helping even when they aren't instead. They think the problem is so big that without massive government intervention not nearly enough is being done, without stopping to realize how ineffective massive government intervention is at addressing such problems. So they won't accept any answers that don't involve vastly increasing the influence of government in people's lives. Edited June 12, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 3 minutes ago, bcsapper said: I think the refusal to accept the fact that, while any reduction in fossil fuel use will reduce the amount of greenhouse gases going into the atmosphere, a carbon tax is so utterly irrelevant to the fate of the species without much, much, more, on a scale that is inconceivable at the moment, is a result of much larger and more heavy duty set of blinkers. I don't mind paying taxes, and our cities could certainly be cleaner, but it's not fighting climate change. I think it's also got value in reminding people that use of fossil fuels has consequence beyond how much it costs. We can no longer fight climate change. Perhaps we can still mitigate it to some extent, and carbon taxes support that. Yes, we must do much more. But doing nothing because what we can do will not solve the entire problem is not a reasonable stance. If the anti-carbon tax people have an alternative that was equal to or more effective than a carbon tax in reducing the use of fossil fuels, then they should present it. Otherwise they just come across as cranks who care more about a few dollars a year in their pockets than about the wellbeing of the next couple of generations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 (edited) Carbon tax ain't got nothing on unleashing free market innovation. Growing their way out of the problem is a lot easier than taxing their way out of it. Get a better plan. If the left ever gets around to pushing Nuclear, then maybe it's a sign that they are getting a little more serious about addressing curbing C02, instead of pushing not ready for primetime energy, because it's "green" or "renewable". Edited June 12, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 9 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: Could always level the playing field when it comes to energy subsidies, which will allow the market to innovate it's way to a better environment, and it could reduce government involvement in people's lives. You mean like this, suggested when Harper was still PM? Canada does offer subsidies for the development of green energies. Canada’s investment in energy innovation is an important part of building our clean economy. Learn more about our contributions to Research, Development and Demonstration projects in Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 (edited) 16 minutes ago, dialamah said: You mean like this, suggested when Harper was still PM? Canada does offer subsidies for the development of green energies. Canada’s investment in energy innovation is an important part of building our clean economy. Learn more about our contributions to Research, Development and Demonstration projects in Canada. You could cut subsidies to fossil fuels too, don't have to just increase subsidies for green energy. The solution isn't always higher taxes, pro tip to lefties. Level the playing field, give the energy industry some tax breaks, and not just on wind and solar, don't pick winners and losers if it can be avoided, let the market sort it out, central planning for the fail. Subsidies should be a last resort, not the go to. If solar and wind ever get their shit together, a level playing field will allow them to rapidly expand without punishing other valuable economic activity. Edited June 12, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said: You could cut subsidies to fossil fuels too, don't have to just increase subsidies for green energy. The solution isn't always higher taxes, pro tip to lefties. If you want to increase energy subsidies, give Nuclear some love, enough of the only throwing money at "green" energy. I agree that nuclear power has possibilities. It seems that its also being considered as part of the solution by the current Canadian government. Reduction of fossil fuel subsidies is also being looked at by the federal government. In the meantime, Alberta is increasing its fossil fuel subsidies. Clearly "taxing our way out" isn't our only solution; many other initiatives are occurring - much of which you agree with. These initiatives will make the carbon tax even more effective in getting people used to the idea that fossil fuels are gradually being phased out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, dialamah said: I agree that nuclear power has possibilities. It seems that its also being considered as part of the solution by the current Canadian government. Reduction of fossil fuel subsidies is also being looked at by the federal government. In the meantime, Alberta is increasing its fossil fuel subsidies. Clearly "taxing our way out" isn't our only solution; many other initiatives are occurring - much of which you agree with. These initiatives will make the carbon tax even more effective in getting people used to the idea that fossil fuels are gradually being phased out. The solutions getting all the press, aren't the one's you and I agree on though, the solutions getting all the press are "taxing our way out" and many environmentalist lefties buy that bullshit hook, line and sinker. Carbon tax is a prime example. Reducing subsidies is a right wing solution, the left aren't the only one's trying to address the issue, but they sure like to pretend that they are. Just because the right does not support all the lefties crazy environmentalist government power grab schemes doesn't mean they are for doing nothing to help the environment. Edited June 12, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said: The solutions getting all the press, aren't the one's you and I agree with though, the solutions getting all the press are "taxing our way out" and many environmentalist lefties buy that bullshit hook, line and sinker. Reducing subsidies is a right wing solution, the left aren't the only one's trying to address the issue, but they sure like to pretend that they are. It's hardly my fault, or Trudeau's or leftists' that the people screaming in the media about the carbon tax do not take 10 minutes to find out what else is happening, eh? And the 10 minutes research I did this morning shows that the 'subsidy reduction' was a left wing solution and the 'subsidy increase' was a right wing solution - depending on which industry is being subsidized. But good on you for actually presenting alternatives; I learned something while investigating and debunking your assumptions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 Just now, dialamah said: Its been demonstrated that carbon taxes succeeds in its goal to reduce the use of fossil fuels. Where? By who? What did they demonstrate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, dialamah said: It's hardly my fault, or Trudeau's or leftists' that the people screaming in the media about the carbon tax do not take 10 minutes to find out what else is happening, eh? And the 10 minutes research I did this morning shows that the 'subsidy reduction' was a left wing solution and the 'subsidy increase' was a right wing solution - depending on which industry is being subsidized. But good on you for actually presenting alternatives; I learned something while investigating and debunking your assumptions. The left likes subsidies because that's more government involvement, the right doesn't like subsidies because that's more government involvement. Conservatives or Republicans pushing fossil fuel subsidies is not right wing, it's anti-free market, government picking winners and losers shit, and more subsidies equals higher taxes, which those on the right, not the biggest fans of. Edited June 12, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 (edited) Just now, dialamah said: It's hardly my fault, or Trudeau's or leftists' that the people screaming in the media about the carbon tax do not take 10 minutes to find out what else is happening, eh? And the 10 minutes research I did this morning shows that the 'subsidy reduction' was a left wing solution and the 'subsidy increase' was a right wing solution - depending on which industry is being subsidized. But good on you for actually presenting alternatives; I learned something while investigating and debunking your assumptions. Hang on. How are tax incentives a left wing solution? Are you suggesting no one to the right of whatever your left is never believed in tax incentives until a leftist mentioned it? Please explain that too. With due respect I would suggest to you D and Y that using tax deductions as an incentive to do things in the business world or with any other interest sector has never been particular to either side of the political equation and neither has government interventionism and tax increases for that matter. That said I would be interested if anyone has any proof that increasing tax by itself changes peoples' behaviour when it comes to using fossel fuel or reducing carbon emission. I would contend what we all know it does is increase the price of everything which sets off inflation in all consumer product prices which causes people to spend more but in fewer economic sectors of service and spend less in other sectors leading to a depressed economy as people have less to spend on things other than fuel for their cars or increased price of food. The carbon tax does not deal with the problem of carbon emissions. It simply uses the problem as an excuse to tax. The revenue from that tax does not go to reducing carbon emission it goes to fueling the out of control wasteful spending the current government has engaged in. The carbon tax enables our government to fuel its addiction at the expense of our fossel fuel addiction. Neither out of control government spending or lowering carbon emissions are being addressed. Edited June 12, 2019 by Rue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 (edited) Tax breaks lower taxes, that's right wing. Government subsidies raise taxes and increase government spending, that's left wing. It's obvious which is more free market capitalist than the other, lets be real. Edited June 12, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egghead Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: Your reply graph changes the discussion to 'life saving drug' demand which isn't the same thing at all. You are so funny, Are you a comedian? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egghead Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 1 hour ago, dialamah said: Its been demonstrated that carbon taxes succeeds in its goal to reduce the use of fossil fuels. Reducing the use of fossil fuels is part of mitigating climate change. That you refuse to accept these facts is not the fault of the plan or the people who implement it. If you have a better plan, share it. If you do not, then get out of the way of those who do have a plan, imperfect as it may be. Show us how you know that? I want to know too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egghead Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 47 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: Tax breaks lower taxes, that's right wing. Government subsidies raise taxes and increase government spending, that's left wing. It's obvious which is more free market capitalist than the other, lets be real. welcome to a modern day version of lefties Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 38 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: free market capitalist As if free-market capitalism is the holy grail. Sure, we in the first world have greatly benifitted, but at what cost to the rest of the world and succeeding generations? 40 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: Tax breaks lower taxes, that's right wing. Harper promises subsidies to farmers. Bernier criticizes Harper subsidies. Harper's tax increases. Harper champions carbon tax through cap and trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 Ok @Rue and @egghead British Columbia, economy grew, emissions decreased. Sweden - highest carbon tax, economy grew by 60%, emissions decreased by 25%. The last source is in PDF form so I can't link to it. Search for OECDEffective Carbon Rates 2018. "Carbon prices increase resource efficiency, boost investment in clean energy and low-emission goods and services, and facilitate a gradual low-carbon transition." "To illustrate effectiveness, consider the effect of the carbon price support in the United Kingdom. The policy increased carbon prices in the electricity sector from EUR 7/tCO2 to more than EUR 30/tCO between 2012 and 2016. Emissions from the electricity sector decreased by 58% in the same period. Overall UK emissions from energy use fell by 25%, of which 19 percentage points are due to cleaner electricity generation." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 39 minutes ago, egghead said: You are so funny, Are you a comedian? No. Do you have a response to what I said ? Or do you think the demand curve for life-saving drug looks identical to the one for fidget spinner ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egghead Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 11 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: No. Do you have a response to what I said ? Or do you think the demand curve for life-saving drug looks identical to the one for fidget spinner ? I just being polite, instead of giving you a piece of my mind . I was trying to show that the change in price has little effect on the quantity demanded in some cases. Anyway, do you understand elasticity of demand or you are being funny again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, egghead said: 1. I just being polite, instead of giving you a piece of my mind . I was trying to show that the change in price has little effect on the quantity demanded in some cases. 2. Anyway, do you understand elasticity of demand or you are being funny again? 1. I don't dispute that. 2. I understand it somewhat. I would say gasoline for your car is more elastic than, say, oxygen. But I'm no economist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egghead Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 Just now, Michael Hardner said: 1. I don't dispute that. 2. I understand it somewhat. I would say gasoline for your car is more elastic than, say, oxygen. But I'm no economist. I love you, you are just being funny again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 3 minutes ago, egghead said: I love you, you are just being funny again I love being loved. I left my ex-wife a note to that effect, but the maid found it and now I'm paying alimony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.