The "LOLCANADA" thread...again

We normally talk about Canada ITT, but one of the main enforcement mechanisms I support globally is basically climate tarrifs. That is if jurisdictions do NOT have a carbon pricing mechanism, then there is a tariffs on goods from them. Definitely a possibility in Europe. The effect of something like this might be that Quebec gets preferential trading terms with countries versus other provinces. Or maybe all of Canada is ****ed until we change our tune and stop being one of the worst per capita emitters while doing nothing.

Why are you so shocked that those NDP leaders would change their policy to win votes ? Justin Trudeau did the exact same thing with Atlantic Canada

I’m not shocked, I’m disappointed. Remember how you used to go on that if I cared about the climate I should vote NDP and I said that time and time again they put their own political interests first and showed zero seriousness in ever doing some for the climate? Well I was sadly proven correct once again (presuming it plays out as expected).

Of course these two are nothing alike. Atlantic Canada was a slight delay in one small niche affecting a small region. I disagree, but it’s incrediably minor. The NDP might jettison the entire carbon pricing that you of course cheer on.

Maybe Trudeau should have known the NDP only signed the agreement because it's in their best political interest. But he's a narcissist and didn't care, either did liberal voters like yourself because it helped him stay in power longer.

No its not minor . The one thing you could say about Trudeau before he removed the carbon tax on home heating oil was that he maintained his integrity on the issue and would not budge. Once he removed the carbon tax for a area were he was getting decimated in the polls he lost what little integrity he had left.

Its about affordability and the majority of CDN's call BS on im getting more back than I pay and they see a future were the carbon tax will double

Quote from Justin Trudeau

Really Justin everything your doing has no effect on climate change. The biggest move you could make on the climate change issue is stop shipping coal to China and India and develop the heck out of our Natural Gas fields and export around the world with a pipeline to the east

I will vote for the party that pledges to end exports of thermal coal in five years. If you care about this issue, will you pledge to do the same?

If not, I suggest you never - ever - bring up this inept talking point of yours again.

Let's try this.

Federal Income Tax - NO REBATE
Provincial Income Tax - NO REBATE
GST/HST - NO REBATE (unless very poor)
Property tax - NO REBATE
Corporate tax - NO REBATE
Payroll taxes - NO REBATE
Excise taxes - NO REBATE

If your goal is about "affordability" from taxation, why focus on the one and only tax that rebates 90% of it back, is deficit neutral, and whose direct and indirect fiscal effects is a net gain for 80% of people. Of course you'll say but but but the report talks about economic effects suppressing incomes too, just as every single one of the other taxes also has negative economic effects. And of course any other policy to do a single thing about climate change is going to cost money - probably a LOT more money than the carbon tax.

Compared to the canadian economy as a whole, a temporary delay in what is a tiny fraction of total green house gas emissions in Canada on one product from one region is just objectively minor in the big picture while providing the incentives to help people convert away to heat pumps over the next couple years. One can say it was bad politics or whatever else, but it is objectively minor to look at a 1% weakening and use it to bolster your team who wants a 100% weakening.

No your voting for a party that said it would end it in 12 or 13 years when it got elected and over those years kept on increasing exports . Like you believe if Justin won again for the next two elections on some date in 2030 he will say no more thermal coal exports. If he was truly serious about this it would be a constant slow decline .

That's like a overweight person at 250 lbs saying ill drop 50 pounds in the next 12 months and were 9 months into it and he ahs gained 30 lbs and people say he will hit his goal

In your bad metaphor, you are the guy who thinks it is GOOD that he gained 30 lbs and that it is GOOD to be 250 and that we shouldn't do anything to stop that.

That's who you are voting for.

So don't come with this hypocritical BS where you pretend to care about the issue at all while supporting exactly the opposite.

This isn't true at all. The rise is purely do to free market forces. There is nothing in the pledge to stop by 2030 that would require a company to slow down now. What are you wanting, some massive big government quota system in place? (Of course you want nothing in place, all of this hypocritical conversation is just fantasy). The reason for giving a specific date of 2030 is so that companies have time to adjust and make their own decisions of how and when to taper their operations. That is the right approach. IF your team also supported the right approach, then we would probably have a consistent decline in the couple years leading up to it. But your team doesn't.

The fact that you believe if he was still PM that he would end coal exports in 2030 for China and India's coal plants tells me how naive you are .

I do believe climate change is a world issue that can only be solved if China and India, Russia, Middle east and South America are on board.

Stop being a hypocrite. You have two choices. You can either support the guy who says he WILL end it or you can support the guy who says he WON"T end it. If you pretend to care about this issue, your choice is clear. IF there was unanimous political consent among the parties on this issue then industry could trust that it was going to happen or very likely to happen or going to happen with maybe a couple year delay but 95% of the risk of it not happening isn't because the liberals will delay, it is because YOUR TEAM will get in power and stop it.

If the Liberals were in power the whole time I think it would happen. They have consistently in policy after policy demonstrated a willingness to make big steps forward to implement their climate change plans and all those plans are on the same 2030 timeline. Again it's possible something slips to 2032 or whatever like the carbon tax on home heating oil, but the direction of movement is clear. For one party. Not the other.

Hypocrite.

Do you - can you - have a response to this?

Like it or not lozen, climate changes are being felt all over the world and it will just get worst .
Now 2 choices are present like you said , doing something or doing nothing.
Waiting for everyone to do something won’t change anything , u will eventually have to do it anyway .
Do you at least get that ?
If yes then you can see waiting until China and other doing something is irrelevant right ?
It’s not a question of if it will happen, but when ….

The big distinction tho is more you waiting , worst the transition will be .
Meaning the cost will much higher, the changes needed will be more drastic , social disturbances will already be far worst ,etc .

From your “great” analogy about being too fat , having to lose 50 pounds in a year , is it better to start as soon as possible so the weight lost can be manageable without too much problems or wait at the least minute and try to lose 50 pounds in the last month ?
Which would be more damaging and difficult ?

And agan , more we wait , less we will benefit from the positive return those adjustments (like innovation) needed to fight climat changes occurs .

So the concept of waiting for China is a bad cop-out , all u do is prevent Canada to maximize All the benefits innovation could bring .
Early birds Get the worms ….

I let you figure out which of these 3 options are the easiest to succeed…

Canada should be exporting as much natural gas as it can its the cleanest solution other than nuclear

IF one can in a zero-sum way replace coal with natural gas, then natural gas is better. But I think the effect of flooding the market with cheap natural gas is that MORE fossil fuels get used and it isn't zero sum. That whatever replacement effect occurs of minimizing coal by supplementing with cheap natural gas is offset by just more people using more fossil fuels because of the cheap natural gas.

But even if that is true, and it helps OTHER COUNTRIES reduce their emissions, it does nothing to reduce our own emissions because we barely use coal for energy. Canada still is among the highest per capita emission countries in the world. So what plan do you have for reducing OUR emissions?

That is your solution and using your own phrase , this will not stop climate changes if only Canada does it right ?

And furthermore you were against trudeau buying the pipeline right ?
Now who will build all those nuclear plant and natural gas ports , boats, personnel and corporations would need to change all their energy system consumption , use increase in resources to hold those. Hanged etc that will cost probably many hundreds of billions dollars while others will too as well ?
U complain about small tax carbon and yet you wouldn’t mind paying far higher tax for those project that are far more expensive and dangerous from an economic stand point and in other way too ?

There is more then one to gain from innovation and again , using your plan which we have no idea who would pay or even be interest in taking such huge investment risk in case it fail , u put all your eggs in the same basket hoping it will works ….
Bad bad bad idea ….

But carry on .
I love the fact you complain about inflation , government debts and think money don’t grow in trees and that is your solution .

+1
Exporting more gas do not reduce our consumption.

reducing other countries emissions is literally identical to reducing yours for climate change purposes

Mother Nature will know and Canadians will be saved when the pending environmental apocalypse happens.

obviously in Quebec we have the privilege to have a choice other then the liberal and PC with bloc quebecois but sadly justin just do not get the message that he needs to go like biden did, with honors....

His time is done.
10 years was a good run.
If he do not leaves he just kills his chances to comeback later on like in a decade or 2 if he would wish it.

in theory yes but in real life it will probably not happen.

India, China and many other countries dont want to keep their energy consumption, but to increase it.
So yes it would help reduce the rate of increase but the rate would still go up because they need more energy.

And since Canada is one of the most consumption of energy per capita.
exporting do not help at all canada to solve its own problems .

Biden needed a push from high level Dems sadly no one in the liberal party is willing to do that

Wow Justin lost another liberal safe seat

More proof they could potentially lose official party status next election. Watch for more resignations now as people start jumping the sinking ship.

Inflation back to target at 2%. Lost in all the noise is that Canada’s performance battling inflation has been really really good on the international stage.

GREAT JOB TRUDEAU!!!