The "LOLCANADA" thread...again
So what's new?
I've noticed the Liberals are now ahead in all major polls and Trudeau hasn't even started to campaign yet...i'd be shocked if they lost the election now.
Just shows just how incompetent Conservatives are.
All I can do is look to the experts that say Canada has yet to lower emissions and the fact it will not meet its targets it committed too.
As well the PBO offficer that stated the carbon tax will have no effect on climate change
As well Pierre’s plan can show is exactly were emissions will be lowered and provide more clean natural gas
As well Pierre will eliminate the tax for everyone not just Atlantic Canada to buy votes
It’s hard to reduce emission when oil production still increases isn’t ?
https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-cli...
It is estimated that carbon pollution pricing will contribute as much as one-third of Canada’s emissions reductions in 2030. Carbon pricing is about recognizing the cost of pollution and accounting for those costs in our daily decisions.
Again I don’t understand why you maintain prices do not affect demands .
Do you believe instead it would be possible the tax carbon would increase tax emissions ?
You didn't answer the question. It's true that the PBO report notes that while 80% of Canadians will get more of the fiscal revenues than they pay directly or indirectly, the PBO also did a secondary economic comparison compared to "doing nothing" and there are negative economic not fiscal consequences of that. That is the full context. Neither politician does a great job of giving that full context. Now the debate is who is lying more:
1) The person who only talks about the fiscal story about th
I do not consider either lies but omission of facts . The only one excluding the fact that you pay GST on carbon tax and the costs of goods increase because of the carbon tax is the liberals
Which person doesn't mention the rebates. I have heard Pierre talk about the rebate(amount) and than say no your paying more than you get back
Lozen I've been trying to get a simple 1) or 2) worse answer out of you for a series of posts now. Every post in response from yours contains a brand new list of whataboutisms that you want me to jump through while ignoring my question. I will answer any and all questions you have as soon as you actually meaningfully address the point.
Stop evading.
Stop whatabouting.
Which is worse? Pretending there is no rebate at all or not adding the full context of the PBO report when talking about the rebat
Please tell me who is pretending there is no rebate?
As for which is worse I think both would be bad . I saw one Liberal minister say the carbon tax does not effect the cost of goods ?? WTF
The reality is CDN's see the cost of the carbon tax and every year another increase at the pumps and on their heating bills. This month it was $60.00 on my heating bill on my house in YEG .
Later just for fun Ill calculate my net cost if I was still in YEG . Of course now I get no rebate and I do not live in a 6100 sq ft house, drive a hummer or have a boat in my backyard . I looked at the rebates for the average BC person or family. Id be shocked if even 60% get a rebate at all
Don't be this guy, lozen. OBVIOUSLY Poilievre is regularly and routinely - as evidenced by your endless links ITT - speaking about the affordability of the carbon tax with scant mention of there being a rebate at all. You seem to be of the delusion that if he has ever talked about that means his despicable lies the rest of the time aren't lies.
The simple, unavoidable, uncontestable, undebatable, unrelenting fact is that Poilievre's entire schtick of the carbon tax is one gigantic lie of omission. That you can't - or won't - call him out on that says a lot about the hypocritical way you accuse one side of "lying" while glossing over the far more egregious lie from your side. The actual truth is that Canada is in an affordability crisis, its just that this crisis has very little to do with the carbon tax, and so we have this politician trying to paint the real pain Canadians are feeling on top of policy and the endless messaging that the affordability is because of the carbon tax (when in reality it is mostly rebated) is a lie that is really starting to stick. And that's sad.
Every Liberal I know has been posting the same messaging the past couple weeks, even ministers and MP's. Guess they got their marching orders..
You can go back and forth all day about if it's a rebate, increase costs etc. But it's a new tax the Liberals introduced that's increasing next week while costs continue to skyrocket. Obviously opposition is going to hammer on it hard.
Don't be this guy, lozen. OBVIOUSLY Poilievre is regularly and routinely - as evidenced by your endless links ITT - speaking about the affordability of the carbon tax with scant mention of there being a rebate at all. You seem to be of the delusion that if he has ever talked about that means his despicable lies the rest of the time aren't lies.
The simple, unavoidable, uncontestable, undebatable, unrelenting fact is that Poilievre's entire schtick of the carbon tax is one gigantic lie of omissio
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstori...
This depending on whether you believe Trudeau that 80% of households paying the federal carbon tax end up better off because of rebates, or Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux, who says when you factor in the tax’s negative impact on the economy, 60% of households end up worse off, despite the rebates
Now let me repeat my question again . Did Justin Trudeau promise small businesses carbon tax relief? Did they put aside that money they collected for that? Did he give that relief out? Is that a lie
Every Liberal I know has been posting the same messaging the past couple weeks, even ministers and MP's. Guess they got their marching orders..
You can go back and forth all day about if it's a rebate, increase costs etc. But it's a new tax the Liberals introduced that's increasing next week while costs continue to skyrocket. Obviously opposition is going to hammer on it hard.
Right, both parties insist on similar messaging. The conservatives are equally if not worse at this annoying thing where they all say the identical "pithy" lines like "axe the tax". And I'm going with them critiquing it. I just want them to do it honestly. Not mentioning that most of the tax goes right back as rebates is not honest. Saying there is negative economic consequences compared to the "doing nothing" plan is honest and they can say that and make that case if they want. But they shouldn't pretend there isn't a rebate that gives back 90% of every single dollar the federal government collects in the tax.
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstori...
Now let me repeat my question again . Did Justin Trudeau promise small businesses carbon tax relief? Did they put aside that money they collected for that? Did he give that relief out? Is that a lie
That is poor phrased, but at least it is the kind of thing people like poilievre could fairly and honestly critique. He could say that yes there is these big rebates and the same quoted report agrees with Trudeau that the fiscal consequences benefit 80% of households - Trudeau is telling the truth - but that compared to the "do nothing" scenario on climate change there are net economic consequences - Trudeau is not telling the whole truth. Go for it. But it has to be honest that there is these massive rebates that zero out the vast majority of the direct and indirect costs.
You get your whataboutism when you meaningfully respond to the core issue that omitting the existence of rebates is an outrageous lie of omission. Not before that. It shouldn't be so hard for you to acknowledge simple obvious deceptions by Poilievre. You don't have to be endlessly devoted to his every lie.
Right, both parties insist on similar messaging. The conservatives are equally if not worse at this annoying thing where they all say the identical "pithy" lines like "axe the tax". And I'm going with them critiquing it. I just want them to do it honestly. Not mentioning that most of the tax goes right back as rebates is not honest. Saying there is negative economic consequences compared to the "doing nothing" plan is honest and they can say that and make that case if they want. But they shouldn
It's about messaging and winning elections. It's working and Liberals are going to get stomped next election.
That is poor phrased, but at least it is the kind of thing people like poilievre could fairly and honestly critique. He could say that yes there is these big rebates and the same quoted report agrees with Trudeau that the fiscal consequences benefit 80% of households - Trudeau is telling the truth - but that compared to the "do nothing" scenario on climate change there are net economic consequences - Trudeau is not telling the whole truth. Go for it. But it has to be honest that there is these m
Typical Trudeau Junkie I answered your question now you make another excuse not answer mine . Bottom line is
Yes Trudeau promised carbon tax relief to small businesses
Yes Trudeau put the money aside
No he is not giving that relief he promised
Axe the Tax is why Pierre will win anyone with any honesty knows the carbon tax does nothing in the overall climate change picture except make life unaffordable
Pierre's plan actually reduces coal consumption which lowers emissions .
When are the next Canadian elections? You guys talk like it's close but Google says end of 2025
It's about messaging and winning elections. It's working and Liberals are going to get stomped next election.
Call me crazy, but I think political leaders should say largely true things and not be constantly deceiving. Even if it wins them elections. Even if it works. If your central campaign message is a lie, it should be called out by BOTH sides.
Typical Trudeau Junkie I answered your question now you make another excuse not answer mine . Bottom line is
Yes Trudeau promised carbon tax relief to small businesses
Yes Trudeau put the money aside
No he is not giving that relief he promised
Axe the Tax is why Pierre will win anyone with any honesty knows the carbon tax does nothing in the overall climate change picture except make life unaffordable
Pierre's plan actually reduces coal consumption which lowers emissions .
No, you haven't meaningfully addressed the central lie of Poilievre's where he criticizes the affordability costs of the carbon takes entirely omitting the rebates. You dance around it. Your whataboutism is just a rounding error - the primary mechanism for rebates is to rebate back to the taxpayer not to businesses, but as probably a political concession there is a small percentage rebated to "small" businesses. I always thought that should be 0% and that inequality issues between small and big emitters should be dealt with different ways, but sure 7%, 5% whatever its fine. The money has flowed slowly because it is designed not as direct payments but a series of programs that got rather interrupted through the pandemic small business supports. Regardless the Ministry says it is still planning on returning this money so no lies, even if you want to critique delays. There, whataboutism over.
No, you haven't meaningfully addressed the central lie of Poilievre's where he criticizes the affordability costs of the carbon takes entirely omitting the rebates. You dance around it. Your whataboutism is just a rounding error - the primary mechanism for rebates is to rebate back to the taxpayer not to businesses, but as probably a political concession there is a small percentage rebated to "small" businesses. I always thought that should be 0% and that inequality issues between small and big
Yeah it’s coming like clean drinking water up north
Exactly the same. Trudeau's messaging about the carbon tax is not perfect, but it is MUCH closer to the truth than the egregious ignoring of the rebates by Poilievre.
he conservatives have completely taken over in the polls recently and so the cons ITT are absolutely chomping at the bit given they are finally winning after 8 years of losing.
Ok so, the idea is the current government still has what like 16-18 months of life, there is a high chance in the next elections the opposition will govern, so the opposition doesn't want the legitimate government to govern because they will win later? Something like this?
Call me crazy, but I think political leaders should say largely true things and not be constantly deceiving. Even if it wins them elections. Even if it works. If your central campaign message is a lie, it should be called out by BOTH sides.
Speaking very generally it depends on what you are fighting against.
Say you think a policy is truly immoral and horrible, slim majorities of the population agree with the policy but you can turn 10% of them against it by lying.
Why wouldn't you? You would be acting to fix something you consider horrible.
Great example. The liberals have been incredibly clear and transparent about all their (very substantial) progress made on this file, and what work remains to be done. Its a great example of how it is easy to make quick soundbites, but the real work of being truthful and transparent is about actions and this website is a great action of liberal truth telling: https://www.sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1506514143...
Speaking very generally it depends on what you are fighting against.
Say you think a policy is truly immoral and horrible, slim majorities of the population agree with the policy but you can turn 10% of them against it by lying.
Why wouldn't you? You would be acting to fix something you consider horrible.
I get the conservatives don't care if they are lying or not, but you don't need to try and make some bad philosophy 101 argument out of it.
I get the conservatives don't care if they are lying or not, but you don't need to try and make some bad philosophy 101 argument out of it.
I am thinking much more generally than that (and I am not defending any canadian conservative claim as I have no clue what they are claiming about what) but I get this is the Canadian thread so I'll stop
Ok so, the idea is the current government still has what like 16-18 months of life, there is a high chance in the next elections the opposition will govern, so the opposition doesn't want the legitimate government to govern because they will win later? Something like this?
Justin our current leader one his first time with a majority than the following two elections with a minority. This means he needs the NDP party to prop him up . They could topple him at any time but the Leader of the NDP will not . That is why it’s 15 months till the next election
Justin has faced many ethics violations more than any leader . As well he has accumulated more debt than all the previous leaders combined .
Canadians are sick of him and his carbon tax that will do nothing to lower emissions.
It’s only a matter of time before he is gone and we get a new leader with some ethics
I am thinking much more generally than that (and I am not defending any canadian conservative claim as I have no clue what they are claiming about what) but I get this is the Canadian thread so I'll stop
You’re always welcome to ask questions Uke is like a maga cult supporter but with Trudeau . He ignores all the scandals and lies because he thinks Justin is a climate warrior when the truth is he is a climate phony corrupt politician
