Bob Long Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 (edited) with the glasses on, that dog looks a lot like JT Miller reincarnated. Edited April 2 by Bob Long 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 1 hour ago, RupertKBD said: Yep. Which kind of underscores my point that I wouldn't trust the Cons to handle such negotiations. you still haven't made the case why anyone would trust the NDP to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 A Tale Of Two Stances: The current carbon tax debate is important — it's just not serious The arguments being made by opponents only make sense if you ignore some awkward facts https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carbon-tax-trudeau-poilievre-1.7159005 Carson Jerema: Economists' open letter oblivious to carbon tax realities Liberal policy is on top of massive subsidies and regulations, which the letter ignores https://nationalpost.com/opinion/carson-jerema-economists-open-letter-oblivious-to-carbon-tax-realities 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maninthebox Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 2 hours ago, Bob Long said: neutral for consumers isn't a bad thing. It reminds me a little of the change to the GST/HST where people argued it would drive prices up dramatically. All it did was remove the old 13% manufacturers tax for the most part, and made it a much more efficient tax system. Carbon pricing is a globally recognized method of creating a market to drive carbon out of the value chain. If you have something better to show us, please do I'd love to see it. but you get that back, so for your family thats a neutral thing. Unless the oil company is adding an extra gouge for you, and then thats on them. Aren't Canada's emissions staying kind of flat, other then last year with an uptick in emissions from oil and gas and buildings (https://climateinstitute.ca/news/canadas-climate-progress/)? We can certainly do more to green up buildings. Oil and gas paying a bit more is fine by me, as long as its basically neutral for most people. Yes, although I was speaking to the perception of the carbon tax, not to it's actual effectiveness. Personal experience is always going to matter, regardless of studies, news reports, or political pandering. It isn't beneficial to condescend to voters even if/when you are technically correct. Nor is it good policy to tell people they need to be 'punished' for heating their homes, driving to work, etc. Good intentions, piss poor communication. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 1 minute ago, Maninthebox said: Yes, although I was speaking to the perception of the carbon tax, not to it's actual effectiveness. Personal experience is always going to matter, regardless of studies, news reports, or political pandering. It isn't beneficial to condescend to voters even if/when you are technically correct. Nor is it good policy to tell people they need to be 'punished' for heating their homes, driving to work, etc. Good intentions, piss poor communication. I think this is where PP putting so much stock in his "axe the tax" thing could backfire. People in Canada still pay attention during elections, and IF the case is made well by the Libs, and the media for that matter, that its actually a "good" tax, then PP comes off looking like a bit of a wanker. I mean I get it, every politician in waiting loves having a tax to make people mad about. But people also don't like being played. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapper Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 One thing to factor in is the cost of climate issues Logical people could agree to disagree on what's causing the climate issues yet.still agree that the flooding , forest fires and drought issues are in fact real and happening The carbon tax should be renamed climate change tax and clearly spelled out that it funds the billions per year in fire fighting and evacuation costs , rebuilding after flooding and the costs to deal with drought. The impacts of climate.change are real and very costly. The impacts of climate change are not neutral.and now events are so predictable they must be budgeted for 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 1 hour ago, Bob Long said: you still haven't made the case why anyone would trust the NDP to do it. I'm not sure how I can make a case on something purely hypothetical. I guess all I can say is that I don't believe Jag would cancel the deal outright and I don't think he would cave to US demands as Harper would have. Sorry, but that's all the "proof" I can give you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 32 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: I'm not sure how I can make a case on something purely hypothetical. I guess all I can say is that I don't believe Jag would cancel the deal outright and I don't think he would cave to US demands as Harper would have. Sorry, but that's all the "proof" I can give you. Well, it's not really hypothetical tho if the left vote splits and hands PP a big majority, because people think Jag would be a competent PM. He's fine as someone pushing for programs holding a balance of power, but that's a long way from someone i would want in critical situations like NAFTA negotiations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 6 minutes ago, Bob Long said: Well, it's not really hypothetical tho if the left vote splits and hands PP a big majority, because people think Jag would be a competent PM. He's fine as someone pushing for programs holding a balance of power, but that's a long way from someone i would want in critical situations like NAFTA negotiations. Of course it's hypothetical. There's no way to know how Singh would do in such negotiations....or as PM for that matter. We might have opinions, but that's all they are. FWIW, I'd rather see Freeland back in the saddle if and when NAFTA 3.0 comes around, but I don't think I'm going to get my wish. Too many Canadians seems to believe the Polievre hype. (though I don't understand why) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
112 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 11 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: Of course it's hypothetical. There's no way to know how Singh would do in such negotiations....or as PM for that matter. We might have opinions, but that's all they are. FWIW, I'd rather see Freeland back in the saddle if and when NAFTA 3.0 comes around, but I don't think I'm going to get my wish. Too many Canadians seems to believe the Polievre hype. (though I don't understand why) I think a good amount of his base is voting against Trudeau rather than for Poilievre. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 28 minutes ago, Bob Long said: Well, it's not really hypothetical tho if the left vote splits and hands PP a big majority, because people think Jag would be a competent PM. He's fine as someone pushing for programs holding a balance of power, but that's a long way from someone i would want in critical situations like NAFTA negotiations. https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/ndp-against-canada-increasing-defence-spending-to-hit-arbitrary-nato-target-1.5835049 I also really don't feel comfortable with what an NDP government would do to our military. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 3 minutes ago, 112 said: I think a good amount of his base is voting against Trudeau rather than for Poilievre. Agreed. It certainly doesn't appear to be based on anything concrete, other than I suppose, too much taxes...... Which would be fine, if it wasn't the same poeple crying about not enough being done to help out middle and lower income folks. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 7 hours ago, PureQuickness said: This whole carbon tax issue may be the final straw for Trudeau. The tax itself is not that expensive (roughly $65 a year more). Honestly, if you can't afford THIS, you're in a whole lot more trouble and the carbon tax is not the problem. I think if the party was popular, this tax would be a non-issue. So this begs the question as to how people are doing. It's a reality that many people are living paycheque to paycheque. This could be the result of poor spending habits, predatory lending practices (including leasing), necessities for people that are becoming too expensive, or just the fact that people's wages are not enough, despite the costs of housing. As another poster (Elias Pettersson) aptly said: Trudeau has gone too far left and is getting more and more radical. On the other hand, PP is too far on the right. Canadians are being divided between two AWFUL choices right now. It's clear that climate change needs to be addressed. Perhaps a better strategy would've been to have Canadians the option to swap out their old cars with electric ones. Obviously not all Canadians can use electric, so not everyone can take advantage of this. There'd be costs of course, which I'm no Finance Minister so I can't crunch those numbers. I think it would be a smarter idea than the carbon tax, which IMO is not really that big of a deal. 9 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said: I agree. Trudeau has pushed the Liberals too far to the left. And Poilievre has pushed the Conservatives too far to the right. Unfortunately the NDP isn’t a centrist party, so that’s where the problem lies. Ultimately the NDP needs to get new leadership to push one of the other parties to the centre. None of Trudeau, Poilievre or Singh are fit to run the country. It’s probably one of the worst times in Canadian history where there really isn’t anyone capable of being the Prime Minister. I'd love to hear what's so "far left" about the Liberals to be honest. Equal rights for Trans people and the like isn't "far left" IMO, given that they're just people after all. And we agree that all people should have equal rights, right? Beyond that, what exactly are they so "far left" about that the right feels they need to swing their pendulum towards wack-a-doos as a result? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 5 hours ago, chris12345 said: Yea we can argue about the income thresholds but that is for another day. Seems low to me - rough math $50k per year per family is below minimum wage for two working stiffs...... but what do I know? here's the latest info for BC: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/taxes/income-taxes/personal/credits/climate-action 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 1 minute ago, aGENT said: I'd love to hear what's so "far left" about the Liberals to be honest. Equal rights for Trans people and the like isn't "far left" IMO, given that they're just people after all. And we agree that all people should have equal rights, right? not for the god boys. They think its OK to discriminate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 7 hours ago, Bob Long said: I do have one yes, and I think I can back it up. If you can show me where the federal NDP, or any provincial NDP, would have a solid plan on trade and development thats at least equal to the other parties, I'm quite open to adjusting my opinion. The BC NDP hasn't seemed to bring industry to a shrieking halt in BC despite your fears (or any other NDP run Provinces for that matter). The stance that we should protect and encourage higher value product/tech manufacturing IN Canada seems to fall right in to your wheelhouse. As for their seemingly strong stance on trade matters...well, it's easy to have strong stances on things when you're 3rd or 4th party. If in actual power, like ANY government you have to govern in reality and negotiate both in parliament, and in any international treaties and compromise on your "ideal" stances. Not sure why the NDP would be any different in that regard? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 1 hour ago, aGENT said: The BC NDP hasn't seemed to bring industry to a shrieking halt in BC despite your fears (or any other NDP run Provinces for that matter). The stance that we should protect and encourage higher value product/tech manufacturing IN Canada seems to fall right in to your wheelhouse. It is in my wheelhouse, which is why I have the opinion I do. "Fear" has nothing to do with it. 1 hour ago, aGENT said: As for their seemingly strong stance on trade matters...well, it's easy to have strong stances on things when you're 3rd or 4th party. If in actual power, like ANY government you have to govern in reality and negotiate both in parliament, and in any international treaties and compromise on your "ideal" stances. Not sure why the NDP would be any different in that regard? Sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureQuickness Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 10 hours ago, Optimist Prime said: I am over the threshold, and I don't care that I don't get the rebate. I am prepaying my mortgage by 5k a month, that is on top of the regular mortgage payments. Household income of 150k a year. Who cares about what amounts to $1.50 a fill up on new taxes? Not me. I am happy to have a new hospital being built in my home town and roads to drive on: a timmies coffee every two weeks just doesn't matter to me: but a couple million timmies coffees every few weeks is a LOT of extra income for our government, which provides services to us, wither you want them to or not. People like you makes me happy that other well-paid Canadians actually want more for other people than hoarding it all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post aGENT Posted April 3 Popular Post Share Posted April 3 (edited) 8 hours ago, PureQuickness said: People like you makes me happy that other well-paid Canadians actually want more for other people than hoarding it all. It's literally the point of living in a society. If I'm doing well, I should pay more taxes to help fund services, infrastructure etc to help lift others up so they can do well too. Them doing well too means less poverty, less crime, a nicer society to live in, healthier, better educated, more successful people who can continue to buy whatever widgets/widget services helped make me successful in the first place, and contribute to further success for me too. In a better, stronger, happier, more educated society. Greedy, narcissistic, "me first", "taxes bad" people don't contribute to that (or at least only do so under severe protest, while constantly trying to claw us backwards). Edited April 3 by aGENT 1 1 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Optimist Prime Posted April 3 Popular Post Share Posted April 3 8 hours ago, PureQuickness said: People like you makes me happy that other well-paid Canadians actually want more for other people than hoarding it all. I am no saint, but I think we are wealthy, being compared here in Canada to other places on earth. In Syria, the welfare program I witnessed the most was a literal turnip truck driving around poor neighbourhoods south of Damascus tossing a literal turnip into every yard on the list. Typically a housewife would run out and snatch up the turnip and return to her kitchen to work wonders with it and add it to last weeks cabbage. Next week they might get a zucchini from the same truck. We have the ability to keep every Canadian living well, obviously mental health and addiction work against those goals, but generally, we are a wealthy nation and we should look after the poorest among us. I am also a bit of a globalist, I think we can raise the standard of living globally without too much damage to ourselves. I am fine if we can lift the worst off Indian and Chinese people out of poverty too, that helps lower the chances of war, which makes me safer. It is all about the selfish gene, but used in a different way. If you are happy, you are leaving me alone and I am happy. hehehe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene 1 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 1 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 1 hour ago, The Arrogant Worms said: "But, people are losing their houses!" (That was an actual comment from one of the protesters last weekend in 'Berta) 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 1 hour ago, RupertKBD said: "But, people are losing their houses!" (That was an actual comment from one of the protesters last weekend in 'Berta) Well they are: the people who barely qualified at the lowest interest rate in the history of loaning out money...and then went deeper in debt for a F350, quad and Snowmachine and then lost their job at Fort Mac. But the carbon tax ain't the reason. lol. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 30 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said: Well they are: the people who barely qualified at the lowest interest rate in the history of loaning out money...and then went deeper in debt for a F350, quad and Snowmachine and then lost their job at Fort Mac. But the carbon tax ain't the reason. lol. To be a bit fair, there was some terrible advice from mortgage brokers out there a few years back. For a few weeks there you could lock in for 10 years at 2% but the brokers all said not to. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureQuickness Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 And yeah, the carbon tax is NOT that big of an issue, and PP was brilliant enough to try and force out a government on THIS issue. Talk about a lack of foresight and a lack of vision in general. NO to PP. I'm not going to be voting Conservative anytime soon because they have shown they don't have any clue as to knowing the pulse of the population. 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.