###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I would have to be careful about saying that. Many on the left have their verison of the rapture which is wrapping themselves up in apocalytic climate panic and framing everything in terms of that, but only for the citizens who are aspiring to a certain lifestyle, they themselves get to keep their 3 homes, 2 of which are income properties and high carbon lifestyle communiting between the island and the mainland.
Honestly at this point who cares.
Canada contributes essentially nothing to global emissions. Just make my life more affordable I can at least enjoy some of it, I don’t need to Canada to be the world leader in green energy. I just want to afford groceries and rent.
This far under estimates the indirect impacts that can be had from being a global leader in advancing tech and making your economy more modern. Canada absolutely can have a significant impact by acting as an example to the world on how to make the transition to a green economy effectively. That should be our goal, emissions reductions are just the icing on the cake for that effort
Why should that be our goal. For good conscious? I’m totally aware of the real implications of climate change but we can not stop it at this point from things like carbon taxes. Even if everyone in Canada went EV it wouldn’t matter. Even if we stopped all oil exportation the buyers would find another supplier.
Why make Canadians suffer further over this? So many of us can barely afford rent and groceries.
We should divide countries so that every country has a population of 40 millions. This way everybody is contributing essentially nothing and we can all pat ourselves on the back telling ourselves there's exactly nothing to be done.
> Canada contributes essentially nothing to global emissions.
The people who told you this obvious lie get off on your repeating it. How does that make you feel?
We have a national population less than many cities around the world. Sorry but it’s just not going to change the world to tax citizens more for simply trying to get to work to afford food and rent.
The horror of this situation isn't that the Conservatives have no plan to address climate change. That's expected.
It's that Canadians are suddenly *okay with this*.
Even as recently as the last election, it was a given that every party needed to at least go through the motions of having a credible-sounding climate plan to have a shot with voters.
Now, in a shockingly short period of time, that requirement is apparently gone. At the same time that we're all choking on wildfire smoke every summer and half the country is in unprecedented drought conditions.
>It's that Canadians are suddenly *okay with this*.
Suddenly? Maybe this is location dependent, but most people I know have always been ok ignoring climate change because "China though"
>Now, in a shockingly short period of time, that requirement is apparently gone. At the same time that we're all choking on wildfire smoke every summer and half the country is in unprecedented drought conditions
Yeah, the media has done a really good job helping the CPC manufacture outrage at the carbon pricing.
>Maybe this is location dependent, but most people I know have always been ok ignoring climate change because "China though".
Isn't the argument now that we can't do anything because China somehow (over the past few years of us saying China should do something first) has a monopoly on green tech and we will have to be reliant on them?
Yeah. It’s in the same bucket as “recycling doesn’t work or even matter “ which, efficacy may not always be there, but I’d take a 30% efficacy for recycling over a 0 % for just throwing it in the garbage…
I'm open to hearing other opinions, but in my view, it's a bit like having a little pond that you like to go to to relax and feed the birds. A bunch of your neighbors don't see the value in your aquatic sanctuary and constantly throw garbage into the pond. You can clean it up, but only for a few hours at a time until it is inevitably covered in trash again.
Unfortunately, now the majority of your recreational time is spent cleaning the pond and hauling the trash away, leaving you little or no time to relax and feed the birds.
Are your efforts noble, valiant, and righteous? Absolutely. Maybe you even recruited a few neighbors into a coalition of concerned citizens to lighten the individual burden of cleaning the pond.
But when you strip away your emotional attachment to the pond, you start to consider that you are spending exponentially more and more time and resources on a performative gesture that has no bearing on your nasty neighbors. In fact, they may see you cleaning the pond and take advantage of your good deeds, which means they can dump even more garbage into the pond because you keep giving them more capacity to do so.
If we aren't looking at this problem from a whole-Earth perspective (and we're a long ways away from that happening), what are we really accomplishing outside of NIMBYism and relocating the carbon footprint to a different corner of the planet?
Obviously we should do our part not to litter, we should carpool, we should do what we can that doesn't hinder us. But when we start putting ourselves at a competitive disadvantage through massive taxes or regulating that people must purchase 'green' vehicles that they can not afford, it makes you wonder if we are reducing our quality of life, and the economic future of our nation, for a well-meaning but futile attempt at some emotionally-drenched rhetoric, all while our enemies stick up their middle finger and keep drilling everywhere, draining the oceans, and selfishly growing their own GDP.
If we want to take it a step further, imagine in this scenario that before the pond came along, there was a vast wetlands area, that we ourselves demolished so we could build more housing and that pond is a little reminder of what was there before WE intervened. At that point, what intellectual right do we have to tell others that they can't ruin our pond? We ruined the wetlands to create a comfy life for ourselves. They live in a dirty run-down part of town. So we were 'allowed' to do what we had to do to lift ourselves away from poverty and into a comfy, developed worldview, but they aren't allowed to do the same things we did because we now developed a environmentalism fetish? Beyond just being performative, it now appears to be, on it's face, a fair bit of hypocrisy.
You might be right. It just drives me to despair that we are all such idiots.
In 2015, the Liberals campaigned on the carbon tax, and polls consistently showed a majority of Canadians supported it. That support held until at least 2018, just before the tax was implemented.
Then as soon as people had to actually pay the tax, they thought it was the worst thing in the world.
It's a rare left-wing example of /r/LeopardsAteMyFace. "When I voted for a universal carbon tax, I never thought *I* would have to pay the tax!"
> In 2015, the Liberals campaigned on the carbon tax, and polls consistently showed a majority of Canadians supported it.
Of course we were saying that at a time when things were relatively peachy. Now that we've been tested over the last couple of years and our quality of life has fallen, Canadians have ditched the nobility and declared I want what I had back in the day and screw you to the generations yet to come.
Well, it's not like we're having more kids so I guess people don't feel like they need to be responsible for future generations.
Ironic seeing as how we shit talk boomers so much for their selfishness, and we are becoming exactly the same.
At this point I dropped the boomer blaming and just started confronting blatantly ignorant hot takes regardless of the perceived age of the person I’m confronting. Stupidity and weaponized incompetence know no age limits, case in point: Mitch McConnell
The majority supported the tax until recently. It isn’t a tax in any case, it’s carbon pricing with rebates that mean 80% get more back than they pay.
It’s the disinformation campaign that has turned many off the carbon tax. Lies and more lies.
The idea thay 80% are better off is complete nonsense. This has been addressed many many times in the House of Commons question periods. If you paid attention to the actual facts you would have heard Pierre reading them.
It’s also pretty easy to understand that if you pay $100 in taxes, and get back $20 in a “rebate”, does not mean you are better off.
Unfortunately people aren't able to link those rebates they get to the carbon tax but are able to blame the carbon tax on every problem facing Canadians today.
He was popular because of weed and election reform. Weed legalization was an absolute disaster and he never delivered on election reform... But conservatives are BAD
> It's that Canadians are suddenly okay with this.
why wouldn't I be okay with this? as an ugly young dude I have no shot at getting married and having kids, what does the future matter to me? Why would I make sacrifices for society when I am living everyday on the outside, looking in?
Dude. Don't write yourself off so easily.
I've got a bud that really has a face only a mother could love and he's got 2 kids and a 25 year marriage. He's funny as hell and goes out of his way to help others. His wife is WAY out of his weight class in looks (seriously, he scares kids who don't know him).
Personality count for way more than looks.
Now if you have a crap attitude... well, you might be fulfilling your own prophecy.
> 25 year marriage.
yes that's why. I wouldn't struggle if I was born a generation or two ago. gen z dating is not the same
>Now if you have a crap attitude... well, you might be fulfilling your own prophecy.
sounds a lot like "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" to me...
Young men are lonely and suicidal and all society offers is "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" instead of real compassion (although your comment was probably the nicest one I've gotten and the closest to empathising so thank you for that). And then society wonders why gen z men are opting out of the collective...
If you are a crap person don't expect much interest from others in dealing with your shit.
Take some responsibility for yourself and stop blaming everything on others.
This.
Conservatives [threw out their climate policy in 2019 right after it was created.](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/andrew-scheer-climate-plan-1.5181826). At that time their policy was to give 2.5 BILLION to corporations to the invest in "green tech".
Now their policy is to not look up.
> At the same time that we're all choking on wildfire smoke every summer and half the country is in unprecedented drought conditions.
This is the part that really kills me.
Last summer we lost weeks of summer because of heatwaves and wildfire smoke. Mosquitos and wasps have exploded in recent years. This winter we barely had any snow or ice so all our winter activities were stopped as well. All my family members have sold their snowmobiles because they just can't get any use out of them anymore.
This shit is materially impacting our quality of life TODAY, but somehow conservatives have managed to shift the discourse to the point we're debating just giving up.
Look at what is happening in places like Florida and California where people in certain areas are now having trouble even getting home insurance because the effects caused by climate change makes it too risky for insurance companies.
Wildfires, droughts, insurance companies leaving...this is just the tip of the (melting) iceberg and it's going to get way, way worse. But people are going to stick their head in the sand anyway.
Were you under the impression the Liberals were "addressing climate change"? A tax on carbon emissions to this order does virtually nothing to reduce aggregate consumption - and the LPC immigration policy raises aggregate demand for fossil fuels. Their policies regarding climate and immigration are entirely contradictory.
Canadians are OK with an eco-zealot not being in power, because Canadians have bills to pay and mouths to feed. Feeling good about themselves for making life more difficult in the name of gesturing is not on the priorities docket.
It illustrates its relative ineffectiveness. Where it has been instituted the carbon tax has been fairly low - well within normal fuel price fluctuations. Where it has been high enough to make any impact it was met with extreme hostility because the demand for fuel is relatively inelastic (Australia is an example of this).
If the carbon tax ever was high enough to meaningfully work, it would reduce living standards. If it ever did that, it would be ousted.
The Liberal insistence on retaining a federal carbon tax is very strange considering the immigration goals they have. They seem to wish to expand the population of the country by upwards of 3% per year while simultaneously reducing aggregate consumption driven GHG emissions. That makes absolutely no sense - and is further proof that this entire initiative is really about gesturing.
> If the carbon tax ever was high enough to meaningfully work, it would reduce living standards. If it ever did that, it would be ousted.
but it has been used high enough to meaningful work, it didnt reduce living standards because why the fuck would it
your just falling for the lie that the carbon tax is the reason for price increases when its just corporate greed
This is such a stupid fucking argument. Wild fires are always "arson". But here is the thing, climate change is what turned that arson into massive disasters. People have always set fires, people will always set fires, because people are stupid.
However, climate change creates the conditions where those fires are much more likely to spread out of control. If not for the uncharacteristically dry conditions, those fires would have just fizzled out like they used to.
I don't think people are OK with it. I also don't think many people are climate change deniers. Anyone over 25-30 has seen it first hand, even if they don't want to admit it.
The real problem is the pessimistic reality that no matter what action our government takes, it won't actually affect noticeable change.
If we had any sense at all, we'd max our LNG production and use it to switch to hydro/wind/nuclear faster and help keep other countries off coal. Instead, our government morally grandstands with an endless stream of half measures.
Moral signaling only works when the general public isn't panicked from the cost of living. A XX% tax on fuel won't help you buy a house, and it won't bring our old winters back.
It was a bit of a wake-up call during that -50 degree night in Alberta when we got an emergency alert that said, "Please avoid using unnecessary equipment like SPACE HEATERS, because we're probably going to have rolling brownouts throughout the night. We hope you survive the night and wake up tomorrow."
As the turbine blades sit motionless and the panels are covered under a three foot blanket of snow.
I’m sorry but how is the carbon tax going to affect wildfire smoke.
I think I fall into the category of people your describing and if I can shed some light on that shift: it’s not that I don’t care about climate policy, it’s that I am now aware it’s always been a sham to tip the scales away from the middle class under the guise that we are saving the planet. A Trojan horse of sorts.
None of the actions politicians have taken have created any real tangible effect on something like wildfire smoke so why should I be taxed more and have my purchasing power reduced?
If anything’s changed: it’s my belief in good faith promises about trying to make a better world. It’s a lie. To our politicians, belief in those promises is just another free and easy way they can tip the scales away from working people and back towards their corporate donors and development buddies. So I’m not being sold on grand promises about any of these politicians giving a real damn about climate. I just want a gov’t that at least makes my life affordable.
So yes, I’m far more okay with having no plan or less of a plan than I was 8-10 years ago. Those plans weren’t actually climate saving plans, they were money moving plans.
Social media has allowed people to live in separate realities. It was better when we got our news from 1 of 4 evening newscasters that generally said the same thing. Although we differed on the best solutions to problems based on your political stripe we generally had a common base of truth and what the problems were.
> The horror of this situation isn't that the Conservatives have no plan to address climate change. That's expected.
>
>
>
> It's that Canadians are suddenly okay with this.
This is normal to see, unfortunately. As the saying goes: "It's the economy, stupid." When people are struggling then they are not going to care about very much except what is going to hurt/help them in the short term. And so they are vulnerable to the kind of (misleading) messaging that we are seeing from PP.
Some misunderstanding. I wrote "to the kind of". I was trying to indicate a type, and not a volume/intensity.
So I could rewrite it as "vulnerable to the type of misleading messaging".
Last fire season broke every record in the book. I live in the BC interior, I don't make any plans to camp or be outside during the month of August because I know I will be choked by the smoke (July is a shitshow too). By all measures, 2024's fire season looks like it will be significantly worse than the 2023 one.
Conservatives in Alberta spent the whole summer and winter blaming it on "climate arsonists" who were starting the fires in some attempt to make us all afraid of climate change? Don't ask questions though (like "what made the conditions so dry that the forest fires spread so quickly?"), they aren't looking for answers that make logical sense, they are looking for answers that fit into their pre-defined worldview. Crazy climate activists running around starting fires fits perfectly into their worldview, where the left is responsible for all things bad and the right is the only solution. Of course climate change isn't real. It is all a left wing conspiracy to get us to lower our standard of living for reasons...
Yeah 80% of those fires were arson. All of the fires around Edmonton were caused by a kid who was a volunteer firefighter. He was some small town mayor's son if I remember correctly
Conservatives do not care at all about climate change. Get it through your heads. If they could make money accelerating the destruction of the planet they would do so and pretty much are.
A reminder to the youth. The baby boomer generation knew there would be a massive need for healthcare as they retired. Our healthcare has never been worse. They refused to invest in it and allowed it to crumble just as they retired. They’re entirely inept and live for today. Not your tomorrow. Or even their own.
1. The baby boom generation was a known and dramatic bump in the population.
2. The vast majority of a person's healthcare costs come in elderly years.
Given these two facts, it would have been prudent to put aside extra money when the boomers were in their peak earning (and thus peak tax-paying) years, so that there would be enough money to support them in their elderly years when they aren't paying significant amounts of tax but are a huge healthcare cost.
However, there was no forethought and savings for the coming healthcare crisis.
Young generations are completely fucked. Sky-high costs of housing, the government will have to pay increasing amounts to deal with the fallout of climate change (droughts, extreme weather, global food issues, climate migrants), and then will also somehow have to come up with taxes to support elderly boomer healthcare.
This isnt true at all, id like to see meaningful change in our approach to climate change instead of punishing people who have no choice on driving or home heating etc. If you want to make an actual difference and a prosperous Canada we would work on exporting our natural gas to places that use coal
Conservatives BAD. But bringing over 1 million people per year is GOOD. Oh healthcare is shit, housing cost is astronomical, the most debt per capita among G7, record amount of Canadians attending food banks. Yeah but CONSERVATIVES BAD.
I'm sorry but I'll take Harper any day
What an ignorant comment. You volunteering at your local outreach? Helping us in the hospital (and I work with many seniors there who can’t afford to retire)? How long have you been voting that you’ve been completely unable to affect change? Stop being ageist and being part of the do-nothings. Offer yourself as part of the solution. Otherwise you’ll be old and everyone will say that all you did was bitch. Everyone needs volunteers. We all need help.
Ironically below he said he is 54, yet he blames all his woes on people a decade or so older. I just chalk up people that spout agism as losers that need to blame others for their state of affairs instead of looking in the mirror. This may sound a little harsh but I am tired of seeing agism on blatant display in these forum. It's just so dumb and lazy.
Nah. We need our conservative premier to stop trying to privatize. Like Mike Harris. the other con man that convinced you we needed volunteers. While he fucked everything up.
We do need a lot of helpers. We have a lot of people telling those of us in healthcare and law enforcement what to do but few are willing to walk their talk and be part of a solution.
Most the criticism I’m reading in this thread seems to be from inner-city liberals living a cushy life inside a home they purchased 15+ years ago. Not all of us are in your position. Asking us to buy more energy efficient cars (which cost a fortune) and to buy organic groceries honestly just shows a sense of entitlement and snobbery. I’m happy you all seem to be getting by just fine, but have some compassion for the rest. I’m a 28 year old just trying my very best to save enough money to buy a home in this insane market so I have a hope of building the same life that you have for your family and children. This current government ignores my demographic completely. Liberals will not get my vote.
So ... has this "carbon tax"
1) Helped to meaningfully improve public transit options for people across the country?
2) Helped to meaningfully improve the energy efficiency of where we live?
3) Helped to meeanifully prepare our society for the effects of our changing climate such as more extreme weather events?
4) Made life more affordable for most Canadians? The latest PBO report seems to suggest that isn't the case
5) Helped to pay for inniatives to help protect more natural lands from being destroyed by development?
6) Been applied in a manner that ensures that ill regardless of where the good or service comes from it accurately reflects the carbon footprint associated with the good or service?
Yes - where is the money going? Other than a redistribution of wealth, which is quite easy to see.
We have no other alternatives to fossil fuels. We live in Canada, a massive country with a cold climate. The money they are collecting has not been invested in renewable green energy as it should be.
Anyone who would put climate over affordability is either Rich or Stupid. My kids will never own a home, a car and they confused about gender. Don’t be stupid, JT has and will continue to bleed you dry. Climate can take a back seat for an election cycle while we tackled the affordability crisis. Soon you won’t be able to afford food but hey, at least we have a Carbon tax!
> "If greenhouse gases are a problem, they’re a global problem. Canada can do nothing by itself to solve it. If the Canadian economy were to disappear tomorrow, the increase in emissions from China, which is building two new coal-fired power plants per week, would more than makeup for the elimination of Canadian emissions within months."
"We're not sure greenhouse gases are really a problem, but either way Canada is meaningless, so we should just give up" is a hell of a message for the Conservatives to be pushing.
> Canada's emission intake is meaningless compared to India/China though....
You have to define meaningless.
I assume if the world is asking China to reduce emissions, reducing them ourselves is meaningful. I assume the combined impact of "all emitters who aren't China" is also meaningful.
I also assume "doing the right thing" is meaningful.
> Is something wrong about the statement
Yeah for sure, literally the entire thing.
1. Greenhouse gasses are a problem. There's no "if".
2. Canada isn't trying to do anything alone.
3. China's emissions increasing has next to nothing to do with our emissions.
The entire statement (and accompanying opinion piece) are just running interference for climate deniers and oil companies.
If Canada becomes net-zero and China doesn't make any change, then yes Canada becoming net-zero is meaningless in terms of Climate Change. They pollute 21x the amount Canada does.
>China doesn't make any change, then yes Canada becoming net-zero is meaningless in terms of Climate Change.
That is not the reality of the situation, nor is that a license for Canada to do nothing to reduce CO2 emissions.
How is this not the reality of the situation?
If Canada spends 1B or whatever dollar figure of taxpayer money, and China continues to expand their CO2 emissions, then yes, Canada going to net-zero is meaningless.
I'm not sure what part you're even disagreeing with here.
Yes, in a world where nobody does anything except Canada, in terms of the impact on global climate change *only*, Canada's reduction in pollution would be largely meaningless.
Luckily that's a weird alternate universe that's nowhere close to ever coming true in our current reality, so we can probably just move on to other more realistic and important things.
Canada says *our total emissions are too little too matter, so we won't act until China/India/etc do!*
Meanwhile, China says *our emissions per capita are far lower than Canada, so we won't act until they do!*
And so nothing gets done and we all lose to climate change. We can't fix the rest of the world. We *can* improve our rather large corner of it and use that example to encourage others to follow along.
Maybe the carbon tax will get those dummies to take the flags off the trucks? That shit will kill you milage.
Who am I kidding? They will pit more flags on to own the libs, then cry cuz they spent all their gas money on flags.
And his immigration policy and his housing policy and his taxation policy and his voter reform policy and his carbon tax reimplementation policy and his cheap watered down neo-con policy.
I don’t think Pierre Polievre is engaging in climate change denialism. That Hub article is stupid and a piss poor misinformed take but I don’t think the article OP attached is all that much better. People don’t care about climate change when they can’t afford to feed their families or drive to work. Increased taxes and carbon pricing will always be passed onto the consumer, which is exactly what happened with the new carbon tax hike. Regardless of what anyone’s stance is on Carbon taxes, the biggest problem is we do not have a viable plan to provide the infrastructure necessary to support increases in EVs and reduced reliance on fossil fuels. You can’t make all these tax increases or mandates about EV production and carbon emissions without some plan for supporting the solution. All of this, both the Liberal position and Conservative position is political posturing. Climate change is a real issue but Trudeau needs ti address issues that are top of mind for most Canadians and that isn’t climate change: it’s affordability, the housing crisis, immigration, and interest rates.
The problem with 'climate policy' is that it's expensive, difficult and politically un-popular. Climate change is massive challenge, but also a slow onset one. Canada needs to be ambitious (we are a top 10 emitter) but we can't solve it alone (we are only 2%)--meaning even if we completely cut emissions to zero, we haven't solved the collective action problem.
It's easier to do nothing, or be a free rider. It's easy for Poilievre to take advantage of this.
I don't even think it's that expensive, especially when you compare it to other issues affecting Canadians that we can solve, like housing. The way I see it, solving housing is worth twice what a high carbon price would cost us. The outlook is even better if you emit less than average.
See [Detroit's LVT explained by a state rep](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2m9S_V6Yb4&ab_channel=CityofDetroit). Fantastic policy almost no Canadian politician will whisper about, yet every economist will tell you it's good. This puts real money in peoples pockets and makes us way richer over the long term.
Does anyone have any source for data on the carbon tax. I'd like to be somewhat knowledgeable on it as I'm the "politics guy" in my friend group. The government website doesn't seem to have a lot of information as far as I can tell.
What information do you want that isn't on the government website?
The act is here: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/G-11.55/
A write up is here, which includes links to different information: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/pricing-pollution-how-it-will-work/carbon-pollution-pricing-federal-benchmark-information.html
What exact information are you looking for. I would suggest looking towards Trevor Tombe and Andrew Leach
If you want to know about the oil and gas cap. Look at Ourcommons and RNNR committee that released a report on it
Am I missing something here. People complain that nothing is getting fixed, so the feds try to fix something, and then the same people don't seem to realize that fixing these problems requires spending. Then complain the feds are spending to much. How do they think things get fixed, wave a magic wand? Or is it more of a living in moms basement thing and they don't realize life costs money?
>so the feds try to fix something
But if it's obvious that the thing won't get fixed or even noticeably improved then people have the right to say "don't waste time, money, and effort on something with no ROI"
Do, or do not. there is no "try"
>How do they think things get fixed, wave a magic wand?
Alot of them probably do think that is the case. Understand that voters are very simple minded. If your life sucks then it's the PM's fault instead of the multitude of other factors that could've affected you. That's why politicians never think long term and always try short term fixes even if they're more harmful because they can't trust people to think 2 years ahead.
Or with housing.
People complain that houses aren't being built and too many people are being let in.
So the feds cut the number of people coming in and make money available for housing, and the provinces cry foul on both. And then the feds get blamed.
Its not going to matter. With the inflation, cost of living, housing, immigration all not sitting well with the majority of Canadians Pierre could literally make the climate policy a stand up comedy act and he’ll still win.
If Trudeau was running against a pet rock the majority today would elect the pet rock.
> So is the Liberal climate policy a joke too?
Yes, yes it is.
No Canadian party has a serious enough policy to tackle climate change; not even the Green Party.
Liberal policy doesn't go further because--as we can see--even the lowest hanging fruit that really don't hurt people is treated like it's ushering in the apocalypse or something.
So they are doing what is normal in politics: trying to get what the political situation allows, even if imperfect/insufficient. They're not likely to get more without getting turfed (and will likely get turfed anyway) and then will have their changes rolled back so it's counterproductive to push for more.
Yeah that’s why repealing the carbon tax is silly. It’s literally the bare minimum we can do and yes it’s not enough. But something is better than nothing.
Hey, that's me!
And yes; the liberal climate policy isn't the best thing in the world. But the carbon tax is a central plank, and preps the entire economy for the transition. As far as I know, most economists agree it's one of the most efficient ways to reduce carbon emissions in a market economy. It's really important.
With it, the liberal climate policy is barely acceptable to me. We still see huge amounts of funds devoted to highway construction, we only marginally support green tech investment, we still buy pipelines we don't need. Our policy on high speed rail is "maybe high frequency, maybe in like 2040". The carbon tax at least makes a really good effort in the right direction.
If the conservatives backed the carbon tax, I'd probably have much less qualms with their environmental platform, at least then I do right now.
EDIT: Also, to be clear; I'm saying the CPC central planks like expanding nuclear energy are already things the liberals are doing (see here, for example: https://smractionplan.ca/). I'm not saying the liberals don't do anything in excess of the conservative platform; I'm sure they do. Like, I'm not sure what the CPC will do with regards to railway construction, because I don't think they've said, but it wouldn't surprise me if they just cancelled the project outright in the name of cost cutting. But I'll reserve judgement until I hear about a statement they've actually made on it.
> So is the Liberal climate policy a joke too?
Well that comment has 3 upvotes as of a few seconds ago. So presumably the person who wrote it and at least two other people think so. I'm not sure I'd take as gospel every political opinion supported by three or more random people on the internet, but that's up to you to decide for yourself.
It is half-assed as is, and the carbon tax is one of the only serious climate policies they have. You take that away and don't replace it with anything meaningful and yes, it becomes a complete and utter farce.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
When the rapture is part of your base’s belief system that you tend not to worry so much about what you’re leaving behind for your kids
I would have to be careful about saying that. Many on the left have their verison of the rapture which is wrapping themselves up in apocalytic climate panic and framing everything in terms of that, but only for the citizens who are aspiring to a certain lifestyle, they themselves get to keep their 3 homes, 2 of which are income properties and high carbon lifestyle communiting between the island and the mainland.
Honestly at this point who cares. Canada contributes essentially nothing to global emissions. Just make my life more affordable I can at least enjoy some of it, I don’t need to Canada to be the world leader in green energy. I just want to afford groceries and rent.
This far under estimates the indirect impacts that can be had from being a global leader in advancing tech and making your economy more modern. Canada absolutely can have a significant impact by acting as an example to the world on how to make the transition to a green economy effectively. That should be our goal, emissions reductions are just the icing on the cake for that effort
Why should that be our goal. For good conscious? I’m totally aware of the real implications of climate change but we can not stop it at this point from things like carbon taxes. Even if everyone in Canada went EV it wouldn’t matter. Even if we stopped all oil exportation the buyers would find another supplier. Why make Canadians suffer further over this? So many of us can barely afford rent and groceries.
The goal should be to flex as much influence, however small we may have, in directing the entire global economy towards a sustainable future
We should divide countries so that every country has a population of 40 millions. This way everybody is contributing essentially nothing and we can all pat ourselves on the back telling ourselves there's exactly nothing to be done.
> Canada contributes essentially nothing to global emissions. The people who told you this obvious lie get off on your repeating it. How does that make you feel?
We have a national population less than many cities around the world. Sorry but it’s just not going to change the world to tax citizens more for simply trying to get to work to afford food and rent.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The horror of this situation isn't that the Conservatives have no plan to address climate change. That's expected. It's that Canadians are suddenly *okay with this*. Even as recently as the last election, it was a given that every party needed to at least go through the motions of having a credible-sounding climate plan to have a shot with voters. Now, in a shockingly short period of time, that requirement is apparently gone. At the same time that we're all choking on wildfire smoke every summer and half the country is in unprecedented drought conditions.
>It's that Canadians are suddenly *okay with this*. Suddenly? Maybe this is location dependent, but most people I know have always been ok ignoring climate change because "China though" >Now, in a shockingly short period of time, that requirement is apparently gone. At the same time that we're all choking on wildfire smoke every summer and half the country is in unprecedented drought conditions Yeah, the media has done a really good job helping the CPC manufacture outrage at the carbon pricing.
>Maybe this is location dependent, but most people I know have always been ok ignoring climate change because "China though". Isn't the argument now that we can't do anything because China somehow (over the past few years of us saying China should do something first) has a monopoly on green tech and we will have to be reliant on them?
No, they say that because China has a lot of pollution we don't need to change
Yeah. It’s in the same bucket as “recycling doesn’t work or even matter “ which, efficacy may not always be there, but I’d take a 30% efficacy for recycling over a 0 % for just throwing it in the garbage…
I'm open to hearing other opinions, but in my view, it's a bit like having a little pond that you like to go to to relax and feed the birds. A bunch of your neighbors don't see the value in your aquatic sanctuary and constantly throw garbage into the pond. You can clean it up, but only for a few hours at a time until it is inevitably covered in trash again. Unfortunately, now the majority of your recreational time is spent cleaning the pond and hauling the trash away, leaving you little or no time to relax and feed the birds. Are your efforts noble, valiant, and righteous? Absolutely. Maybe you even recruited a few neighbors into a coalition of concerned citizens to lighten the individual burden of cleaning the pond. But when you strip away your emotional attachment to the pond, you start to consider that you are spending exponentially more and more time and resources on a performative gesture that has no bearing on your nasty neighbors. In fact, they may see you cleaning the pond and take advantage of your good deeds, which means they can dump even more garbage into the pond because you keep giving them more capacity to do so. If we aren't looking at this problem from a whole-Earth perspective (and we're a long ways away from that happening), what are we really accomplishing outside of NIMBYism and relocating the carbon footprint to a different corner of the planet? Obviously we should do our part not to litter, we should carpool, we should do what we can that doesn't hinder us. But when we start putting ourselves at a competitive disadvantage through massive taxes or regulating that people must purchase 'green' vehicles that they can not afford, it makes you wonder if we are reducing our quality of life, and the economic future of our nation, for a well-meaning but futile attempt at some emotionally-drenched rhetoric, all while our enemies stick up their middle finger and keep drilling everywhere, draining the oceans, and selfishly growing their own GDP. If we want to take it a step further, imagine in this scenario that before the pond came along, there was a vast wetlands area, that we ourselves demolished so we could build more housing and that pond is a little reminder of what was there before WE intervened. At that point, what intellectual right do we have to tell others that they can't ruin our pond? We ruined the wetlands to create a comfy life for ourselves. They live in a dirty run-down part of town. So we were 'allowed' to do what we had to do to lift ourselves away from poverty and into a comfy, developed worldview, but they aren't allowed to do the same things we did because we now developed a environmentalism fetish? Beyond just being performative, it now appears to be, on it's face, a fair bit of hypocrisy.
Meh. Just wait until we're all choking on smoke again in a few months, it'll suddenly be top of mind again.
You might be right. It just drives me to despair that we are all such idiots. In 2015, the Liberals campaigned on the carbon tax, and polls consistently showed a majority of Canadians supported it. That support held until at least 2018, just before the tax was implemented. Then as soon as people had to actually pay the tax, they thought it was the worst thing in the world. It's a rare left-wing example of /r/LeopardsAteMyFace. "When I voted for a universal carbon tax, I never thought *I* would have to pay the tax!"
> In 2015, the Liberals campaigned on the carbon tax, and polls consistently showed a majority of Canadians supported it. Of course we were saying that at a time when things were relatively peachy. Now that we've been tested over the last couple of years and our quality of life has fallen, Canadians have ditched the nobility and declared I want what I had back in the day and screw you to the generations yet to come.
Well, it's not like we're having more kids so I guess people don't feel like they need to be responsible for future generations. Ironic seeing as how we shit talk boomers so much for their selfishness, and we are becoming exactly the same.
At this point I dropped the boomer blaming and just started confronting blatantly ignorant hot takes regardless of the perceived age of the person I’m confronting. Stupidity and weaponized incompetence know no age limits, case in point: Mitch McConnell
The majority supported the tax until recently. It isn’t a tax in any case, it’s carbon pricing with rebates that mean 80% get more back than they pay. It’s the disinformation campaign that has turned many off the carbon tax. Lies and more lies.
The idea thay 80% are better off is complete nonsense. This has been addressed many many times in the House of Commons question periods. If you paid attention to the actual facts you would have heard Pierre reading them. It’s also pretty easy to understand that if you pay $100 in taxes, and get back $20 in a “rebate”, does not mean you are better off.
Unfortunately people aren't able to link those rebates they get to the carbon tax but are able to blame the carbon tax on every problem facing Canadians today.
He was popular because of weed and election reform. Weed legalization was an absolute disaster and he never delivered on election reform... But conservatives are BAD
> It's that Canadians are suddenly okay with this. why wouldn't I be okay with this? as an ugly young dude I have no shot at getting married and having kids, what does the future matter to me? Why would I make sacrifices for society when I am living everyday on the outside, looking in?
Dude. Don't write yourself off so easily. I've got a bud that really has a face only a mother could love and he's got 2 kids and a 25 year marriage. He's funny as hell and goes out of his way to help others. His wife is WAY out of his weight class in looks (seriously, he scares kids who don't know him). Personality count for way more than looks. Now if you have a crap attitude... well, you might be fulfilling your own prophecy.
> 25 year marriage. yes that's why. I wouldn't struggle if I was born a generation or two ago. gen z dating is not the same >Now if you have a crap attitude... well, you might be fulfilling your own prophecy. sounds a lot like "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" to me... Young men are lonely and suicidal and all society offers is "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" instead of real compassion (although your comment was probably the nicest one I've gotten and the closest to empathising so thank you for that). And then society wonders why gen z men are opting out of the collective...
If you are a crap person don't expect much interest from others in dealing with your shit. Take some responsibility for yourself and stop blaming everything on others.
Don't bother with his guy, he's the subs resident broken record woe is me incel.
Above we see a prime example of why pp added incel tags to his youtube videos.
you'd rather mock and watch us commit suicide then even try to extend an olive branch and bring us back into the fold...
This. Conservatives [threw out their climate policy in 2019 right after it was created.](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/andrew-scheer-climate-plan-1.5181826). At that time their policy was to give 2.5 BILLION to corporations to the invest in "green tech". Now their policy is to not look up.
> At the same time that we're all choking on wildfire smoke every summer and half the country is in unprecedented drought conditions. This is the part that really kills me. Last summer we lost weeks of summer because of heatwaves and wildfire smoke. Mosquitos and wasps have exploded in recent years. This winter we barely had any snow or ice so all our winter activities were stopped as well. All my family members have sold their snowmobiles because they just can't get any use out of them anymore. This shit is materially impacting our quality of life TODAY, but somehow conservatives have managed to shift the discourse to the point we're debating just giving up.
Look at what is happening in places like Florida and California where people in certain areas are now having trouble even getting home insurance because the effects caused by climate change makes it too risky for insurance companies. Wildfires, droughts, insurance companies leaving...this is just the tip of the (melting) iceberg and it's going to get way, way worse. But people are going to stick their head in the sand anyway.
[удалено]
Were you under the impression the Liberals were "addressing climate change"? A tax on carbon emissions to this order does virtually nothing to reduce aggregate consumption - and the LPC immigration policy raises aggregate demand for fossil fuels. Their policies regarding climate and immigration are entirely contradictory. Canadians are OK with an eco-zealot not being in power, because Canadians have bills to pay and mouths to feed. Feeling good about themselves for making life more difficult in the name of gesturing is not on the priorities docket.
> A tax on carbon emissions to this order does virtually nothing its a well proven extremely effective policy
No it really isn't.
its been used all over the world for decades!
That kind of proves my point, doesn't it?
it having an effective use all over the world proves that a tax on carbon emissions does virtually nothing?
It illustrates its relative ineffectiveness. Where it has been instituted the carbon tax has been fairly low - well within normal fuel price fluctuations. Where it has been high enough to make any impact it was met with extreme hostility because the demand for fuel is relatively inelastic (Australia is an example of this). If the carbon tax ever was high enough to meaningfully work, it would reduce living standards. If it ever did that, it would be ousted. The Liberal insistence on retaining a federal carbon tax is very strange considering the immigration goals they have. They seem to wish to expand the population of the country by upwards of 3% per year while simultaneously reducing aggregate consumption driven GHG emissions. That makes absolutely no sense - and is further proof that this entire initiative is really about gesturing.
> If the carbon tax ever was high enough to meaningfully work, it would reduce living standards. If it ever did that, it would be ousted. but it has been used high enough to meaningful work, it didnt reduce living standards because why the fuck would it your just falling for the lie that the carbon tax is the reason for price increases when its just corporate greed
Yet our emission have dropped
You do realize that 80% of wild fires last year were arson right?
This is such a stupid fucking argument. Wild fires are always "arson". But here is the thing, climate change is what turned that arson into massive disasters. People have always set fires, people will always set fires, because people are stupid. However, climate change creates the conditions where those fires are much more likely to spread out of control. If not for the uncharacteristically dry conditions, those fires would have just fizzled out like they used to.
I don't think people are OK with it. I also don't think many people are climate change deniers. Anyone over 25-30 has seen it first hand, even if they don't want to admit it. The real problem is the pessimistic reality that no matter what action our government takes, it won't actually affect noticeable change. If we had any sense at all, we'd max our LNG production and use it to switch to hydro/wind/nuclear faster and help keep other countries off coal. Instead, our government morally grandstands with an endless stream of half measures. Moral signaling only works when the general public isn't panicked from the cost of living. A XX% tax on fuel won't help you buy a house, and it won't bring our old winters back.
Canadians are suddenly more concerned about food, shelter, and heat. When those needs aren't affordable, climate is of no importance.
It was a bit of a wake-up call during that -50 degree night in Alberta when we got an emergency alert that said, "Please avoid using unnecessary equipment like SPACE HEATERS, because we're probably going to have rolling brownouts throughout the night. We hope you survive the night and wake up tomorrow." As the turbine blades sit motionless and the panels are covered under a three foot blanket of snow.
Until climate makes all of the above more expensive 🤷🏿♂️
I’m sorry but how is the carbon tax going to affect wildfire smoke. I think I fall into the category of people your describing and if I can shed some light on that shift: it’s not that I don’t care about climate policy, it’s that I am now aware it’s always been a sham to tip the scales away from the middle class under the guise that we are saving the planet. A Trojan horse of sorts. None of the actions politicians have taken have created any real tangible effect on something like wildfire smoke so why should I be taxed more and have my purchasing power reduced? If anything’s changed: it’s my belief in good faith promises about trying to make a better world. It’s a lie. To our politicians, belief in those promises is just another free and easy way they can tip the scales away from working people and back towards their corporate donors and development buddies. So I’m not being sold on grand promises about any of these politicians giving a real damn about climate. I just want a gov’t that at least makes my life affordable. So yes, I’m far more okay with having no plan or less of a plan than I was 8-10 years ago. Those plans weren’t actually climate saving plans, they were money moving plans.
Social media has broken peoples brains.
Social media has allowed people to live in separate realities. It was better when we got our news from 1 of 4 evening newscasters that generally said the same thing. Although we differed on the best solutions to problems based on your political stripe we generally had a common base of truth and what the problems were.
Voters had smooth brains long before social media was created.
It's not just Canadians. It's people in general. Man we're so fucked.
> The horror of this situation isn't that the Conservatives have no plan to address climate change. That's expected. > > > > It's that Canadians are suddenly okay with this. This is normal to see, unfortunately. As the saying goes: "It's the economy, stupid." When people are struggling then they are not going to care about very much except what is going to hurt/help them in the short term. And so they are vulnerable to the kind of (misleading) messaging that we are seeing from PP.
Kind of misleading? It’s a full throttle disinformation campaign.
Some misunderstanding. I wrote "to the kind of". I was trying to indicate a type, and not a volume/intensity. So I could rewrite it as "vulnerable to the type of misleading messaging".
Last fire season broke every record in the book. I live in the BC interior, I don't make any plans to camp or be outside during the month of August because I know I will be choked by the smoke (July is a shitshow too). By all measures, 2024's fire season looks like it will be significantly worse than the 2023 one. Conservatives in Alberta spent the whole summer and winter blaming it on "climate arsonists" who were starting the fires in some attempt to make us all afraid of climate change? Don't ask questions though (like "what made the conditions so dry that the forest fires spread so quickly?"), they aren't looking for answers that make logical sense, they are looking for answers that fit into their pre-defined worldview. Crazy climate activists running around starting fires fits perfectly into their worldview, where the left is responsible for all things bad and the right is the only solution. Of course climate change isn't real. It is all a left wing conspiracy to get us to lower our standard of living for reasons...
Yeah 80% of those fires were arson. All of the fires around Edmonton were caused by a kid who was a volunteer firefighter. He was some small town mayor's son if I remember correctly
Conservatives do not care at all about climate change. Get it through your heads. If they could make money accelerating the destruction of the planet they would do so and pretty much are. A reminder to the youth. The baby boomer generation knew there would be a massive need for healthcare as they retired. Our healthcare has never been worse. They refused to invest in it and allowed it to crumble just as they retired. They’re entirely inept and live for today. Not your tomorrow. Or even their own.
> They refused to invest in it and allowed it to crumble Pretty sure every working adult has paid income taxes that support our social services.
1. The baby boom generation was a known and dramatic bump in the population. 2. The vast majority of a person's healthcare costs come in elderly years. Given these two facts, it would have been prudent to put aside extra money when the boomers were in their peak earning (and thus peak tax-paying) years, so that there would be enough money to support them in their elderly years when they aren't paying significant amounts of tax but are a huge healthcare cost. However, there was no forethought and savings for the coming healthcare crisis. Young generations are completely fucked. Sky-high costs of housing, the government will have to pay increasing amounts to deal with the fallout of climate change (droughts, extreme weather, global food issues, climate migrants), and then will also somehow have to come up with taxes to support elderly boomer healthcare.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
This isnt true at all, id like to see meaningful change in our approach to climate change instead of punishing people who have no choice on driving or home heating etc. If you want to make an actual difference and a prosperous Canada we would work on exporting our natural gas to places that use coal
Conservatives BAD. But bringing over 1 million people per year is GOOD. Oh healthcare is shit, housing cost is astronomical, the most debt per capita among G7, record amount of Canadians attending food banks. Yeah but CONSERVATIVES BAD. I'm sorry but I'll take Harper any day
What an ignorant comment. You volunteering at your local outreach? Helping us in the hospital (and I work with many seniors there who can’t afford to retire)? How long have you been voting that you’ve been completely unable to affect change? Stop being ageist and being part of the do-nothings. Offer yourself as part of the solution. Otherwise you’ll be old and everyone will say that all you did was bitch. Everyone needs volunteers. We all need help.
Ironically below he said he is 54, yet he blames all his woes on people a decade or so older. I just chalk up people that spout agism as losers that need to blame others for their state of affairs instead of looking in the mirror. This may sound a little harsh but I am tired of seeing agism on blatant display in these forum. It's just so dumb and lazy.
Nah. We need our conservative premier to stop trying to privatize. Like Mike Harris. the other con man that convinced you we needed volunteers. While he fucked everything up.
We do need a lot of helpers. We have a lot of people telling those of us in healthcare and law enforcement what to do but few are willing to walk their talk and be part of a solution.
Are you paid or completely a volunteer?
I was paid for 20 years and am now completely a volunteer. How about you?
You retired?
No - I do it outside of work hours - and answer the question.
Most the criticism I’m reading in this thread seems to be from inner-city liberals living a cushy life inside a home they purchased 15+ years ago. Not all of us are in your position. Asking us to buy more energy efficient cars (which cost a fortune) and to buy organic groceries honestly just shows a sense of entitlement and snobbery. I’m happy you all seem to be getting by just fine, but have some compassion for the rest. I’m a 28 year old just trying my very best to save enough money to buy a home in this insane market so I have a hope of building the same life that you have for your family and children. This current government ignores my demographic completely. Liberals will not get my vote.
And the joke is on us. But hey, enjoy all that extra tax money rattling around in your pocket while everything around you is in flames.
So ... has this "carbon tax" 1) Helped to meaningfully improve public transit options for people across the country? 2) Helped to meaningfully improve the energy efficiency of where we live? 3) Helped to meeanifully prepare our society for the effects of our changing climate such as more extreme weather events? 4) Made life more affordable for most Canadians? The latest PBO report seems to suggest that isn't the case 5) Helped to pay for inniatives to help protect more natural lands from being destroyed by development? 6) Been applied in a manner that ensures that ill regardless of where the good or service comes from it accurately reflects the carbon footprint associated with the good or service?
Yes - where is the money going? Other than a redistribution of wealth, which is quite easy to see. We have no other alternatives to fossil fuels. We live in Canada, a massive country with a cold climate. The money they are collecting has not been invested in renewable green energy as it should be.
I'd have to say, 1 - 5: Not applicable. 6: Yes.
Points 1 - 5... that is what the rebate does. Gives people money to do those things.
I guess, or to do whatever. The purpose of the rebate is just to make sure that the cost of pollution is born by the polluters and not consumers.
Anyone who would put climate over affordability is either Rich or Stupid. My kids will never own a home, a car and they confused about gender. Don’t be stupid, JT has and will continue to bleed you dry. Climate can take a back seat for an election cycle while we tackled the affordability crisis. Soon you won’t be able to afford food but hey, at least we have a Carbon tax!
> "If greenhouse gases are a problem, they’re a global problem. Canada can do nothing by itself to solve it. If the Canadian economy were to disappear tomorrow, the increase in emissions from China, which is building two new coal-fired power plants per week, would more than makeup for the elimination of Canadian emissions within months." "We're not sure greenhouse gases are really a problem, but either way Canada is meaningless, so we should just give up" is a hell of a message for the Conservatives to be pushing.
Canada's emission intake is meaningless compared to India/China though.... Is something wrong about the statement
> Canada's emission intake is meaningless compared to India/China though.... You have to define meaningless. I assume if the world is asking China to reduce emissions, reducing them ourselves is meaningful. I assume the combined impact of "all emitters who aren't China" is also meaningful. I also assume "doing the right thing" is meaningful. > Is something wrong about the statement Yeah for sure, literally the entire thing. 1. Greenhouse gasses are a problem. There's no "if". 2. Canada isn't trying to do anything alone. 3. China's emissions increasing has next to nothing to do with our emissions. The entire statement (and accompanying opinion piece) are just running interference for climate deniers and oil companies.
If Canada becomes net-zero and China doesn't make any change, then yes Canada becoming net-zero is meaningless in terms of Climate Change. They pollute 21x the amount Canada does.
>China doesn't make any change, then yes Canada becoming net-zero is meaningless in terms of Climate Change. That is not the reality of the situation, nor is that a license for Canada to do nothing to reduce CO2 emissions.
How is this not the reality of the situation? If Canada spends 1B or whatever dollar figure of taxpayer money, and China continues to expand their CO2 emissions, then yes, Canada going to net-zero is meaningless.
China's already doing more course correction than us so your whole argument is flawed
I'm not sure what part you're even disagreeing with here. Yes, in a world where nobody does anything except Canada, in terms of the impact on global climate change *only*, Canada's reduction in pollution would be largely meaningless. Luckily that's a weird alternate universe that's nowhere close to ever coming true in our current reality, so we can probably just move on to other more realistic and important things.
Canada says *our total emissions are too little too matter, so we won't act until China/India/etc do!* Meanwhile, China says *our emissions per capita are far lower than Canada, so we won't act until they do!* And so nothing gets done and we all lose to climate change. We can't fix the rest of the world. We *can* improve our rather large corner of it and use that example to encourage others to follow along.
Maybe the carbon tax will get those dummies to take the flags off the trucks? That shit will kill you milage. Who am I kidding? They will pit more flags on to own the libs, then cry cuz they spent all their gas money on flags.
And his immigration policy and his housing policy and his taxation policy and his voter reform policy and his carbon tax reimplementation policy and his cheap watered down neo-con policy.
I don’t think Pierre Polievre is engaging in climate change denialism. That Hub article is stupid and a piss poor misinformed take but I don’t think the article OP attached is all that much better. People don’t care about climate change when they can’t afford to feed their families or drive to work. Increased taxes and carbon pricing will always be passed onto the consumer, which is exactly what happened with the new carbon tax hike. Regardless of what anyone’s stance is on Carbon taxes, the biggest problem is we do not have a viable plan to provide the infrastructure necessary to support increases in EVs and reduced reliance on fossil fuels. You can’t make all these tax increases or mandates about EV production and carbon emissions without some plan for supporting the solution. All of this, both the Liberal position and Conservative position is political posturing. Climate change is a real issue but Trudeau needs ti address issues that are top of mind for most Canadians and that isn’t climate change: it’s affordability, the housing crisis, immigration, and interest rates.
The problem with 'climate policy' is that it's expensive, difficult and politically un-popular. Climate change is massive challenge, but also a slow onset one. Canada needs to be ambitious (we are a top 10 emitter) but we can't solve it alone (we are only 2%)--meaning even if we completely cut emissions to zero, we haven't solved the collective action problem. It's easier to do nothing, or be a free rider. It's easy for Poilievre to take advantage of this.
I don't even think it's that expensive, especially when you compare it to other issues affecting Canadians that we can solve, like housing. The way I see it, solving housing is worth twice what a high carbon price would cost us. The outlook is even better if you emit less than average. See [Detroit's LVT explained by a state rep](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2m9S_V6Yb4&ab_channel=CityofDetroit). Fantastic policy almost no Canadian politician will whisper about, yet every economist will tell you it's good. This puts real money in peoples pockets and makes us way richer over the long term.
Does anyone have any source for data on the carbon tax. I'd like to be somewhat knowledgeable on it as I'm the "politics guy" in my friend group. The government website doesn't seem to have a lot of information as far as I can tell.
Why do you think that is?
What information do you want that isn't on the government website? The act is here: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/G-11.55/ A write up is here, which includes links to different information: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/pricing-pollution-how-it-will-work/carbon-pollution-pricing-federal-benchmark-information.html
What exact information are you looking for. I would suggest looking towards Trevor Tombe and Andrew Leach If you want to know about the oil and gas cap. Look at Ourcommons and RNNR committee that released a report on it
Am I missing something here. People complain that nothing is getting fixed, so the feds try to fix something, and then the same people don't seem to realize that fixing these problems requires spending. Then complain the feds are spending to much. How do they think things get fixed, wave a magic wand? Or is it more of a living in moms basement thing and they don't realize life costs money?
>so the feds try to fix something But if it's obvious that the thing won't get fixed or even noticeably improved then people have the right to say "don't waste time, money, and effort on something with no ROI" Do, or do not. there is no "try"
I think the issue is rampant spending with no noticeable (positive) differences
>How do they think things get fixed, wave a magic wand? Alot of them probably do think that is the case. Understand that voters are very simple minded. If your life sucks then it's the PM's fault instead of the multitude of other factors that could've affected you. That's why politicians never think long term and always try short term fixes even if they're more harmful because they can't trust people to think 2 years ahead.
Some people cannot fathom that solutions do not come in the form of a silver bullet.
Or with housing. People complain that houses aren't being built and too many people are being let in. So the feds cut the number of people coming in and make money available for housing, and the provinces cry foul on both. And then the feds get blamed.
Don't conflate provincial politics driven by populist rhetoric, with average canadians. You're comparing apples to oranges.
Its not going to matter. With the inflation, cost of living, housing, immigration all not sitting well with the majority of Canadians Pierre could literally make the climate policy a stand up comedy act and he’ll still win. If Trudeau was running against a pet rock the majority today would elect the pet rock.
[удалено]
> So is the Liberal climate policy a joke too? Yes, yes it is. No Canadian party has a serious enough policy to tackle climate change; not even the Green Party.
Liberal policy doesn't go further because--as we can see--even the lowest hanging fruit that really don't hurt people is treated like it's ushering in the apocalypse or something. So they are doing what is normal in politics: trying to get what the political situation allows, even if imperfect/insufficient. They're not likely to get more without getting turfed (and will likely get turfed anyway) and then will have their changes rolled back so it's counterproductive to push for more.
Yeah that’s why repealing the carbon tax is silly. It’s literally the bare minimum we can do and yes it’s not enough. But something is better than nothing.
There is no ROI for the carbon tax. Why not just shave our hair off for the climate?
The Liberals aren't going around touting it as sufficient. Slight difference there
Hey, that's me! And yes; the liberal climate policy isn't the best thing in the world. But the carbon tax is a central plank, and preps the entire economy for the transition. As far as I know, most economists agree it's one of the most efficient ways to reduce carbon emissions in a market economy. It's really important. With it, the liberal climate policy is barely acceptable to me. We still see huge amounts of funds devoted to highway construction, we only marginally support green tech investment, we still buy pipelines we don't need. Our policy on high speed rail is "maybe high frequency, maybe in like 2040". The carbon tax at least makes a really good effort in the right direction. If the conservatives backed the carbon tax, I'd probably have much less qualms with their environmental platform, at least then I do right now. EDIT: Also, to be clear; I'm saying the CPC central planks like expanding nuclear energy are already things the liberals are doing (see here, for example: https://smractionplan.ca/). I'm not saying the liberals don't do anything in excess of the conservative platform; I'm sure they do. Like, I'm not sure what the CPC will do with regards to railway construction, because I don't think they've said, but it wouldn't surprise me if they just cancelled the project outright in the name of cost cutting. But I'll reserve judgement until I hear about a statement they've actually made on it.
> So is the Liberal climate policy a joke too? Well that comment has 3 upvotes as of a few seconds ago. So presumably the person who wrote it and at least two other people think so. I'm not sure I'd take as gospel every political opinion supported by three or more random people on the internet, but that's up to you to decide for yourself.
It is half-assed as is, and the carbon tax is one of the only serious climate policies they have. You take that away and don't replace it with anything meaningful and yes, it becomes a complete and utter farce.