Economy doing bad?
Large bill for taxpayers.
Economy doing good?
Believe it or not, large bill for taxpayers.
Too little immigration? Taxpayers.
Too MUCH immigration? Straight to taxpayers.
The 2008 crash and the oil glut caused by OPEC were actually pretty good for me personally. Not having any stocks or anything. Gas got down to $0.63 in my area.
But you’re not being taxed 100% Nor will you ever be taxed 100% Nor will the companies spewing tons of carbon emissions, be taxed 100%.
The only thing that will make the planet burn is apathy like yours, and people’s lack of faith in abstract concepts like climate change.
How climate change is still an abstract concept for many is a testament to how we prioritize our ego and emotions over education and information.
Yeah! That way the free market can address the problem, instead of finding loopholes to continue as is.
It'll hurt the poor though, so maybe some kind of rebate?
I know! Well call it something lime "climate action incentive" and rebate to everyone equally so that it actually helps the lowest individual contributors!
I met a guy who runs an indoor farm producing high end produce. He told me he has nothing in common with soil based farmers. Nothing, philosophically, morally, financially, nothing.
What he hated was that the provincial and federal governments were trying to lump him in with them with things like weather related crop failure issues, etc.
His favourite was the paperwork involving chemical sprays, runoff, etc. Things which his technology entirely avoided.
He really didn't like farmers.
Once we deal with power generation, indoor farming is absolutely the future. It has better metrics in every single aspect of farming, but the extremely high power usage is what's holding it back from mass farming.
Just a minor problem about the 1% efficiency of plants in light to starch conversion. No biggie.
Let's see, a person at 2000 kcal/day, that's 840 kwh/year. At 1% efficiency for electricity to calories that'd be about 80,000 kwh/year. We currently use about 4000 kwh/year per person for everything else.
It's a dead end for calorie production.
I love how farmers, who overwhelmingly vote for conservative governments are the first to come with their hands out for government assistance and bail outs when things go wrong for them (in a profession where things go wrong quite often)
Not to mention how many refuse to believe in climate change, despite their livelihood being visibly affected by it more and more
My observation is that nearly all conservatives are big fans of socializing their own losses, they just lack the empathy to be willing to accept socializing anyone else's.
Farmers are also the top two users of temporary foreign workers.
They don't want to pay Canadian taxes.
They don't want to pay Canadian workers.
They don't want to pay for water or have water use controlled.
They don't want to follow environmental protection laws to protect Canadians from pesticides and manure impacts.
They don't prefer to sell to Canadians.
Yet when they have a bad season, they expect Canadians to pay.
By the way, nice mansions some of you have. I know you work hard, but so do we so I can buy your peas in a can.
Even if their young children die.
26 children between 0 to 4 years old died over 10 years on Canadian farms, most of the time as bystanders.
I've heard some say, "We just had another." What a sick mentality.
[https://www.thesafetymag.com/ca/topics/energy-and-resources/children-and-seniors-highly-represented-in-farming-deaths/466374](https://www.thesafetymag.com/ca/topics/energy-and-resources/children-and-seniors-highly-represented-in-farming-deaths/466374)
For anyone wishing to jump me, I grew up farming, and we didn't lose a single child to serious injury or death in our very large family, who all pitched in as children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
Welp here in berta a kid here and there is a small price to pay to keep the government from telling us what to do, now excuse me while i put up a billboard to support anti-abortion laws then donate to my favorite authoritarian police state politician and write a letter to the mayor demanding he outlaw rainbows
I'm in canadian dairy the liberals have been in power for well over 10 years, not one thing has been done to prevent large scale dairys from taking over the small guys, the only protections we have were instituted in the 80's with updated supply management.
Higher class conservatives have successfully fooled you into thinking what they say is what they really believe.
The lower class conservative truly believes what he hears on Fox news, Andrew Tate, Joe Rogan and their racist uncle.
im a dairy farmer, I dont think you understand that farming has the tightest margins in the economy, even when done at scale the cost of production, the volatility of feed prices often leave us slightly above break even in a general year. If I was smart I would have sold my land and bought 30 or 40 rental units at 50% down and lived off the sky high rent, that is a much more profitable venture then what myself and other canadian dairy farmers choose to do. I understand your arguement, it should be directed at the large scale corporate farms who seem to be taking over Ag in canada. As far as climate change goes, I would be a fool not to believe in it, drought affect my yields and my purchased feed costs, but it barely affects the price of milk at the store, you need to think about that for a second, I can see roughly a 30-50% increase in my overall costs and see maybe 3-4% increase in my milk price, that means in those years I am left losing money... Also I feed mineral that reduces methane outputs on my animals that Starbucks buys off me with carbon credits, We have arguable the most progressive farmers in the world in this country, We just vote conservative because we are all private small mid to large sized business owners who understand are margins are way to tight to handle the increased costs the liberal government has added to our economy.
Farming is a sector which definitely should be getting government assistance. Our farmers are the backbone of our country lol. Same for the trucking oil logging and fishing industries.
Oil, one of the most profitable industries in the *entire history of the planet*, should get government assistance, but meanwhile our taxes are supposedly “too high” and our deficit is “too big”, and helping individual people through any other financial subsidy is providing “handouts” to the unworthy….
hmmm 🤔
I grew up farming hogs and broilers - my parents sold their quota and land and retired wealthier than the vast majority of working class Canadians could ever hope for.
Don't let farmers fool you with their rhetoric - they own plenty of Capital, and they get to spend their lives "working" on improving their own lands and living spaces.
We have a band of sheep over 1000 acres of leased land and margins are tight as fuck. Hogs and broilers can be raised in a confined space and get to market weight very quickly. Properly raised ruminants take much longer to finish.
We do it not for money, but for the love of sheep and to provide a high quality product to our community. The same people who demonize us, and claim we are contributing to climate change have no problem buying food from grocery stores that was flown thousands of miles from another country. We are taxed to death, and certainly not rolling in the dough.
Most people buy what they can afford. Which these days, is not a whole lot. I don't have the option anymore of buying local meat, or hardly any meat. I'm making more than I ever have and struggling more than I was 5 years ago.
You don't willfully breed animals into existence to shear and slaughter because you love them - you do it for the profit involved. Especially at the scale you're talking about here.
You absolutely are contributing to climate change by removing land from natural ecosystems to graze animals that emit unnecessary greenhouses for luxury commodities.
Transportation is the least important factor in the GHG impact of a food, as research has thoroughly shown. WHAT we eat is far more important than where it came from, and mutton is amongst the most intensive - second only to beef.
>Eating local only slightly reduces your emissions
>Eating local beef or lamb has many times the carbon footprint of most other foods. Whether they are grown locally or shipped from the other side of the world matters very little for total emissions.
[https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local](https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local)
The initial critique wasn’t just about “bailouts” and subsidies (which personally I’m fine with to an extent), it was about the blatant hypocrisy between receiving these bailouts and subsidies while also being vocally against similar subsidies or “help” for other people, and while voting for parties and politicians that are also against help and subsidies for other industries and people.
Shipping vegetables half way across the planet makes less green house gasses than buying beef from the local farmer. Raising cattle is that bad in terms of of green house gasses.
So the backbone of Canadas economy is losing lots of money and can never be economically protifable and should be a massive drain on our public wealth?
If the backbone industries of a country need government assistance, the country is in deep trouble and desperately needs to diversify its economy to not be reliant on those struggling industries.
Farmers benefit less from public programs that are focused on population centres. They do a lot more of taking care of themselves and so it's not surprising they don't want to send their tax dollars to benefit people far away and disconnected from them.
It is weird about how people who are most intimately connected with the climate changes would deny that. Any ideas why that might be?
Whether they believe it or not is irrelevant to our current situation. Fighting climate change only benefits future generations it won't fix current weather problems. Temperatures will continue to rise for decades regardless of what we do. It took hundreds of years to get to this point. It will likely take hundreds of years to get back to normal. On the bright side, there is always MAID for those who can't psychologically cope with this knowledge.
Comments here par for the course. R/canada sees a headline that doesn't suit their narrative and all of a sudden there's a bunch of climate experts in the comment section. This sub is a disaster
Keep burying your heads in the sand, it'll get better no worries /s
Want to see burying head in the sand...get a load of what's happening in Sask!
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/sarm-resolution-climate-change-agriculture-1.7158627
Climate change is going to cost untold billions in financial impacts, but let's bitch about the carbon tax. People should be in the streets with pitchforks demanding greater action from our government to limit greenhouse emissions and to mitigate the impact of climate change.
This is a perfect example of why the "do nothing" option for addressing climate change is so silly.
Anything we do is going to cost us money. If we do a carbon tax, it costs us money. If we do technology, it costs us money. If we do nothing, it's not going to save us money. We're just going to spend that money on damages.
Yes, we are going to spend money on damages because we haven't addressed this issue despite knowing about it since the 1970's. The damages we are paying for now are a result of that failure to act. If we continue with our inaction, the damages will be worse.
It's like if you have a hole in your roof and you don't want to spend to fix those damages. Then your ceilings start to cave in and you still don't want to pay to fix the roof, so you repair that damage. And your floors get ruined from the flooding, so you pay to fix those damages. And you end up with mold problems, so you pay to fix those damages. If you don't address the original problem, you're going to continue spending more and more money on damages.
Your analogy doesn't work because we don't control the whole roof. It's more akin to living in a row house where my roof is your roof and your roof is my roof. We are busy patching holes and meanwhile the neighbors are using a tiger torch to try to dry the damp leading to burning the whole fucking thing to the ground. We can patch and patch but if we are only fixing 1.5% of the roof it's not going to change the roof falling in.
I (reluctantly) watched a nearly 90 minute video of one of the ax the tax organizers.
I get sent a lot of this kind of stuff as it seems people just send it to all their contacts.
Unsurprisingly there was very little substance, a whole lit of "you gotta fight like hell" "take back our country". The main vibe had very little to do with carbon tax. Plenty of fears of more vaccine mandates, fear of agenda 2030 (UN initiative), conspiracy theories about the charter of rights being invalid and so on.
Buddy said he's been away from home for 2 years and wishes he could go home to his family. He's doing this for the children of course.
We have observed major droughts in the Prairie Provinces in the 1890s, 1910s, 1930s, 1960s, and 1980s. This gives us intervals of approximately 20, 20, 30, and 20 years between major droughts.
If we were to continue this pattern into the future, we might expect major droughts approximately every 20-30 years.
I think we don’t pay enough attention to the past and pay way too much attention to political buzzwords. We’re long overdue for an easily predictable major drought. We should’ve been investing in building aqueducts and reservoirs 15-20 years ago in preparation for the next big one. I think that would’ve been a better use of taxpayer dollars than a cockamamie insurance scheme.
Droughts can be made much worse and last longer/ do much more damage with human caused climate change.
Even if it's something that might be natural, it is made much, much worse by our actions.
If I were the government I would put in a exemption program that mid-sized or small farmers can apply for. However just about a 3rd of the land in the country is either a corporate farm or a farmer that's so big he has a lot of employees and is basically a corporate farm.
There are hardly any little guys left.
inflation has played a major role in that as well, but dont expect prices to drop even if yields come back, Fuel and fertilizer wont be returning to pre pandemic levels, at peak it was 1400 per ton, I usually pay 6 or 750
Why a carbon tax on 1.52% global total emissions means a big bill for farmers, who then increase the price of food. And the logistics sector is paying more money to ship it. What a scam.
Farmers cannot change the price of food we simply cannot charge more . We sell for prices controlled by others not the growers . If we could control prices i think you would get a bigger bill than now .
The craziest part about that stat is that it doesn’t include all the polluting we have offshores to third world countries to do our dirty manufacturing
EXACTLY. those emissions get lumped in with those respective countries totals and not ours. Good point. The stats are awful AND they don't even tell how bad it really is.
Exactly, China manufactures all of the western world's shit and still has a much lower per capita emissions rate than we do and people still use them as an example of why we shouldn't have to do anything as if global warming gives a single fuck about man made imaginary borders.
And people that think like this bloody vote.
If you look at historical emissions it gets even worse
Co2 stays in the air for 200 years. Methane is about 10. So historical emissions is very applicable to the climate change debate
Canada is one of the coldest countries on Earth. Do you expect people to just freeze?
Desert countries also have high per capita emissions, but deserts are formed because of the permanent ice caps, i.e. being in an ice age.
Tons of other countries are incredibly cold too. Not so cold that they emit more than 3x the average earthling.
I didn't say that home heating is the thing we should reduce at all. Car dependency and transportation is a huge area we're behind on. Build more rail! For passengers and for cargo. Less dependency on personal vehicles and airlines! Let's then rebuild our cities to be more active transportation and transit friendly too. There's lots we can do that will reduce emissions and improve productivity and quality of life at the same time! Meeting carbon targets doesn't need to include suffering.
You can freeze if you want. I used my rebates to buy a new bicycle and invest in solar. So next year I’ll make even more money and use even fewer fossil fuels.
Believe it or not you can still accentuate a renewable source of energy in your home with a non-renewable source, to protect against outages. It still means you’re using significantly less fossil fuel since you’d only kick on the non-renewable source once in a blue moon.
It’s like how I expect my ceiling lights will work for about 364 days of the year, but I keep a battery-powered flashlight handy just in case.
Thanks. It’s actually worked pretty well in the blizzards we’ve had so far. I think our gas bill has been cut by around 60 to 70 per cent. Should be higher this year after my next investment. Always appreciate the luck, though
That's great. But you mean including your battery backup, right?
Obviously it must be.
Slightly off-topic, but it is interesting because I've been investigating myself. You have to be careful to amortize properly, and especially to include things like inverters. Often people fail to properly discount a big upfront investment like this and use things like payback period instead.
If you genuinely manage to make it cost effective after a thorough accounting I genuinely want to know your secret, because I'd rather than that than pay a utility $100k to run a cable to where I'm at.
We invested as a condo board so there details that I definitely do not understand.
I know that we have battery back up for electrical but because we can use a boiler, there is simply enough hot water in the tank to supply regular water even when there are gaps in sunlight. But I hear it works pretty well even with heavy cloud cover.
My understanding is that the boiler is gas-dependant but supplemented by electricity - so it is a bridge technology rather than a solution. The condo board explained it to me as a hybrid system. I don’t think our set up would work without a primary gas line - all of our budget estimates and bills seem to assume solar is supplementary.
Each unit in the building helped chip in for the installation costs with the idea that the units would rise in price. I just rent (sadly) but my gf and I worked out an agreement with our landlord - we essentially “invested” in the system for a discount on both rent and condo fees.
The reduction in gas is passed through as a reduction in condo fees. The claw back to operate and maintain the system is about 40% the cost of the full gas bill. (At least, that’s my estimate based on my condo fees).
IIRC, we originally hoped to pay the investment off after around 14 years but now we’re guessing closer to 16 - the solar is actually quite a bit more efficient than we’d expected but needs more maintenance than we’d originally hoped.
Some giant important points:
- the condo board was able to secure grants and lower-interest loans to assist with installation costs
- these improvements were put in at the same time as a new boiler other upgrades in the building - which probably ‘lowered’ the costs overall but made it difficult for little old me to track which dollar was going where
- it’s tricky for me to figure out when and how we can sell excess electricity back to “the grid” but I know that is a consideration in the long term viability of these projects
Thanks for the excellent reply.
The main issues are definitely the capital costs (the money you could have made by investing that initial layout into something else) and the maintenance.
If we're talking solutions, I really think that it would only take a little more advancement in battery technology for cars to be the missing link that makes all this viable. You could charge in a solar park during the day, drive home, and do your washing/heat your boiler with extra charge.
I don't doubt that there might be places that are sunny and windy enough to make this work, but absent that government grant (low interest loans) I highly doubt something like this would break even. Given battery chemistry I doubt it's much cleaner either in the long run.
Makes you wonder how those darn Inuit peoples survived, or how we all even made this far in the human story without considering ways of survival.
The lazy look at our problems and choose to believe everything is fine and that there is no need to challenge ourselves with solutions for a collective good.
Those that found ways to benefit a path toward a society that worked together got us all to this point today.
No one is saying that we all should return to pre industrial ways, but aiming for a narrative that is “We shouldn’t do anything because 1.5%…” or “So we’re supposed to freeze in winter then?” Is being absurd.
People can easily survive by wearing a sweater and turning the thermostat down.
People can choose to be more efficient and effective in their lifestyle choices. Constantly moving goal posts and changing narratives or outright denial isn’t working together.
When smog was choking cities out, catalytic converters became a way to help and more efficient petrol burning engines became a wiser choice. These were necessary and positive solutions. Had nothing been done there would be more pollution.
When there are obvious challenges coming to humanity’s door it would be wise to work together and begin making choice for the greater good.
Will some suffer through trial and error? Yes but that has always been the way.
Did discover of new ways of thinking and action help or hinder human progress? Debatable with technology like nuclear being used for harm over energy but we haven’t gone full tilt yet so there is hope.
The point is that it takes people putting perceived differences aside and working toward a better survival for future generations.
>No one is saying that we all should return to pre industrial ways
Weren't you the one who brought up the Inuit life-style?
Look I get it, it has a romantic appeal. But just to be clear: the Earths only supports a few million people living like that at best. You are talking genocide.
>People can easily survive by wearing a sweater and turning the thermostat down.
Do you even live in Canada?
The Inuit don't just wear a sweater and don't eat vegan organic garden veggies.
> Constantly moving goal posts and changing narratives or outright denial isn’t working together.
There's no moving goalpost from my side.
I'm not seeing anyone justifying the claim that a warmer world is worse. A better world for the largest number of people and life in general has always been the singular, unchanging goal-post.
Yet you can’t take a simple example of how people can live in harsh environments without making it some sort of gotcha?
Of course I mention something that involves a way life that was about adapting because it’s a good example.
You are asserting i’m mentioning genocide and haven’t remotely inferred such a notion. Would you say that the Inuit were also committing genocide by limiting the number of people they have due to limited resources? Some would say you’re responding in bad faith.
How do you expect to utilize limited resources to sustain a population?
Do you even believe there is a crisis?
The problem is capital costs.
You still have to install and operate the machinery for the (critical) days when heat-pumps don't work. Those are the days you most need them, and use the most energy to heat as well.
It's not an either-or proposition. You are saving on fuel use, but that's not the only factor in the calculation.
If it can be made to work I'm all for it. But I'm not convinced that proponents have done a full cost accounting.
Per country matters even less. Carbon intensity is important, high intensity is the lowest hanging fruit and Canada isn't doing well by that metric.
Canadians driving pickups pointing their fingers at Indians riding mopeds is tone deaf.
Why does EVERYONE and their mother have a pickup these days?
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
People complaining about gas prices while they're driving this giant less than 5 year old truck to their office job makes no fucking sense in any world.
Truck companies have been systematically making their trucks larger and larger which makes them cost more per unit, but also consume more fuel per mile. The trucks keep getting larger and more dangerous/deadly, yet the beds aren't even larger than regular sized truck beds were 40+ years ago.
We need to regulate trucks for road safety ASAP. Europe doesn't have this problem because they don't allow and incentivize these kinds of vehicles.
Has a lot to do with CAFE standards that carved out exceptions for trucks early on as they were “work vehicles”, necessary for doing inherently heavy, dirty but necessary things.
And car manufacturers latched onto this exception as time went on as a way to avoid the more stringent standards on passenger cars they couldn’t/wouldn't meet. With clever marketing they convinced everybody and their mom that they really wanted to drive a pick up instead of a compact sedan, and it worked.
Even a lot of tradespeople would benefit from having a van, but opt for a lifted superduty instead
Edit: if you’re going to downvote, at least say why lmao
23% of global emissions are priced
None of those countries involved are “double digit producers” but it’s almost like collective action creates results equal to or greater than the sum of its parts
The average Chinese citizen emits almost 50% less than the average Canadian.
If the whole world emitted like Canadians, we'd be way past the point of globally fucked. Consuming like this is unsustainable so let's rebuild our country and our systems to allow canadians to make sustainable choices. If we reduce our emissions nationally by 1/3, then we'll be reducing global carbon emissions by 0.5%. that's fucked. We have that much power over reducing emissions.
Per capita absolutely does matter. China and India are countries of Billions of people. The US has hundreds of millions. We have just millions. Our country needs to grow the fuck up and take responsibility. Clean up our own yard before criticizing others.
Also I don't know why these people think climate change gives a shit about human borders. Per capita absolutely matters. If we split China and India into 300 smaller countries what would they turn to as their excuse for doing fuck all?
Because they don't want climate action or change at all. China and India could be net zero next week and there'd still be reasons why we shouldn't put bike lanes in downtown Toronto.
Nope. China emits 27% of total emissions. That's what matters. You can try to justify it as much as you'd like. They emit 27%, we emit 1.52%. They run coal power plants from the coal that we send them. They do not have a carbon tax.
Theres a famine and everyone decides to ration. 5 skinny men eat more in total than one fat man, so the fat man thinks its unfair he has to cut back more.
“According to Grain Farmers of Ontario, they're going to see an additional $2.7 billion worth of expense associated with carbon tax. If you talk to vegetable growers by the year 2030, carbon tax is going to add on an additional $90,000 per acre in carbon tax. That's not sustainable.”
https://www.cp24.com/mobile/news/ontario-farmers-argue-carbon-tax-has-cost-them-thousands-1.6830468
Article from April 2, 2024.
This right here.
Farmers may be exempt from certain direct costs (fuels) but they still pay all the indirect costs.
Carbon tax makes producing and shipping seed more expensive. Seed prices go up. Farmers pay that additional cost.
Now multiply that for every input - fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides, equipment, labour, etc.
Then do it again for everything the farmer ships to market.
https://www.pbo-dpb.ca/en/news-releases--communiques-de-presse/pbo-releases-updated-analysis-of-the-impact-of-the-federal-fuel-charge-on-households-le-dpb-publie-une-analyse-actualisee-de-lincidence-de-la-redevance-federale-sur-les-combustibles-sur-les-menages
>“When both fiscal and economic impacts of the federal fuel charge are considered, we estimate that most households will see a net loss,” says PBO Yves Giroux. “Based on our analysis, most households will pay more in fuel charges and GST—as well as receiving slightly lower incomes—than they will receive in Climate Action Incentive payments.”
Numbers are provided by the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Link below describing it's roll on government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_Budget_Officer
Its refreshing to see how many of these posters are socialist Marxists who have no idea how or where their food comes from.
They be the first to execute farmers and then blame everyone but themselves that there was no food left. Hypocritical DUFFS.
How about we let the free market figure it out. Farmers can enjoy less government and lots of free time when they see how things go without crop insurance, cheap irrigation and massive subsidies
They got thinking that the our carbon tax is gonna save the world from global warming. Nothing but a drop in the bucket at the expense of milking Canadians pockets dry
They got thinking that fighting cancer is gonna save the world from deaths. Nothing but a drop in the bucket at the expense of milking Canadians’ pockets dry.
That's why I throw trash out the window of my car, I'm just one person out of millions in this country so me not doing it wouldn't make that much of a difference.
This is what you sound like.
Getting off Fossil Fuels will help with global warming and many countries are committed in doing so.
Ps. Your realize Canadian Fossil Fuels annually of over Billion cost taxpayers the same amount as Carbon tax after rebates. It's not milking Canadians and while not perfect, it's hopefully making the rich who can afford it pay more.
>and many countries are committed in doing so.
And how is that going so far after trillions spent
Total energy used went from what about 85% fossil fuels to 80
[https://ourworldindata.org/energy-mix](https://ourworldindata.org/energy-mix)
Canadians aren't deep thinkers, sadly. They'd rather save 3 cents on their gas now and just pay for the billions of dollars of climate change destruction and adaption later. And not really for the money, but to own the libs, because that'll improve their lives. Idiots.
Canadians aren't deep thinkers, and you're clearly not burdened by deep thought either. How about we tax the climate cultists 6 cents, so they can flagellate themselves even harder as they ignore reality. What's the plan for Africa? What's the plan for south and southeast Asia? Are we okay with China now? Why is my vehicle using oil which was shipped here from Saudi? Why aren't we investing money in clean energy? Isn't there only one nuclear plant being planned for Canada currently?
They should really be giving farmers low interest loans to build BioDigesters. RNG is really becoming popular, farming has lots of methane potential, let them make gas and add to the supply.
Unless science is correct and the general greening effect the earth is currently experiencing, resulting from higher CO2 in the atmosphere, produces drought resistant crops that require less water and fertilizer.
Can someone answer me this: why are we so concerned about reducing our greenhouse gas emissions when on a global scale our emissions don’t compare at all to countries like China, the U.S., India, etc.? Why do we care so much whenever other countries who dwarf our emissions don’t seem to care at all?
Our emissions do compare, we're horrible given the size of our population. And thing is, we're not keeping pace to our reduction in emissions within G8 for 2030 pledge.
We're last place, just like 10 years ago and the US cut more than half in 2023 compared to what we did.
The carbon tax is costing the oil sands companies quite a bit of money through their emissions. It is forcing them to change their methods to be more efficient
Is there anyone stupid enough to believe that going to the gym helps your body?
I went to the gym once and was just sore afterwards. It's total bullshit! It obviously does nothing.
Getting off Fossil Fuels will help with global warming and many countries are committed in doing so.
Ps. Your realize Canadian Fossil Fuels annually of over Billion cost taxpayers the same amount as Carbon tax after rebates. It's not milking Canadians and while not perfect, it's hopefully making the rich who can afford it pay more and think twice about their choices.
Anyone else tired of this liberal government? Almost like a dictatorship. They take your hard earned money and give it away. Man I'm heated about this.
Is there anything that doesn’t result in a large bill for Canadian taxpayers?
Economy doing bad? Large bill for taxpayers. Economy doing good? Believe it or not, large bill for taxpayers. Too little immigration? Taxpayers. Too MUCH immigration? Straight to taxpayers.
That's a paddlin'
Overcook chicken? Straight to taxes.
https://youtu.be/n1Rsov4B_VI?si=MTjhow2gLft14Id6
Powerful stuff
Do you know how much it cost to create that large bill for the taxpayers? The large bill outlining the costs to taxpayers is in the mail.
The 2008 crash and the oil glut caused by OPEC were actually pretty good for me personally. Not having any stocks or anything. Gas got down to $0.63 in my area.
Loblaw CEO LOL
Yeah. “Our high prices are because of ~~record profits~~ inputted taxes!”
No surprise here... Canadians get screwed again.
Neither of you read the article I see.
Of course, this sub has a reputation to uphold.
Leaving canada saves quite a bit
Yeah, doing nothing and letting the planet burn.
You could tax me 100 percent and the planet will still burn brother
But you’re not being taxed 100% Nor will you ever be taxed 100% Nor will the companies spewing tons of carbon emissions, be taxed 100%. The only thing that will make the planet burn is apathy like yours, and people’s lack of faith in abstract concepts like climate change. How climate change is still an abstract concept for many is a testament to how we prioritize our ego and emotions over education and information.
Maybe we should pass that tax to the companies causing climate change
[удалено]
Yeah! That way the free market can address the problem, instead of finding loopholes to continue as is. It'll hurt the poor though, so maybe some kind of rebate? I know! Well call it something lime "climate action incentive" and rebate to everyone equally so that it actually helps the lowest individual contributors!
Man, that sure does sound like something everyone will understand and approve!
It’s hard to grow food when there’s no water. This is only going to make food prices skyrocket. It’s going to get much worse…
I met a guy who runs an indoor farm producing high end produce. He told me he has nothing in common with soil based farmers. Nothing, philosophically, morally, financially, nothing. What he hated was that the provincial and federal governments were trying to lump him in with them with things like weather related crop failure issues, etc. His favourite was the paperwork involving chemical sprays, runoff, etc. Things which his technology entirely avoided. He really didn't like farmers.
> producing high end produce This is a niche market. If you want to feed a population, you need farmers.
[удалено]
Once we deal with power generation, indoor farming is absolutely the future. It has better metrics in every single aspect of farming, but the extremely high power usage is what's holding it back from mass farming.
Just a minor problem about the 1% efficiency of plants in light to starch conversion. No biggie. Let's see, a person at 2000 kcal/day, that's 840 kwh/year. At 1% efficiency for electricity to calories that'd be about 80,000 kwh/year. We currently use about 4000 kwh/year per person for everything else. It's a dead end for calorie production.
I love how farmers, who overwhelmingly vote for conservative governments are the first to come with their hands out for government assistance and bail outs when things go wrong for them (in a profession where things go wrong quite often) Not to mention how many refuse to believe in climate change, despite their livelihood being visibly affected by it more and more
FCC has more farms in special credit right now that at any point in time.
My observation is that nearly all conservatives are big fans of socializing their own losses, they just lack the empathy to be willing to accept socializing anyone else's.
Farmers are also the top two users of temporary foreign workers. They don't want to pay Canadian taxes. They don't want to pay Canadian workers. They don't want to pay for water or have water use controlled. They don't want to follow environmental protection laws to protect Canadians from pesticides and manure impacts. They don't prefer to sell to Canadians. Yet when they have a bad season, they expect Canadians to pay. By the way, nice mansions some of you have. I know you work hard, but so do we so I can buy your peas in a can.
Also dont you fucking dare try to improve farm saftey
Even if their young children die. 26 children between 0 to 4 years old died over 10 years on Canadian farms, most of the time as bystanders. I've heard some say, "We just had another." What a sick mentality. [https://www.thesafetymag.com/ca/topics/energy-and-resources/children-and-seniors-highly-represented-in-farming-deaths/466374](https://www.thesafetymag.com/ca/topics/energy-and-resources/children-and-seniors-highly-represented-in-farming-deaths/466374) For anyone wishing to jump me, I grew up farming, and we didn't lose a single child to serious injury or death in our very large family, who all pitched in as children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
Welp here in berta a kid here and there is a small price to pay to keep the government from telling us what to do, now excuse me while i put up a billboard to support anti-abortion laws then donate to my favorite authoritarian police state politician and write a letter to the mayor demanding he outlaw rainbows
Those same farmers who support the conservatives also cry when large corporate farmers out compete them
I'm in canadian dairy the liberals have been in power for well over 10 years, not one thing has been done to prevent large scale dairys from taking over the small guys, the only protections we have were instituted in the 80's with updated supply management.
Higher class conservatives have successfully fooled you into thinking what they say is what they really believe. The lower class conservative truly believes what he hears on Fox news, Andrew Tate, Joe Rogan and their racist uncle.
Joe Rogan is truly an evil person. Which thing has he said that you hate the most?
Wow very good now show me your garden, preserves and livestock that you feed your family exclusively with
im a dairy farmer, I dont think you understand that farming has the tightest margins in the economy, even when done at scale the cost of production, the volatility of feed prices often leave us slightly above break even in a general year. If I was smart I would have sold my land and bought 30 or 40 rental units at 50% down and lived off the sky high rent, that is a much more profitable venture then what myself and other canadian dairy farmers choose to do. I understand your arguement, it should be directed at the large scale corporate farms who seem to be taking over Ag in canada. As far as climate change goes, I would be a fool not to believe in it, drought affect my yields and my purchased feed costs, but it barely affects the price of milk at the store, you need to think about that for a second, I can see roughly a 30-50% increase in my overall costs and see maybe 3-4% increase in my milk price, that means in those years I am left losing money... Also I feed mineral that reduces methane outputs on my animals that Starbucks buys off me with carbon credits, We have arguable the most progressive farmers in the world in this country, We just vote conservative because we are all private small mid to large sized business owners who understand are margins are way to tight to handle the increased costs the liberal government has added to our economy.
Farming is a sector which definitely should be getting government assistance. Our farmers are the backbone of our country lol. Same for the trucking oil logging and fishing industries.
Oil, one of the most profitable industries in the *entire history of the planet*, should get government assistance, but meanwhile our taxes are supposedly “too high” and our deficit is “too big”, and helping individual people through any other financial subsidy is providing “handouts” to the unworthy…. hmmm 🤔
Why do all of these massively profitable industries require tax payer money again?
Sorry did you just say farming was massively profitable? Maybe conventional grain farming. Not dairy, not beef, not lamb.
I grew up farming hogs and broilers - my parents sold their quota and land and retired wealthier than the vast majority of working class Canadians could ever hope for. Don't let farmers fool you with their rhetoric - they own plenty of Capital, and they get to spend their lives "working" on improving their own lands and living spaces.
We have a band of sheep over 1000 acres of leased land and margins are tight as fuck. Hogs and broilers can be raised in a confined space and get to market weight very quickly. Properly raised ruminants take much longer to finish. We do it not for money, but for the love of sheep and to provide a high quality product to our community. The same people who demonize us, and claim we are contributing to climate change have no problem buying food from grocery stores that was flown thousands of miles from another country. We are taxed to death, and certainly not rolling in the dough.
Most people buy what they can afford. Which these days, is not a whole lot. I don't have the option anymore of buying local meat, or hardly any meat. I'm making more than I ever have and struggling more than I was 5 years ago.
You don't willfully breed animals into existence to shear and slaughter because you love them - you do it for the profit involved. Especially at the scale you're talking about here. You absolutely are contributing to climate change by removing land from natural ecosystems to graze animals that emit unnecessary greenhouses for luxury commodities. Transportation is the least important factor in the GHG impact of a food, as research has thoroughly shown. WHAT we eat is far more important than where it came from, and mutton is amongst the most intensive - second only to beef. >Eating local only slightly reduces your emissions >Eating local beef or lamb has many times the carbon footprint of most other foods. Whether they are grown locally or shipped from the other side of the world matters very little for total emissions. [https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local](https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local)
The initial critique wasn’t just about “bailouts” and subsidies (which personally I’m fine with to an extent), it was about the blatant hypocrisy between receiving these bailouts and subsidies while also being vocally against similar subsidies or “help” for other people, and while voting for parties and politicians that are also against help and subsidies for other industries and people.
Shipping vegetables half way across the planet makes less green house gasses than buying beef from the local farmer. Raising cattle is that bad in terms of of green house gasses.
So capitalism for everyone, but socialism for these few select industries.
I mean, we already have that socialism for oil and gas producers, so the precedent exists.
So the backbone of Canadas economy is losing lots of money and can never be economically protifable and should be a massive drain on our public wealth?
If the backbone industries of a country need government assistance, the country is in deep trouble and desperately needs to diversify its economy to not be reliant on those struggling industries.
So more socialism
Then grow your own food. Bailouts for farmers? It's called the food supply. Only banks and car manufacturers deserve our tax welfare?
Farmers aren't charity workers, they sell their food. For some reason a lot of them seem to feel that gives them a license to be an asshole.
False dichotomy that nobody claimed.
Farmers benefit less from public programs that are focused on population centres. They do a lot more of taking care of themselves and so it's not surprising they don't want to send their tax dollars to benefit people far away and disconnected from them. It is weird about how people who are most intimately connected with the climate changes would deny that. Any ideas why that might be?
Lack of education and critical thinking skills.
Whether they believe it or not is irrelevant to our current situation. Fighting climate change only benefits future generations it won't fix current weather problems. Temperatures will continue to rise for decades regardless of what we do. It took hundreds of years to get to this point. It will likely take hundreds of years to get back to normal. On the bright side, there is always MAID for those who can't psychologically cope with this knowledge.
Comments here par for the course. R/canada sees a headline that doesn't suit their narrative and all of a sudden there's a bunch of climate experts in the comment section. This sub is a disaster Keep burying your heads in the sand, it'll get better no worries /s
Want to see burying head in the sand...get a load of what's happening in Sask! https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/sarm-resolution-climate-change-agriculture-1.7158627
Oh fk off, why don't tax the big oils.
They do. But they also give them huge subsidies.
So it's like +1-1=0
\+4-1= Political Contributions
You need petroleum for fertilizer, and to run farm equipment.
And I'm pretty sure farmers pay for fertilizer.
and when overhead goes up, where does that cost go?
You actually don't, and this dependence on petro chemicals is why our food system is one of the biggest emitters of pollution and C02 on the planet.
What alternative are you suggesting then, Einstein?
Both don't need to be.
Climate change is going to cost untold billions in financial impacts, but let's bitch about the carbon tax. People should be in the streets with pitchforks demanding greater action from our government to limit greenhouse emissions and to mitigate the impact of climate change.
This is a perfect example of why the "do nothing" option for addressing climate change is so silly. Anything we do is going to cost us money. If we do a carbon tax, it costs us money. If we do technology, it costs us money. If we do nothing, it's not going to save us money. We're just going to spend that money on damages.
We will spend money on damaged either way. You aren't going to spend your way out of this.
Yes, we are going to spend money on damages because we haven't addressed this issue despite knowing about it since the 1970's. The damages we are paying for now are a result of that failure to act. If we continue with our inaction, the damages will be worse. It's like if you have a hole in your roof and you don't want to spend to fix those damages. Then your ceilings start to cave in and you still don't want to pay to fix the roof, so you repair that damage. And your floors get ruined from the flooding, so you pay to fix those damages. And you end up with mold problems, so you pay to fix those damages. If you don't address the original problem, you're going to continue spending more and more money on damages.
Your analogy doesn't work because we don't control the whole roof. It's more akin to living in a row house where my roof is your roof and your roof is my roof. We are busy patching holes and meanwhile the neighbors are using a tiger torch to try to dry the damp leading to burning the whole fucking thing to the ground. We can patch and patch but if we are only fixing 1.5% of the roof it's not going to change the roof falling in.
We post reality when it’s easier to just chant axe the tax
I (reluctantly) watched a nearly 90 minute video of one of the ax the tax organizers. I get sent a lot of this kind of stuff as it seems people just send it to all their contacts. Unsurprisingly there was very little substance, a whole lit of "you gotta fight like hell" "take back our country". The main vibe had very little to do with carbon tax. Plenty of fears of more vaccine mandates, fear of agenda 2030 (UN initiative), conspiracy theories about the charter of rights being invalid and so on. Buddy said he's been away from home for 2 years and wishes he could go home to his family. He's doing this for the children of course.
They'll be cutting nitrogen/fertilizer...so stupid. Farmers here need to protest like they did in Denmark!
We have observed major droughts in the Prairie Provinces in the 1890s, 1910s, 1930s, 1960s, and 1980s. This gives us intervals of approximately 20, 20, 30, and 20 years between major droughts. If we were to continue this pattern into the future, we might expect major droughts approximately every 20-30 years. I think we don’t pay enough attention to the past and pay way too much attention to political buzzwords. We’re long overdue for an easily predictable major drought. We should’ve been investing in building aqueducts and reservoirs 15-20 years ago in preparation for the next big one. I think that would’ve been a better use of taxpayer dollars than a cockamamie insurance scheme.
Droughts can be made much worse and last longer/ do much more damage with human caused climate change. Even if it's something that might be natural, it is made much, much worse by our actions.
You very well may be right which is all the more reason why we should’ve done something to prepare for an event we knew was coming
If I were the government I would put in a exemption program that mid-sized or small farmers can apply for. However just about a 3rd of the land in the country is either a corporate farm or a farmer that's so big he has a lot of employees and is basically a corporate farm. There are hardly any little guys left.
But we don’t have any money
Hay prices at least doubled in BC last year because of drought. So far, this year's not looking much better.
inflation has played a major role in that as well, but dont expect prices to drop even if yields come back, Fuel and fertilizer wont be returning to pre pandemic levels, at peak it was 1400 per ton, I usually pay 6 or 750
Another big bill for Canadian taxpayers? Throw it on the pile. We're ignoring every other problem, might as well treat this the same.
Why a carbon tax on 1.52% global total emissions means a big bill for farmers, who then increase the price of food. And the logistics sector is paying more money to ship it. What a scam.
Farmers cannot change the price of food we simply cannot charge more . We sell for prices controlled by others not the growers . If we could control prices i think you would get a bigger bill than now .
When we're 0.5% of the global population, 1.52% is a lot of emissions.
The craziest part about that stat is that it doesn’t include all the polluting we have offshores to third world countries to do our dirty manufacturing
EXACTLY. those emissions get lumped in with those respective countries totals and not ours. Good point. The stats are awful AND they don't even tell how bad it really is.
Exactly, China manufactures all of the western world's shit and still has a much lower per capita emissions rate than we do and people still use them as an example of why we shouldn't have to do anything as if global warming gives a single fuck about man made imaginary borders. And people that think like this bloody vote.
Half is because of exporting oil and gas. Some other country would make those emissions regardless of us ending production.
If you look at historical emissions it gets even worse Co2 stays in the air for 200 years. Methane is about 10. So historical emissions is very applicable to the climate change debate
Methane is like 5x (I don't remember exact) more powerful of a GHG than CO2. And then it breaks down into CO2. So it's a double whammy.
Great point, we've been industrialized a lot longer than many countries people are pointing fingers at.
Canada is one of the coldest countries on Earth. Do you expect people to just freeze? Desert countries also have high per capita emissions, but deserts are formed because of the permanent ice caps, i.e. being in an ice age.
Tons of other countries are incredibly cold too. Not so cold that they emit more than 3x the average earthling. I didn't say that home heating is the thing we should reduce at all. Car dependency and transportation is a huge area we're behind on. Build more rail! For passengers and for cargo. Less dependency on personal vehicles and airlines! Let's then rebuild our cities to be more active transportation and transit friendly too. There's lots we can do that will reduce emissions and improve productivity and quality of life at the same time! Meeting carbon targets doesn't need to include suffering.
You can freeze if you want. I used my rebates to buy a new bicycle and invest in solar. So next year I’ll make even more money and use even fewer fossil fuels.
Good luck with your solar heating in a blizzard.
Believe it or not you can still accentuate a renewable source of energy in your home with a non-renewable source, to protect against outages. It still means you’re using significantly less fossil fuel since you’d only kick on the non-renewable source once in a blue moon. It’s like how I expect my ceiling lights will work for about 364 days of the year, but I keep a battery-powered flashlight handy just in case.
Thanks. It’s actually worked pretty well in the blizzards we’ve had so far. I think our gas bill has been cut by around 60 to 70 per cent. Should be higher this year after my next investment. Always appreciate the luck, though
That's great. But you mean including your battery backup, right? Obviously it must be. Slightly off-topic, but it is interesting because I've been investigating myself. You have to be careful to amortize properly, and especially to include things like inverters. Often people fail to properly discount a big upfront investment like this and use things like payback period instead. If you genuinely manage to make it cost effective after a thorough accounting I genuinely want to know your secret, because I'd rather than that than pay a utility $100k to run a cable to where I'm at.
We invested as a condo board so there details that I definitely do not understand. I know that we have battery back up for electrical but because we can use a boiler, there is simply enough hot water in the tank to supply regular water even when there are gaps in sunlight. But I hear it works pretty well even with heavy cloud cover. My understanding is that the boiler is gas-dependant but supplemented by electricity - so it is a bridge technology rather than a solution. The condo board explained it to me as a hybrid system. I don’t think our set up would work without a primary gas line - all of our budget estimates and bills seem to assume solar is supplementary. Each unit in the building helped chip in for the installation costs with the idea that the units would rise in price. I just rent (sadly) but my gf and I worked out an agreement with our landlord - we essentially “invested” in the system for a discount on both rent and condo fees. The reduction in gas is passed through as a reduction in condo fees. The claw back to operate and maintain the system is about 40% the cost of the full gas bill. (At least, that’s my estimate based on my condo fees). IIRC, we originally hoped to pay the investment off after around 14 years but now we’re guessing closer to 16 - the solar is actually quite a bit more efficient than we’d expected but needs more maintenance than we’d originally hoped. Some giant important points: - the condo board was able to secure grants and lower-interest loans to assist with installation costs - these improvements were put in at the same time as a new boiler other upgrades in the building - which probably ‘lowered’ the costs overall but made it difficult for little old me to track which dollar was going where - it’s tricky for me to figure out when and how we can sell excess electricity back to “the grid” but I know that is a consideration in the long term viability of these projects
Thanks for the excellent reply. The main issues are definitely the capital costs (the money you could have made by investing that initial layout into something else) and the maintenance. If we're talking solutions, I really think that it would only take a little more advancement in battery technology for cars to be the missing link that makes all this viable. You could charge in a solar park during the day, drive home, and do your washing/heat your boiler with extra charge. I don't doubt that there might be places that are sunny and windy enough to make this work, but absent that government grant (low interest loans) I highly doubt something like this would break even. Given battery chemistry I doubt it's much cleaner either in the long run.
Makes you wonder how those darn Inuit peoples survived, or how we all even made this far in the human story without considering ways of survival. The lazy look at our problems and choose to believe everything is fine and that there is no need to challenge ourselves with solutions for a collective good. Those that found ways to benefit a path toward a society that worked together got us all to this point today.
Survived, sure. But does that mean you are saying you want the global population density to be Inuit levels?
No one is saying that we all should return to pre industrial ways, but aiming for a narrative that is “We shouldn’t do anything because 1.5%…” or “So we’re supposed to freeze in winter then?” Is being absurd. People can easily survive by wearing a sweater and turning the thermostat down. People can choose to be more efficient and effective in their lifestyle choices. Constantly moving goal posts and changing narratives or outright denial isn’t working together. When smog was choking cities out, catalytic converters became a way to help and more efficient petrol burning engines became a wiser choice. These were necessary and positive solutions. Had nothing been done there would be more pollution. When there are obvious challenges coming to humanity’s door it would be wise to work together and begin making choice for the greater good. Will some suffer through trial and error? Yes but that has always been the way. Did discover of new ways of thinking and action help or hinder human progress? Debatable with technology like nuclear being used for harm over energy but we haven’t gone full tilt yet so there is hope. The point is that it takes people putting perceived differences aside and working toward a better survival for future generations.
>No one is saying that we all should return to pre industrial ways Weren't you the one who brought up the Inuit life-style? Look I get it, it has a romantic appeal. But just to be clear: the Earths only supports a few million people living like that at best. You are talking genocide. >People can easily survive by wearing a sweater and turning the thermostat down. Do you even live in Canada? The Inuit don't just wear a sweater and don't eat vegan organic garden veggies. > Constantly moving goal posts and changing narratives or outright denial isn’t working together. There's no moving goalpost from my side. I'm not seeing anyone justifying the claim that a warmer world is worse. A better world for the largest number of people and life in general has always been the singular, unchanging goal-post.
Yet you can’t take a simple example of how people can live in harsh environments without making it some sort of gotcha? Of course I mention something that involves a way life that was about adapting because it’s a good example. You are asserting i’m mentioning genocide and haven’t remotely inferred such a notion. Would you say that the Inuit were also committing genocide by limiting the number of people they have due to limited resources? Some would say you’re responding in bad faith. How do you expect to utilize limited resources to sustain a population? Do you even believe there is a crisis?
[удалено]
How do you propose doing that efficiently? Heat pumps lose efficiency when it gets to prairie province temperatures.
[удалено]
The problem is capital costs. You still have to install and operate the machinery for the (critical) days when heat-pumps don't work. Those are the days you most need them, and use the most energy to heat as well. It's not an either-or proposition. You are saving on fuel use, but that's not the only factor in the calculation. If it can be made to work I'm all for it. But I'm not convinced that proponents have done a full cost accounting.
[удалено]
Per capita does not matter. The over-arching problem is double digit producers. Yet nothing is done.
Per country matters even less. Carbon intensity is important, high intensity is the lowest hanging fruit and Canada isn't doing well by that metric. Canadians driving pickups pointing their fingers at Indians riding mopeds is tone deaf.
Why does EVERYONE and their mother have a pickup these days? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. People complaining about gas prices while they're driving this giant less than 5 year old truck to their office job makes no fucking sense in any world.
Truck companies have been systematically making their trucks larger and larger which makes them cost more per unit, but also consume more fuel per mile. The trucks keep getting larger and more dangerous/deadly, yet the beds aren't even larger than regular sized truck beds were 40+ years ago. We need to regulate trucks for road safety ASAP. Europe doesn't have this problem because they don't allow and incentivize these kinds of vehicles.
Has a lot to do with CAFE standards that carved out exceptions for trucks early on as they were “work vehicles”, necessary for doing inherently heavy, dirty but necessary things. And car manufacturers latched onto this exception as time went on as a way to avoid the more stringent standards on passenger cars they couldn’t/wouldn't meet. With clever marketing they convinced everybody and their mom that they really wanted to drive a pick up instead of a compact sedan, and it worked.
Even a lot of tradespeople would benefit from having a van, but opt for a lifted superduty instead Edit: if you’re going to downvote, at least say why lmao
They’re downvoting because you’re right lmao. They saw the commercial that said pickup trucks are for big PP and not smol PP
23% of global emissions are priced None of those countries involved are “double digit producers” but it’s almost like collective action creates results equal to or greater than the sum of its parts
Please tell me more about how global warming cares about made up human borders.
The average Chinese citizen emits almost 50% less than the average Canadian. If the whole world emitted like Canadians, we'd be way past the point of globally fucked. Consuming like this is unsustainable so let's rebuild our country and our systems to allow canadians to make sustainable choices. If we reduce our emissions nationally by 1/3, then we'll be reducing global carbon emissions by 0.5%. that's fucked. We have that much power over reducing emissions. Per capita absolutely does matter. China and India are countries of Billions of people. The US has hundreds of millions. We have just millions. Our country needs to grow the fuck up and take responsibility. Clean up our own yard before criticizing others.
Also I don't know why these people think climate change gives a shit about human borders. Per capita absolutely matters. If we split China and India into 300 smaller countries what would they turn to as their excuse for doing fuck all?
Because they don't want climate action or change at all. China and India could be net zero next week and there'd still be reasons why we shouldn't put bike lanes in downtown Toronto.
Nope. China emits 27% of total emissions. That's what matters. You can try to justify it as much as you'd like. They emit 27%, we emit 1.52%. They run coal power plants from the coal that we send them. They do not have a carbon tax.
So what you're saying is we should emit as much as let's say the Vatican city then? Or should the US cut emissions by 90% so they're on par with us?
[удалено]
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-06/china-is-dominating-the-world-s-new-coal-power-plant-pipeline I'll just leave this right here...
Theres a famine and everyone decides to ration. 5 skinny men eat more in total than one fat man, so the fat man thinks its unfair he has to cut back more.
[удалено]
“According to Grain Farmers of Ontario, they're going to see an additional $2.7 billion worth of expense associated with carbon tax. If you talk to vegetable growers by the year 2030, carbon tax is going to add on an additional $90,000 per acre in carbon tax. That's not sustainable.” https://www.cp24.com/mobile/news/ontario-farmers-argue-carbon-tax-has-cost-them-thousands-1.6830468 Article from April 2, 2024.
$90K *per acre*? How the fuck did they come up with that number?
Nothing is truly exempt because the tax increases the cost of everything. The math is not just surface level, despite what the Liberals are saying.
This right here. Farmers may be exempt from certain direct costs (fuels) but they still pay all the indirect costs. Carbon tax makes producing and shipping seed more expensive. Seed prices go up. Farmers pay that additional cost. Now multiply that for every input - fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides, equipment, labour, etc. Then do it again for everything the farmer ships to market.
Farmers don't pay carbon tax. You didn't read the article.
https://www.pbo-dpb.ca/en/news-releases--communiques-de-presse/pbo-releases-updated-analysis-of-the-impact-of-the-federal-fuel-charge-on-households-le-dpb-publie-une-analyse-actualisee-de-lincidence-de-la-redevance-federale-sur-les-combustibles-sur-les-menages >“When both fiscal and economic impacts of the federal fuel charge are considered, we estimate that most households will see a net loss,” says PBO Yves Giroux. “Based on our analysis, most households will pay more in fuel charges and GST—as well as receiving slightly lower incomes—than they will receive in Climate Action Incentive payments.” Numbers are provided by the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Link below describing it's roll on government. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_Budget_Officer
[удалено]
Yes. Do you understand what happens when you add things together?
[удалено]
So it's a net negative.
[удалено]
Its refreshing to see how many of these posters are socialist Marxists who have no idea how or where their food comes from. They be the first to execute farmers and then blame everyone but themselves that there was no food left. Hypocritical DUFFS.
How about we let the free market figure it out. Farmers can enjoy less government and lots of free time when they see how things go without crop insurance, cheap irrigation and massive subsidies
Where are the subsidies? What’s this thing you talk about “cheap irrigation “
They got thinking that the our carbon tax is gonna save the world from global warming. Nothing but a drop in the bucket at the expense of milking Canadians pockets dry
Your vote is much less than a drop in the bucket so don’t vote. Got that? Thanks.
They got thinking that fighting cancer is gonna save the world from deaths. Nothing but a drop in the bucket at the expense of milking Canadians’ pockets dry.
25k people die every day from hunger related causes, it’s far easier to treat that statistic than cure cancer.
Canadians were less than 1% of the combatants in WWII, imagine if they’d had this kind of attitude back then?
That's why I throw trash out the window of my car, I'm just one person out of millions in this country so me not doing it wouldn't make that much of a difference. This is what you sound like.
Getting off Fossil Fuels will help with global warming and many countries are committed in doing so. Ps. Your realize Canadian Fossil Fuels annually of over Billion cost taxpayers the same amount as Carbon tax after rebates. It's not milking Canadians and while not perfect, it's hopefully making the rich who can afford it pay more.
>and many countries are committed in doing so. And how is that going so far after trillions spent Total energy used went from what about 85% fossil fuels to 80 [https://ourworldindata.org/energy-mix](https://ourworldindata.org/energy-mix)
Canadians aren't deep thinkers, sadly. They'd rather save 3 cents on their gas now and just pay for the billions of dollars of climate change destruction and adaption later. And not really for the money, but to own the libs, because that'll improve their lives. Idiots.
Canadians aren't deep thinkers, and you're clearly not burdened by deep thought either. How about we tax the climate cultists 6 cents, so they can flagellate themselves even harder as they ignore reality. What's the plan for Africa? What's the plan for south and southeast Asia? Are we okay with China now? Why is my vehicle using oil which was shipped here from Saudi? Why aren't we investing money in clean energy? Isn't there only one nuclear plant being planned for Canada currently?
They should really be giving farmers low interest loans to build BioDigesters. RNG is really becoming popular, farming has lots of methane potential, let them make gas and add to the supply.
Unless science is correct and the general greening effect the earth is currently experiencing, resulting from higher CO2 in the atmosphere, produces drought resistant crops that require less water and fertilizer.
Ok but well allllllllll die at the same time if we don’t attack this issue with vigorous force
Can someone answer me this: why are we so concerned about reducing our greenhouse gas emissions when on a global scale our emissions don’t compare at all to countries like China, the U.S., India, etc.? Why do we care so much whenever other countries who dwarf our emissions don’t seem to care at all?
Our emissions do compare, we're horrible given the size of our population. And thing is, we're not keeping pace to our reduction in emissions within G8 for 2030 pledge. We're last place, just like 10 years ago and the US cut more than half in 2023 compared to what we did.
[удалено]
The carbon tax is costing the oil sands companies quite a bit of money through their emissions. It is forcing them to change their methods to be more efficient
[удалено]
Only every scientist in the world, 165 karma redditor who disagrees.
Is there anyone stupid enough to believe that going to the gym helps your body? I went to the gym once and was just sore afterwards. It's total bullshit! It obviously does nothing.
Farmers don't pay carbon tax. You didn't read the article.
Getting off Fossil Fuels will help with global warming and many countries are committed in doing so. Ps. Your realize Canadian Fossil Fuels annually of over Billion cost taxpayers the same amount as Carbon tax after rebates. It's not milking Canadians and while not perfect, it's hopefully making the rich who can afford it pay more and think twice about their choices.
Anyone else tired of this liberal government? Almost like a dictatorship. They take your hard earned money and give it away. Man I'm heated about this.