[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

What's with piling on one expectation after another, just for EVs? Now EVs have to solve inequality?

Where were these expectations for gas cars?

I specifically said policy that doesn't exasperate inequality which means worsen it. That's something I expect as a goal for any and all government policies. If I haven't expressed that regarding other policies, it's because I either haven't discussed the policy (like 99% of policies that exist) or I didn't see any possibility that the policy could have that issue.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The status quo is not more expensive. The price of a gas car has not changed at all. Carbon taxes make fuel more expensive, but half the country lives in a province which rebates the carbon taxes, to the point that most lower and middle income families have a net benefit.

I was simply adding nuance to the suggestion of increasing carbon pricing to explain the benefit of combining that with other policies. If there are already policies in place that credit back the tax to people with lower incomes then that is a great way to lessen the impact since people can save more by reducing their carbon emissions but aren't necessarily paying more if they can't. However, that type of provision wouldn't exist if governments hadn't taken the time to consider how the policy was implemented and what ways it could be altered to avoid worsening inequality.

And obviously there are many potential approaches. If there are ways that we can help people transition to lower carbon lifestyles when upfront cost is a barrier then that deserves consideration.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

These arguments just sound like a whole series of moving goalposts in search of the absolutely perfect policy before anything is put in place at all. I am not sure how we cut emissions, if we don't recognize that every effort needs to be made today, regardless of how imperfect it is. We don't have the luxury of time, to wait for the perfect technology at the perfect price with the perfect policy.

My goal is and has always been to see policies that reduce carbon emissions (and other environmental issues) without negatively affecting the public, particularly those in the most vulnerable situation like with low incomes. Nothing has changed about that. And yes, I do want policies that are as close to perfect as possible because, you know, finding the best way to accomplish a goal without negative side effects is always the best approach. The idea that we can't bother creating good policies because it's somehow too time consuming is ridiculous. I never suggested we should delay implementation of carbon reduction policies. Policies can be critically evaluated at any point before or after they're implemented and can even change once they're enacted.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

If you don't want to price carbon higher, how do you suggest cutting back on emissions?

I do want carbon prices to be higher and I clearly agreed that it would be the most effective way to reduce emissions. I simply suggested ways to help the people who need help transitioning. If you're going to reply to a comment and make these kind of accusations, at least actually read it first.

I'm perplexed as to why you would have such a negative reaction to simple policy discussion when I mostly wasn't even disagreeing with you. But I'm sure your future responses will be more sensible. Or, at least I hope so because I frankly don't have the patience for any more of that.