HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 6:58 PM
djforsberg's Avatar
djforsberg djforsberg is offline
Pride is our downfall
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Posts: 1,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
The world has been ending for 30 over years.

https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf11...6PjTLiEGJVSNNg

All religions have to have a doomsday date to coerce compliance. Climate alarmism is no different.
It always amazes me when people post things like this, thinking they are cleverly owning the “libtards”. At least your name is anonymous so your stupidity can’t be directly linked to you but I’m willing to bet it comes out often in your real life.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 8:01 PM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 6,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by djforsberg View Post
It always amazes me when people post things like this, thinking they are cleverly owning the “libtards”. At least your name is anonymous so your stupidity can’t be directly linked to you but I’m willing to bet it comes out often in your real life.
Sounds like your a proponent of the Liberal left's new carbon tax a regressive tax that will ultimately do more damage than it actually solves, typical Liberals looked for solutions to problems that don't exist!
__________________
The voice of reason
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 8:11 PM
1ajs's Avatar
1ajs 1ajs is online now
ʇɥƃıuʞ -*ʞpʇ*-
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: lynn lake
Posts: 24,658
keep it civil guys
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 9:29 PM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is offline
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 11,222
Thanks for making this a new thread.

I don’t understand how climate change is a politically partisan discussion. What is it about Conservative voters that makes them disagree with science?

I understand it if you believe there are better solutions. So then let’s hear them and talk about where they have worked before.

I do not understand believing you are qualified to contradict 99.9% of the scientists on earth. How is that a Conservative ideal? I don’t get it. What else do you think you know better than qualified scientists?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 9:31 PM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is offline
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 11,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrskylar View Post
Sounds like your a proponent of the Liberal left's new carbon tax a regressive tax that will ultimately do more damage than it actually solves, typical Liberals looked for solutions to problems that don't exist!
1. How is a tax that you get back regressive?

2. How will it do more damage than it solves?

3. What is the problem you believe does not exist?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 9:38 PM
djforsberg's Avatar
djforsberg djforsberg is offline
Pride is our downfall
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Posts: 1,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrskylar View Post
Sounds like your a proponent of the Liberal left's new carbon tax a regressive tax that will ultimately do more damage than it actually solves, typical Liberals looked for solutions to problems that don't exist!
You might want to do some research on that as it appears you and myriad others are getting sucked into the propaganda being spread by right-wing political parties and other parties who have an interest in dividing us and spreading ignorance and misinformation in the face of science and actual facts. I won’t do the hard work for you but in summary, a carbon tax is a conservative idea that makes markets more fair and efficient by applying a price on a negative externality. Free market and libertarian proponents usually don’t like it when economic transactions effects the freedom of others. Allowing fossil fuels to be burned without taking into account the negative costs they have on the climate and other humans ends up with an inefficient and unfair market that passes on the costs to others. So no, the carbon tax is not a Liberal or liberal idea. Regulations would be. So please do everyone a favor and do your own research and stop wasting our time having these tired old discussions over and over again. Frankly it’s embarrassing this is still happening in 2019. Be better.

Last edited by djforsberg; Apr 14, 2019 at 9:49 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 10:39 PM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is offline
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 11,222
Whenever I engage in this discussion with a Conservative voter I tell them I agree with their right to oppose the carbon tax, as long as they can tell me what their solution is.

Inevitably the answer is the government should regulate the heavy polluters.

I then ask them as a Conservative you really oppose the free market solution and prefer the government tell you what kind of engine you can put in your F150?

The response is always, well no. Only the major polluters.

Then I tell them by far the largest source of emissions in Manitoba is vehicles. Second is buildings, most of which are houses, so any government regulation strategy will restrict the kind of car you can buy, or the type of furnace you can have in your house.

The response is always something about Trudeau being a drama teacher.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 11:03 PM
Tacheguy Tacheguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 897
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
Whenever I engage in this discussion with a Conservative voter I tell them I agree with their right to oppose the carbon tax, as long as they can tell me what their solution is.

Inevitably the answer is the government should regulate the heavy polluters.

I then ask them as a Conservative you really oppose the free market solution and prefer the government tell you what kind of engine you can put in your F150?

The response is always, well no. Only the major polluters.

Then I tell them by far the largest source of emissions in Manitoba is vehicles. Second is buildings, most of which are houses, so any government regulation strategy will restrict the kind of car you can buy, or the type of furnace you can have in your house.

The response is always something about Trudeau being a drama teacher.
The current policy is conservative, but mixed with a bit of populism (think small businesses). A conservative purist, backed into a corner to reduce pollution, would likely prefer a voucher system, where a fixed amount of pollution is allowed and permits/vouchers are distributed to the public and then traded in a commodity market of sorts. It has some positive features for sure, but you can see how monied interests would dominate this process.

At least this is the system the Chicago boys were peddling back in the day..
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 11:06 PM
djforsberg's Avatar
djforsberg djforsberg is offline
Pride is our downfall
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Posts: 1,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
...
Yup. No amount of facts will change primitive people who base their opinions 100% on their feelings. Their criticisms of people like Trudeau are usually a projection of their own shortcomings. Sadly we are full of people like this on the prairies.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 11:32 PM
headhorse's Avatar
headhorse headhorse is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,570
the ruling class wants a carbon tax but they should be getting their wealth and businesses expropriated to pay for the mess they profited off of and their mismanagement of resources.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 11:52 PM
VANRIDERFAN's Avatar
VANRIDERFAN VANRIDERFAN is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,359
I don't understand why the feds are insisting on rebates? If they are serious about changing our ways, then instead of another level of bureaucracy to send out the cheques, why aren't they using that money for infrastructure to reduce carbon emissions?
I hate the government putting their hands in my wallet for more, but if they are going to take that money, do something useful with it instead just giving it back!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2019, 1:21 AM
DLLB DLLB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Penticton, BC
Posts: 2,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by djforsberg View Post
It always amazes me when people post things like this, thinking they are cleverly owning the “libtards”. At least your name is anonymous so your stupidity can’t be directly linked to you but I’m willing to bet it comes out often in your real life.
When you insult someone rather that present arguments in opposition to what peolpe say, it reflects on you and not on them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2019, 1:26 AM
DLLB DLLB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Penticton, BC
Posts: 2,495
Here is an interesting fact about what the carbon tax has done to heating your house in BC and the difference will only grow as the carbon tax increases over the next few years.

We now have a tax that EXCEEDS THE PRICE OF THE ACTUAL PRODUCT. Yes I know about storage, transport etc, but I am talking about the actual product.

I have been checking my natural gas bills lately and the carbon tax now exceeds the cost of the gas, you know the actual product we are buying. The carbon tax was 112% of the actual cost of gas. The tax is more than the actual product.

Even better, when you take all the taxes into account, the municipal operating fee, carbon tax, clean energy levy (what the heck is this?) and the GST, they are 170%, almost 2 times, the actual cost of gas.

I guess we should be glad there are only 4 of them. Oops, I hope I didn't give them any ideas.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2019, 3:03 AM
djforsberg's Avatar
djforsberg djforsberg is offline
Pride is our downfall
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Posts: 1,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN View Post
I don't understand why the feds are insisting on rebates? If they are serious about changing our ways, then instead of another level of bureaucracy to send out the cheques, why aren't they using that money for infrastructure to reduce carbon emissions?
I hate the government putting their hands in my wallet for more, but if they are going to take that money, do something useful with it instead just giving it back!
The answer is already out there and has been discussed much. The provinces were given the opportunity to apply their own carbon tax and do what they wish with it. Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and New Brunswick chose not to do it. The only reasonable thing the federal government could do is refund most of the money back to everyone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2019, 3:04 AM
djforsberg's Avatar
djforsberg djforsberg is offline
Pride is our downfall
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Posts: 1,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLLB View Post
When you insult someone rather that present arguments in opposition to what peolpe say, it reflects on you and not on them.
There is nothing much more I can do to change their minds at this point. There’s no more time to sugar coat things.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2019, 3:26 AM
ywgwalk ywgwalk is offline
Formerly rypinion
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Exchange District, Winnipeg
Posts: 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLLB View Post
We now have a tax that EXCEEDS THE PRICE OF THE ACTUAL PRODUCT. Yes I know about storage, transport etc, but I am talking about the actual product.
Which seems completely reasonable and expected for something that is plentiful and very cheap, yet very damaging to the future, and the government has put a price on that damage.

Just think how expensive single use plastic and other hard to recycle or expensive-to-dispose-of-properly items should be if we all properly paid for the full lifecycle of the product. Instead we have oceans filled with plastic, and people dumping mattresses, batteries, electronics, etc into garbage dumps. <-- a much more direct and visual impact, but one that pales in seriousness to what's happening due to excess carbon in the atmosphere.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2019, 3:29 AM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 6,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
1. How is a tax that you get back regressive?

2. How will it do more damage than it solves?

3. What is the problem you believe does not exist?
For sure climate change is real and something needs to be done but charging Canadians more for home heating, really?

Changing building code, pressing industries and tax break for companies to reduce emissions etc. Would do more than charging people more to fill up to get to work with GST on the added tax.

People really need to give their heads a shake if anyone thinks this poorly thought out non-sensical Liberal carbon plan make sense, token lip service that penalizes the middle class!
__________________
The voice of reason
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2019, 3:49 AM
milomilo milomilo is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN View Post
I don't understand why the feds are insisting on rebates? If they are serious about changing our ways, then instead of another level of bureaucracy to send out the cheques, why aren't they using that money for infrastructure to reduce carbon emissions?
I hate the government putting their hands in my wallet for more, but if they are going to take that money, do something useful with it instead just giving it back!
How would you feel if they reduced income taxes instead, or sales taxes, or something else? Ultimately, the government needs to raise revenue somehow, so it would be better they taxed something we don't want people to produce (CO2) and reduced taxes on something we do want them to produce (work). Really, a tax rebate is equivalent to reducing income tax (my preferred option), just in a more obvious way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2019, 5:01 AM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is offline
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 11,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrskylar View Post
For sure climate change is real and something needs to be done but charging Canadians more for home heating, really?

Changing building code, pressing industries and tax break for companies to reduce emissions etc. Would do more than charging people more to fill up to get to work with GST on the added tax.

People really need to give their heads a shake if anyone thinks this poorly thought out non-sensical Liberal carbon plan make sense, token lip service that penalizes the middle class!
It can’t be someone else paying for it when it is us doing the damage.

30% of provincial emissions come from natural gas heating buildings, most of which are houses. How can any plan ignore home heating?

37% of provincial emisssions are vehicles. How can any plan ignore vehicle use?

How can it punish the middle class if you get the money back? Why do people ignore this fact. You get the money back!!

Who do you think pays for the higher costs of building code changes? You, through higher business rent, home costs, apartment rents. And you don’t get that money back on your tax return. For the most part those changes have already been made. If your plan only deals with new buildings what do we do about the millions of existing buildings across Canada?.

Tax breaks are not free. You pay for them with your tax dollars. Companies are a small fraction of emissions, so tax breaks, which the middle class would be paying for, would not be effective.

Any cost incurred by regulations on any industry would be passed on to consumers...and you wouldn’t get the money back on your tax return.

Carbon pricing is not a liberal plan. It is now used in 60 countries around the world and is considered internationally as the most effective solution.

Last edited by trueviking; Apr 15, 2019 at 5:29 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2019, 5:08 AM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is offline
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 11,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN View Post
I don't understand why the feds are insisting on rebates? If they are serious about changing our ways, then instead of another level of bureaucracy to send out the cheques, why aren't they using that money for infrastructure to reduce carbon emissions?
I hate the government putting their hands in my wallet for more, but if they are going to take that money, do something useful with it instead just giving it back!
I agree. But the only way to get it through politically was to make it revenue neutral. If it wasn’t, the idea that they are putting their hands in your wallet for more would be true.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:51 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.