Carbon tax is a conservative think tank idea. Pay for use makes sense for capitalist countries. Call it a fee instead.
Alberta has carbon tax with rebates. It has websites, sent out postcards and did all it could to inform people how the money was to be spent. I'm pretty sure Fred is representative of a voter. He keeps saying he doesn't know where they money is going in spite of me telling him each time he makes that comment. 'rents-in-law get rebates because they are on a fixed income. Their city has used the money to build windmills. They insist paying for carbon use is unfair even though they benefit from it.
I give up on people.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tasker-carbon-tax-plan-trudeau-1.4874258
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
Weight loss is more than calories in and calories out. Research using a pool of 10,000 participants. People tend to gain weight back. Differ...
-
Serious about safety? Allow one free checked bag and stop carry on that doesn't fit under the seat. Don't want to "give away&qu...
-
We were in Edmonton so I took the opportunity to visit the Microsoft Store, check out the Go and finally purchased it. I knew there was a ...
The way I do the sums, a carbon tax at the source of $200/T coupled with the existing EROEI of under 10:1 would put the tar sands out of business permanently. Make it so, Justin.
ReplyDeleteSince one of the conservative governments spent the Heritage Fund that was supposed to get us off oil without financial collapse, that will be a hard sell for AB.
ReplyDeleteOops. I'm sure they had the very best intentions.
ReplyDeleteNow, I know this might sound a little radical, but instead of putting a price on it, why not go all-in. Why not put a limit (based on some fancy maths, no doubt) on total allowable emissions, and also broken down by chemical component, and have that allowable amount reduce by a set ratio over time. Any contravention = license revoked. Period. No dollars involved.
ReplyDeleteI look at it this way, all this pricing and taxing and fees and penalties is just another word for dithering.
Maybe it would push some industries away ... I don't think it has to, though. Make it very clear, and make it non-negotiable. Boom ... here are the rules. Done. No confusion. And no sneaky ways of passing this newfangled "cost" of carbon on to the consumers.
Yeah, Fred and I were talking about better names for things. For instance WCB should be the Employer Insurance Fund as it really protects employers from the cost of mistreating employees. He felt fee wasn't positive enough althought I thought it would imply you could lower personal costs.
ReplyDelete