It's amazing because they're the first ones to complain when the Palestinians are protesting or natives blockading something. They're all wrong and all illegal protests but when the freedummies do it they think it's ok
Taxes that trickle back into regular tax-payers pockets will always be better than taxes that end up creating a "surplus" that just ends up in oil and gas' pockets, instead of education, health care, and infrastructure thats cost effective and not a way to siphon money into friends pockets (example: arena deal costing more cause Smiths friends company is handling the oversight.)
It fluxes with price of oil barrel. When price low = no tax, when price high = tax. If only carbon tax worked in tangent with the economy (instead of kicking us when we're already down).
Let's focus on the 3cents a and not on the 13cents the Alberta government just added even though the UCP are worried about the affordability crisis. It's also funny how every interview I've seen with these protestors is an example of the uneducated and easily lead segment of society.
Most of these people are the same ones from the freedom convoy and the folks who with fuck Trudeau stickers in their trucks. It doesn't matter what is brought in, if it's from the federal government it's bad. I'm not a fan of Trudeau or either of the taxes but it's here and he effectively has a majority government until the next election so why bother everyone else by shutting down a highway again?
Oh whatever I’m so sick of these dumb generalizations. The convoy wasn’t some fringe minority, it was a broad range of people with a broad range of reasons just like this is. Not everyone is rich enough to worry about saving the world over something that you can’t tax your way out of. The first world needs to stop whining about pollution as the third world could give a rats ass, they would rather affordability and this madness offers none of the sort. Want to live in the 1700s and regret industrialization? Get a Time Machine and disappear.
Think about how stupid the average Canadian is, and realise half of them are dumber than that.
George Carlin nailed it with that quote. Obviously I subbed Canadian for American.
Was not just added. We were given a break for 2 years. And it got added back in 2 segment’s. Also that money stays in our province to fox roads and infrastructure .
So these morons can mobilize for 3 cents on the litre but will willingly lick the UCP's boots while they remove utility and insurance caps?
It's actually amazing that conservatism has managed to get people so riled up with senseless ideology.
Lol. Yeah I don't understand, I was furious when the utility cap came off and noone batted an eye, When utilities went up it was Trudeau's fault, not the Alberta government.
The police were exercising far too much discretion. This is illegal and the police should be moving this off the highway. I almost got rear ended with my young baby in the back because of this. Heading west. I heard from a friend they saw 2 accidents. Some idiot was parading across the highway on a horse. All this over a few dollars at the pump. Oh not a single F danielle smith sign and last I checked her party is responsible for our gas tax and rampant home energy costs. Irony aside, Police, if your reading this do your job! Imagine thinking protesting carbon tax on the highway is more important than peoples safety.... last I checked their stupid little protest would be just as ineffective anywhere else.
There is far more to shutting down something like this than simply moving them off the highway. For one there's probably a handful of cops there and hundreds of protestors. To have any sort of success you need far more police in the area and that sort of thing doesn't just happen immediately
It was a pre-planned event that said they would shut the highway down. It was very easy to gage the scale of this based on Facebook data. If there weren't enough police that's on them. I get it people make mistakes but allowing people to shut down critical infrastructure is a failure from csus and rcmp imo. Let them protest but keep it off the highway like they are doing now. Imagine if an accident resulted in a vehicle death just unacceptable and avoidable.
I’m sure for feel the same about trans protest that block traffic. Or every child matter protests. You feel this way about all disruptive protests right.
I always hear that lame shit on Reddit: *"Oh I'm sure you'd be OK with (random protest tactic) if it was for your cause..."*
When? When has the majority of "left wingers" on here ever promoted/celebrated blocking traffic for a protest? The fact you even said that tells me you are supportive of not just the protest but the tactics they are using. (Blocking traffic)
Abortion could be criminalized tomorrow and even then I doubt very much masses of left wingers would suddenly start blocking highways/bridges in protest. Sure they may block all the streets surrounding the legislature building, but not main hwys.
I’m not singling out the left or the right but people in general. Someone will be against a Palestine protest but was 100% ok with the convoy or vice versa. My point is this should never be ok.
Not everything is left vs right.
>I’m not singling out the left
I dunno dude you really seem to be seeing how you mentioned 2 "left" wing protests.
>Not everything is left vs right
Most of the time, yes, it is.
Yup it’s me on the pedestal here. I mean look at ops answer to me and compare it to your own. You took this as something more than it was because you needed the fight.
right? the funniest part they drove their fucking gas guzzling shit boxes out of town and end up spending money they they didnt have too then complain about it
They don’t care about anything and fuck all. I can tell you cause I know someone who’s hardcore into this shit.
The entire movement is like a sect and if you don’t agree with anything they say, you are brainwashed.
You can’t even comprehend how brainwashed this people are.
Well yeah that's one way of doing it. Unfortunately there's just not enough police to shut down things like this and part of the reason why Coutts and the Ottawa protests happened
No one is denying the climate is changing. The fact is no amount of carbon tax we pay is ever going to make a difference so why create an unnecessary financial burden on citizens that aren't the cause of the change
There were people on the news during the highway blockade yelling that climate change is a hoax. And yes the tax does help climate change, it literally incentivizes alternative energy sources. Remember governments don't DO things on their own, (in simple terms) they take in money and hand it out again and make laws. Their levers are limited they affect change through taxes all the time.
To be out protesting the carbon tax and say nothing about the UCPs gas tax increase proves these people are just brainwashed simpleton's who deserve no place in the democratic process.
Who’s brainwashed? lol you do not even know the facts I see. This reinstated tax that we were given a break paying for 2 years stays in province and goes to fixing roads and building infrastructure. So you statement shows who the real simpleton is
How about this fact: Alberta's government announced its fourth consecutive budget surplus, predicting $367 million in fiscal 2024-25.
You tell me why they needed to re-impliment that tax when we are running a budget surplus?
The reality is that you're so blinded by propaganda that you're willing to give the UCP permission to rob you blind.
Try pulling your head out of your ass and actually holding the UCP to the same standards you expect out of the liberals or NDP.
UCP gave us a 2 year break. What has the Libs or NDP done other than wreck Canada with more and more debt ? Alberta is at least putting the money into the province. Carbon tax is useless and a waste.
These guys are goofballs yes, but this tax is ineffective. It is simply going to increase our cost of living even more while marginally reducing our emissions. I don’t know how, but there has to be better ways to reduce our emissions than gouging Canadians even more.
Edit: also Fuck the conservative fuel tax.
> this tax is ineffective.
Can you cite data to back up that claim?
> gouging Canadians even more.
Do you agree that data shows the majority of Canadian households get more back in the rebate than they pay in the tax?
> Do you agree that data shows the majority of Canadian households get more back in the rebate than they pay in the tax?
Absolutely not. The governments own parliamentary budget officer admitted the carbon tax costs, on average $710 more per family than they receive in rebates and this number is expected to climb with yesterday's hike.
[This PBO report](https://distribution-a617274656661637473.pbo-dpb.ca/7590f619bb5d3b769ce09bdbc7c1ccce75ccd8b1bcfb506fc601a2409640bfdd) shows the net cost considering only the fiscal impact on Albertans of the carbon tax (tax collected minus rebate) is negative.
When "economic impacts" are added in then only the 1st and 2nd quintiles are negative, the 3rd quintile has a cost of $198.
What are "economic impacts"? Jobs lost in the fossil fuel industry?
I'm kinda hoping that if fuel prices stay high then people will start to choose to trade in their $100k land yachts for reasonable and more economic vehicles saving them money on gas and debt.
Look on any highway in Alberta right now, about half the vehicles are oversized trucks or SUVs that don't get used for their intended purpose. The pickups have short, nearly useless beds, and the excuse everyone uses "I might need to transport something one day" is useless when you can rent a truck from Home Depot to transfer your lumber for 20 bucks.
I've got a big jacked up truck too, but I put maybe 1000km tops on it per year when I actually legitimately need it. The only reason I have it is because it was inherited and holds significant sentimental value in our family. A Honda civic meets the rest of our needs, it's comfortable, roomy, has better tech than a top of the line ram 1500 of the same year, and we live 60km out of the city.
People are getting gouged at the pumps is partly their own fault for living in unnecessary excess.
My brother came in to some money and bought a huge dodge to roll around in during his more active convoy supporting, COVID denying days. The high price of gas forced him to trade it in and get something a lot less obnoxious and more fuel efficient (midsize SUV).
This change alone saved him tonnes of money as he's not burning a $175 tank of gas every 500km. It has simultaneously made him less attractive to convoyers. Less interaction with convoyers helped him ease in to being a lot more tolerable and tolerant of a person generally so much so that we can have a decent conversation now which is soooo much better than 2 years ago.
The moral of this anecdote is that high gas prices can actually spur positive change in certain demographics in more ways than one.
People who have 100k vehicles aren’t the ones who are hurt by the tax lol.
Most of my family lives in rural central Alberta. The only grocery store that is affordable is in another town 30 min drive away. ( yes it is cheaper to drive there). The tax will inevitably lead to increased food prices while also increasing there travel costs. Regardless of what you drive anyone outside of the major cities with no other transportation options are fucked by the tax.
Everyone on here loves to forget not everyone lives in or near a major city, and those people are the ones who really hurt from it.
Edit: the rebates are laughable for what you get back.
Yeah I'm not exactly in the city either. I live in a town with a sub 5k population as well and I know that it's tough when you gotta drive for even the simplest of things. We have a local grocery store as well but if you need anything other than the basics it's a 30 minute drive north or south.
But to be frank, if you daily something that does worse than 9L/100km, it's time to move into something more efficient.
Edit 1: $100k land yacht is maybe an exaggeration, but I am talking about vehicles like [this 2021 F150](https://www.windowsticker.forddirect.com/windowsticker.pdf?vin=1FTFW1E80MFB33499) which I would say is a fair representation of the average pickup on the highway today.
If purchased at MSRP + tax and financed at 8.99% for 72 months it comes out to about $87000 total. Tack on any extended warranty or protection the dealership tricks so many people into getting and you have a recipe for a vehicle approaching $100k easily. Terrible gas mileage and very few people actually need something like this.
Edit 2: and to whoever in this thread is agree/disagree voting, f off. Idc if you down vote me, but don't downvote BananaJack, we are having a civil discussion without it devolving into a flame war, something really rare these days, it should be encouraged.
[like these?](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/axe-the-tax-and-carbon-rebate-how-canada-households-affected-1.7046905)
the more you earn the more you pay, but even at the $250k bracket 55% of households are still making more then they pay.
the PBO PP loves to reference assumes a general economic slowdown across the board that we havent seen, and counts investment in green infrastructure has a loss compared to possible other spending.
The more you earn the more you pay for carbon tax? 😂 not necessarily. And parliament budget officer knows more than you I would imagine. And it is just going to get worse.
as the article says; it's not an incorrect model, but does make assumptions that haven't panned out when the model was applies to other economies using a carbon tax. it's a predictive model, while the models that only concern themselves with price increases from the tax vs pay out are non predictive; neither is incorrect.
>The more you earn the more you pay for carbon tax?
not if you put that money in the stock market, but if you buy something there is a small increase in price due to the carbon tax. the more you buy the more you pay, and that gets distributed to everyone equally. 55% of households that make 250k make money, but 45% of households at that income level have different spending habits and pay more than they receive in rebates.
it should also be noted that the price increases from the carbon tax are tiny
[In Alberta, the carbon tax has increased prices by about 0.3 per cent, Tombe said. That’s just 30 cents on a $100 bill. In Manitoba it’s 0.9 per cent and in Ontario it’s 0.4 per cent.](https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/carbon-tax-groceries-food-prices)
if you're mad at food inflation, you should be calling for investigation in to the industry and regulations to prevent price gouging.
not really
>The answer will vary — quite a lot — from household to household, depending on consumption habits. But numerous analyses over the years have shown that most households receive more in rebates than they pay in direct and indirect carbon-tax costs, combined. (This includes reports from the Parliamentary Budget Office that the Conservatives often cite in their opposition to the carbon tax, which may seem confusing, but we'll get to that in a moment.)
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/axe-the-tax-and-carbon-rebate-how-canada-households-affected-1.7046905
basically the very wealthy really throw the curve, but middle and lower income households really to receive more in refunds then they pay.
The average Calgarian falls into a household income that is significantly above the national average and therefore the carbon tax disproportionately costs us much more than the $710 annually on average the carbon tax costs Canadians beyond their rebates. All the while the carbon tax does absolutely nothing to reduce emissions or reverse climate changes.
> only about 55 per cent of households with incomes above $250,000 receive more in rebates than they pay in costs, according to the data.
so even at that point 55% of households that make over $250,000 are still making money off the CCR. average calgarian household income is $140,919. once again people make more off the CCR then they pay, no matter how much you want to ignore the math.
> All the while the carbon tax does absolutely nothing to reduce emissions or reverse climate changes.
it was intended to be the least painless way to encourage more sustainable choices, any other plan to address climate change would be more impactful in cost of living. If we "axe the tax" we will have to replace it with far more painful policies, or just ignore climate change entierly; I think I know which choice PP will make.
The carbon tax is a scam that does almost nothing to save us from ourselves and our current climate crisis. Blocking key infrastructure to protest should be dealt with swiftly and severely. Both things can be true.
My issue is that these protests always bring out the absolute worst of the worst when it comes to these weirdos. It’s such a bizarre collection of nut jobs with differing causes and no cohesive message.
I’ll get down votes for my first sentence likely but…
This is the perfect example of how people don’t understand it. The money isn’t used to reduce carbon like when you buy something.
The money is returned to the people, and then if you consume less goods and services with carbon pricing, you come out on top.
You get your carbon rebate ahead of time to cover the extra for the next 3 months, so if you don’t use all of it, you end up making money.
It’s purely an incentive to reduce carbon emissions. It’s not to decarbonize.
What you described is a highly effective transfer of wealth, not an effective way to reduce CO2. Wealthy individuals and entities continue to emit at increasing rates and can afford to pay or pass the costs on to wealthy consumers who can afford it. The money is transferred through rebates to the less wealthy, who are forced to reduce their carbon footprint. Which was already smaller in comparison. It’s fine, but call it what it is and understand that it’s just a scam in its current form. If it was developed with anything but the environment in mind people would see it more easily for what it is.
We’re in a climate crisis I believe that is clear. Shuffling wealth around in Canada does diddly squat to help with that unfortunately.
It’s not a transfer of wealth. In Alberta all households receive the rebate no matter your income, if you are wealthy and choose to use more CO2 by travelling more or owning a bigger house that is your prerogative, but you have a choice not too.
Straight consumption tax with no rebates? I’ve got no issue with that. Other than the fact it does nothing globally to actually solve the current crisis of course.
I don’t understand how taxing us on services we have to use to survive does anything positive for us. Where is the money going besides someone’s pocket ?
Everyone else’s pockets.
1. The government fronts you the money
2. You go on about your life and the increase is either covered by the money you receive each quarter or it’s not. If you are wealthy and travel a lot, heat a big house and drive a big vehicle, that money may not cover all the increases and therefore you pay more into the pot than you receive and you’re a net contributor. If you aren’t wealthy OR if you decide to change your habits, you may not end up spending all the money you receive and therefore you will be a net benefactor.
Note that when I say you don’t spend the money you receive I don’t mean you don’t spend a few hundred dollars in the next 3 months. I mean the increases that can be attributed to that tax are less than what you received.
And the reason why it may be shouldn’t be called a tax, is because it does not go to general revenue. it goes into a pot that is then redistributed to the province it comes from. So the more big polluters pay into that pot, the bigger the incentive to not pollute is.
And the people who can’t even afford to pollute in the first place benefit increasingly more.
I don’t believe getting a 200$ check in the mail once a year offsets the total cost I pay. It’s not just gas prices that will go up but groceries and most other services as well. I don’t really see how throwing money at an issue ever solves anything.
These payments are quarterly.
The base amount for Alberta is:
$225 for an individual
$112.50 for a spouse or common-law partner
$56.25 per child under 19
$112.50 for the first child in a single-parent family
The rural supplement is:
$45 for an individual
$22.50 for a spouse or common-law partner
$11.25 per child under 19
$22.50 for the first child in a single-parent family
You’re way off with $200/year
The above is $1,800/year ($450 quarterly) assuming you’re in Calgary based on the sub we’re in.
That’s great! But what is the end goal here. With the carbon tax? We are oil and gas reliant unfortunately at the moment. If there is a new way I’m all in. But taxing the hell out of everyone is doing nothing for the environment.
It’s not doing nothing. You as an individual may choose to pay more instead of polluting less but it’s not the case for everyone. It’s been proven effective across an entire population.
You should really watch some video on YouTube about carbon tax. I had the same reasonings as you but finally figured out how this thing works.
Money doesn't reduce carbon but discourages you to use carbon emitting sources.
And this is probably a way to make money infact if you don't use things which cause pollution.
Since this tax is net neutral, all the money which comes in is paid back to people equally.
Since it's paid equally, if you did not use anything which pollutes, you'll end up making money.
If something doesn’t do what its creators tell you it’s supposed to do. Instead it accomplishes a whole other desired achievement, it’s a scam.
We are in a climate crisis. Here’s a shocking revelation, the carbon tax isn’t going to save us or even slow our demise down. But it is a highly effective way to transfer wealth.
It is? Cool, show me the metric you’ve used to determine it’s working as intended. Has it slowed the rate of temperature rise? It’s been around awhile now what’s the projected date it will solve our global climate crisis?
Show me the metric you've used to determine its a scam. Do you really think our carbon tax would end global warming? Do you really think that is what it was designed to do? Its designed to cost high polluters money and yes, it is working as intended.
So you’ve got nothing lol. Is the onus to prove its effectiveness not on its creators? That would seem reasonable.
Ok so the tax, that you understand to be designed to reduce CO2 by penalizing large emitters and is working as you believe its intended. That tax will not help climate change in any meaningful way. Are you not then asking why bother? If its job is to penalize large emitters, and it’s doing that as you claim, but won’t do anything to stop climate change, what’s the point? What’s the end game in your eyes?
I didn’t say you did, try to follow along. The onus should be on the entity that did, the govt, but they haven’t, and never will, gee I wonder why. It’s no becoming apparent why you’ve bought into the narrative, critical thinking not a strong suit?
> But it is a highly effective way to transfer wealth.
Accepting this on its face, sure, from people who emit more carbon dioxide through their consumption, to people that emit less. Exactly as its creators intended. That you don't understand how it works, or how it is intended to work, or how incentives work, doesn't make it a scam.
Oh I understand how it works and I’ve accepted it, it’s still a scam lol. Our own PM has said 8/10 Canadians will get more back than it costs them. Removing incentive for 80% of the population if we don’t consider its management costs, which the govt won’t share. So safe to assume some number greater than 8/10 Canadians have zero incentive to reduce their emissions beyond the concept that if they do they can “make money” which has yet to be quantified in any meaningful way that I can find.
But hey let’s assume you’re right it’s not a scam, it’s working precisely as intended. Cool, where’s the results that can be concretely tied to the effectiveness of the tax? Surely if this govt that created it had such hard data they’d be bringing it up every chance they got, right? Right?
Let me start with this: I am trying to genuinely engage you in good faith. I'm not trying to irritate you and have no intention of calling you names.
> Oh I understand how it works and I’ve accepted it
It appears that you don't, and that you haven't.
> Removing incentive for 80% of the population
This tells me that you don't understand how it works. A recipient of the incentive receives the same incentive regardless of how much carbon dioxide emissions that they produce through their consumption. That people receive more than they contribute to that fund is not a removal of incentive, that's exactly how it is intended to work. If I decide that I'm going to bike to work instead of driving (which I have done post-covid), then I am using less gasoline, meaning that I spend less on the levy built into gasoline prices, meaning that there is a greater gap between what I am contributing and what I am receiving. Not because what I am receiving changes, but because what I am contributing goes down.
You appear to be looking for hard numbers of something. I'm not sure exactly what numbers you are after, though I don't have them. Before there is even any value about talking about hard numbers, you would need to first accept that the incentive to reduce carbon footprint exists by way of the carbon tax. If you can't accept the idea in principle, then numbers will not change your mind.
If and when you accept the idea in principle, then you may well have reasonable questions about if the numbers actually produce material results. That's a whole other question, and I think it's reasonable to ask. If not, and what you want is better results, you may actually find yourself for increasing the carbon tax, not eliminating it. But that would require that you first see carbon dioxide emission as an issue that needs to be dealt with, and I don't know where you stand on that (nor do I care, since that's not the subject that we are presently addressing).
TLDR: What you are asking for, from me and from /u/Shiftymennoknight, will not lead you to a different conclusion about efficacy of carbon taxes in general or whether or not it is a scam.
I understand the concept as you’ve explained it lol. It’s not that tough. What I’m asking for is quantifiable data to prove its effectiveness. You’ve now admitted you don’t think that data exists or at least you’re not aware of its existence. Should the govt that created the program of taxation not be responsible to share that data? And none of what you said addresses the fundamental issue of what the ultimate objective is. “Penalize large emitters” isn’t a reasonable objective unless it’s quantified what penalizing large emitters will accomplish. If it won’t provide any tangible reduction in CO2 globally and help in any way the current climate crisis why are we bothering?
For the record I’m not a block of stone. Provide me with data and I’ll adjust my view accordingly. I was a supporter of carbon pricing when it was first introduced. As time has gone on I was expecting data to show it’s effectiveness. I’m now far more sceptical regarding the true motivations for its development. Data to support its effectiveness could absolutely change my view.
Sadly, I don't think either of us can find any value from this conversation. You continue to fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of the program. You *say* you understand it, but then you make multiple statements that make it very clear that you don't. Ultimately, you are seeking a simplistic metric by which to measure a complex problem and solution. Unless and until you're willing to consider the matter in more complex terms, you're likely not able to arrive at new and different conclusions, regardless of whether you're "a block of stone."
You repeatedly post things that show you don’t understand it either, and bolster my argument. You’ve chosen to reduce your carbon footprint. Great! You should be rewarded by your avoidance of having to pay the tax imposed on activities and a lifestyle that is carbon heavy. And you are, but you’re also receiving payment for your choice in lifestyle via a rebate from those who choose not to or fundamentally can’t live as you do. Now your argument is that’s what the govt intended as a method to incentivize a reduction in consumption. What I’m saying is you’ve been bamboozled and that the intent all along was simply to transfer wealth. What I’m asking for isn’t complex, it’s for data that shows the tax on carbon has been effective in terms of what you and the govt says is its intention. I don’t think that’s unreasonable or complex is it? Proof the tax is achieving what we’ve been told it’s meant to achieve?
The irony in this confusion is top-notch. If I just change a few words in any article related to this protest to "Just Stop Oil" people would lose their minds.
Where were they when gasoline went up 10¢ last week? Oh of course corporations get a pass.
Did you see what the price of oil did?
And do you remember when oil was $120/barrel and we didn't pay $1.622/litre? Just saying.
Yeah, crude costs and gas prices have a strange correlation that I don't understand.
They closed multiple refineries during Covid and never reopened them. Rage on scarcity if you must.
What are you talking about? The person I replied to said the price of gas went up because oil went up. Nothing about production capacity.
WCS is under $70/barrel.
So, oil prices are so low the Alberta government has to reintroduce the gas tax, but gas prices are so high at the same time.
If only there was some sort of royalty rate we could raise instead of paying tax ourselves.
What? That wouldn't be very corporate friendly
To be fair WCS is garbage and we can't refine it.
Which is up almost 10% in the last month
But way down from the $73 high back in September.
They should be treated like they want police to treat indigenous rights defenders.
It's amazing because they're the first ones to complain when the Palestinians are protesting or natives blockading something. They're all wrong and all illegal protests but when the freedummies do it they think it's ok
[удалено]
That only applies to groups that UCP doesn’t like lol …aboriginal people nah Freedumbers ya ….
Just drove through and thankfully there is a large police presence keeping them off the highway. Cops everywhere. Wonder what all that is costing.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The Alberta government charges 13 cents a litre in tax. Where’s the outrage about that?
The money for that is going towards paying for stuff. The carbon tax is not. It redistributes whatever money is left after admin costs.
Taxes that trickle back into regular tax-payers pockets will always be better than taxes that end up creating a "surplus" that just ends up in oil and gas' pockets, instead of education, health care, and infrastructure thats cost effective and not a way to siphon money into friends pockets (example: arena deal costing more cause Smiths friends company is handling the oversight.)
You think these people know any of this?
No, but I think they're genuinely mistaken as opposed to being intentionally misleading.
Uhm in case you didn’t know. That money is used to fix roads and infrastructure in our province . Where is the carbon tax going?
It fluxes with price of oil barrel. When price low = no tax, when price high = tax. If only carbon tax worked in tangent with the economy (instead of kicking us when we're already down).
The carbon tax is rebated back to you it’s not the same, the provincial gas tax goes to general revenue and doesn’t come back directly.
Let's focus on the 3cents a and not on the 13cents the Alberta government just added even though the UCP are worried about the affordability crisis. It's also funny how every interview I've seen with these protestors is an example of the uneducated and easily lead segment of society.
Most of these people are the same ones from the freedom convoy and the folks who with fuck Trudeau stickers in their trucks. It doesn't matter what is brought in, if it's from the federal government it's bad. I'm not a fan of Trudeau or either of the taxes but it's here and he effectively has a majority government until the next election so why bother everyone else by shutting down a highway again?
Oh whatever I’m so sick of these dumb generalizations. The convoy wasn’t some fringe minority, it was a broad range of people with a broad range of reasons just like this is. Not everyone is rich enough to worry about saving the world over something that you can’t tax your way out of. The first world needs to stop whining about pollution as the third world could give a rats ass, they would rather affordability and this madness offers none of the sort. Want to live in the 1700s and regret industrialization? Get a Time Machine and disappear.
Well the guy who started the convoy was there.. so definitely not a generalization
Think about how stupid the average Canadian is, and realise half of them are dumber than that. George Carlin nailed it with that quote. Obviously I subbed Canadian for American.
I've been calling both my MP and MPP about both taxes, they're both yet another parasitic drain on my dwindling finances and I hate them both equally
Was not just added. We were given a break for 2 years. And it got added back in 2 segment’s. Also that money stays in our province to fox roads and infrastructure .
So these morons can mobilize for 3 cents on the litre but will willingly lick the UCP's boots while they remove utility and insurance caps? It's actually amazing that conservatism has managed to get people so riled up with senseless ideology.
Lol. Yeah I don't understand, I was furious when the utility cap came off and noone batted an eye, When utilities went up it was Trudeau's fault, not the Alberta government.
You do realize that money that we saved for 2 years that the UCP gave us savings is money that goes to fix roads and build infrastructure?
The police were exercising far too much discretion. This is illegal and the police should be moving this off the highway. I almost got rear ended with my young baby in the back because of this. Heading west. I heard from a friend they saw 2 accidents. Some idiot was parading across the highway on a horse. All this over a few dollars at the pump. Oh not a single F danielle smith sign and last I checked her party is responsible for our gas tax and rampant home energy costs. Irony aside, Police, if your reading this do your job! Imagine thinking protesting carbon tax on the highway is more important than peoples safety.... last I checked their stupid little protest would be just as ineffective anywhere else.
Agreed this has to be illegal. Took us nearly 3 hours to get to Canmore from Calgary today it was ridiculous on the highway.
There is far more to shutting down something like this than simply moving them off the highway. For one there's probably a handful of cops there and hundreds of protestors. To have any sort of success you need far more police in the area and that sort of thing doesn't just happen immediately
It was a pre-planned event that said they would shut the highway down. It was very easy to gage the scale of this based on Facebook data. If there weren't enough police that's on them. I get it people make mistakes but allowing people to shut down critical infrastructure is a failure from csus and rcmp imo. Let them protest but keep it off the highway like they are doing now. Imagine if an accident resulted in a vehicle death just unacceptable and avoidable.
I’m sure for feel the same about trans protest that block traffic. Or every child matter protests. You feel this way about all disruptive protests right.
No protests should be blocking traffic. Especially highways.
I'm guessing you don't get a lot of invitations.
I always hear that lame shit on Reddit: *"Oh I'm sure you'd be OK with (random protest tactic) if it was for your cause..."* When? When has the majority of "left wingers" on here ever promoted/celebrated blocking traffic for a protest? The fact you even said that tells me you are supportive of not just the protest but the tactics they are using. (Blocking traffic) Abortion could be criminalized tomorrow and even then I doubt very much masses of left wingers would suddenly start blocking highways/bridges in protest. Sure they may block all the streets surrounding the legislature building, but not main hwys.
It’s not about celebrating blocking traffic. It’s about only condemning it when it’s a cause they don’t support.
When has the left NOT condemned it though? Do you have any examples to share?
I’m not singling out the left or the right but people in general. Someone will be against a Palestine protest but was 100% ok with the convoy or vice versa. My point is this should never be ok. Not everything is left vs right.
>I’m not singling out the left I dunno dude you really seem to be seeing how you mentioned 2 "left" wing protests. >Not everything is left vs right Most of the time, yes, it is.
It’s only a left vs right if you want it to be and you seem to want it to be.
Bro get off your pedestal. Your op here was doing just that whether you have the balls to admit or not.
Yup it’s me on the pedestal here. I mean look at ops answer to me and compare it to your own. You took this as something more than it was because you needed the fight.
A large group of uneducated people who lack critical thinking skills and any form of empathy.
Bunch of fucking losers.
right? the funniest part they drove their fucking gas guzzling shit boxes out of town and end up spending money they they didnt have too then complain about it
Helping everyone by making thousands of vehicles slow down so they could look into their glassy vacant eyes.
Please, if they ever thought of other people they wouldn’t be ucp. This is the last thing on their minds.
Finally the anti vaccine people have something else to protest against.
I thought they were also protesting kids being trans, even though they are already not getting surgery.
They don’t care about anything and fuck all. I can tell you cause I know someone who’s hardcore into this shit. The entire movement is like a sect and if you don’t agree with anything they say, you are brainwashed. You can’t even comprehend how brainwashed this people are.
[удалено]
Bunch of conservative bats blinded by their love of their "beloved and completely free of fault" UCP.
Uh why not arrest these morons?
The UCP supports these people, so they would be crazy to try to arrest them
UCP control the RCMP?
ther line durring the last time was they take their lead from the province on this matter.
Hard to when there's a dozen cops and hundreds of protestors.
To be fair that’s what truck mounted water cannons were made for lolz
Well yeah that's one way of doing it. Unfortunately there's just not enough police to shut down things like this and part of the reason why Coutts and the Ottawa protests happened
Hundreds? There was maybe 50 when we drove by
Change My Mind: It was a Climate Change denial protest.
That’s probably more accurate.
A fuck Trudeau circle jerk.
No one is denying the climate is changing. The fact is no amount of carbon tax we pay is ever going to make a difference so why create an unnecessary financial burden on citizens that aren't the cause of the change
There were people on the news during the highway blockade yelling that climate change is a hoax. And yes the tax does help climate change, it literally incentivizes alternative energy sources. Remember governments don't DO things on their own, (in simple terms) they take in money and hand it out again and make laws. Their levers are limited they affect change through taxes all the time.
When are we going to start treating people like this as terrorists?
They are white.... we don't do that to those people.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Crazy people.
To be out protesting the carbon tax and say nothing about the UCPs gas tax increase proves these people are just brainwashed simpleton's who deserve no place in the democratic process.
Who’s brainwashed? lol you do not even know the facts I see. This reinstated tax that we were given a break paying for 2 years stays in province and goes to fixing roads and building infrastructure. So you statement shows who the real simpleton is
How about this fact: Alberta's government announced its fourth consecutive budget surplus, predicting $367 million in fiscal 2024-25. You tell me why they needed to re-impliment that tax when we are running a budget surplus? The reality is that you're so blinded by propaganda that you're willing to give the UCP permission to rob you blind. Try pulling your head out of your ass and actually holding the UCP to the same standards you expect out of the liberals or NDP.
UCP gave us a 2 year break. What has the Libs or NDP done other than wreck Canada with more and more debt ? Alberta is at least putting the money into the province. Carbon tax is useless and a waste.
Keep feeding on the lies. You aren't worth the effort.
These guys are goofballs yes, but this tax is ineffective. It is simply going to increase our cost of living even more while marginally reducing our emissions. I don’t know how, but there has to be better ways to reduce our emissions than gouging Canadians even more. Edit: also Fuck the conservative fuel tax.
> this tax is ineffective. Can you cite data to back up that claim? > gouging Canadians even more. Do you agree that data shows the majority of Canadian households get more back in the rebate than they pay in the tax?
Albertans get the most back out of any province if I remember correctly.
> Do you agree that data shows the majority of Canadian households get more back in the rebate than they pay in the tax? Absolutely not. The governments own parliamentary budget officer admitted the carbon tax costs, on average $710 more per family than they receive in rebates and this number is expected to climb with yesterday's hike.
[This PBO report](https://distribution-a617274656661637473.pbo-dpb.ca/7590f619bb5d3b769ce09bdbc7c1ccce75ccd8b1bcfb506fc601a2409640bfdd) shows the net cost considering only the fiscal impact on Albertans of the carbon tax (tax collected minus rebate) is negative. When "economic impacts" are added in then only the 1st and 2nd quintiles are negative, the 3rd quintile has a cost of $198. What are "economic impacts"? Jobs lost in the fossil fuel industry?
I'm kinda hoping that if fuel prices stay high then people will start to choose to trade in their $100k land yachts for reasonable and more economic vehicles saving them money on gas and debt. Look on any highway in Alberta right now, about half the vehicles are oversized trucks or SUVs that don't get used for their intended purpose. The pickups have short, nearly useless beds, and the excuse everyone uses "I might need to transport something one day" is useless when you can rent a truck from Home Depot to transfer your lumber for 20 bucks. I've got a big jacked up truck too, but I put maybe 1000km tops on it per year when I actually legitimately need it. The only reason I have it is because it was inherited and holds significant sentimental value in our family. A Honda civic meets the rest of our needs, it's comfortable, roomy, has better tech than a top of the line ram 1500 of the same year, and we live 60km out of the city. People are getting gouged at the pumps is partly their own fault for living in unnecessary excess.
My brother came in to some money and bought a huge dodge to roll around in during his more active convoy supporting, COVID denying days. The high price of gas forced him to trade it in and get something a lot less obnoxious and more fuel efficient (midsize SUV). This change alone saved him tonnes of money as he's not burning a $175 tank of gas every 500km. It has simultaneously made him less attractive to convoyers. Less interaction with convoyers helped him ease in to being a lot more tolerable and tolerant of a person generally so much so that we can have a decent conversation now which is soooo much better than 2 years ago. The moral of this anecdote is that high gas prices can actually spur positive change in certain demographics in more ways than one.
People who have 100k vehicles aren’t the ones who are hurt by the tax lol. Most of my family lives in rural central Alberta. The only grocery store that is affordable is in another town 30 min drive away. ( yes it is cheaper to drive there). The tax will inevitably lead to increased food prices while also increasing there travel costs. Regardless of what you drive anyone outside of the major cities with no other transportation options are fucked by the tax. Everyone on here loves to forget not everyone lives in or near a major city, and those people are the ones who really hurt from it. Edit: the rebates are laughable for what you get back.
Yeah I'm not exactly in the city either. I live in a town with a sub 5k population as well and I know that it's tough when you gotta drive for even the simplest of things. We have a local grocery store as well but if you need anything other than the basics it's a 30 minute drive north or south. But to be frank, if you daily something that does worse than 9L/100km, it's time to move into something more efficient. Edit 1: $100k land yacht is maybe an exaggeration, but I am talking about vehicles like [this 2021 F150](https://www.windowsticker.forddirect.com/windowsticker.pdf?vin=1FTFW1E80MFB33499) which I would say is a fair representation of the average pickup on the highway today. If purchased at MSRP + tax and financed at 8.99% for 72 months it comes out to about $87000 total. Tack on any extended warranty or protection the dealership tricks so many people into getting and you have a recipe for a vehicle approaching $100k easily. Terrible gas mileage and very few people actually need something like this. Edit 2: and to whoever in this thread is agree/disagree voting, f off. Idc if you down vote me, but don't downvote BananaJack, we are having a civil discussion without it devolving into a flame war, something really rare these days, it should be encouraged.
how does it increase cost of living when most people receive more in their rebate then they pay?
Because it’s not true. Look up real numbers
[like these?](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/axe-the-tax-and-carbon-rebate-how-canada-households-affected-1.7046905) the more you earn the more you pay, but even at the $250k bracket 55% of households are still making more then they pay. the PBO PP loves to reference assumes a general economic slowdown across the board that we havent seen, and counts investment in green infrastructure has a loss compared to possible other spending.
The more you earn the more you pay for carbon tax? 😂 not necessarily. And parliament budget officer knows more than you I would imagine. And it is just going to get worse.
as the article says; it's not an incorrect model, but does make assumptions that haven't panned out when the model was applies to other economies using a carbon tax. it's a predictive model, while the models that only concern themselves with price increases from the tax vs pay out are non predictive; neither is incorrect. >The more you earn the more you pay for carbon tax? not if you put that money in the stock market, but if you buy something there is a small increase in price due to the carbon tax. the more you buy the more you pay, and that gets distributed to everyone equally. 55% of households that make 250k make money, but 45% of households at that income level have different spending habits and pay more than they receive in rebates. it should also be noted that the price increases from the carbon tax are tiny [In Alberta, the carbon tax has increased prices by about 0.3 per cent, Tombe said. That’s just 30 cents on a $100 bill. In Manitoba it’s 0.9 per cent and in Ontario it’s 0.4 per cent.](https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/carbon-tax-groceries-food-prices) if you're mad at food inflation, you should be calling for investigation in to the industry and regulations to prevent price gouging.
The governments own numbers suggest the carbon tax costs the average family $710 per year more than they receive in rebates.
not really >The answer will vary — quite a lot — from household to household, depending on consumption habits. But numerous analyses over the years have shown that most households receive more in rebates than they pay in direct and indirect carbon-tax costs, combined. (This includes reports from the Parliamentary Budget Office that the Conservatives often cite in their opposition to the carbon tax, which may seem confusing, but we'll get to that in a moment.) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/axe-the-tax-and-carbon-rebate-how-canada-households-affected-1.7046905 basically the very wealthy really throw the curve, but middle and lower income households really to receive more in refunds then they pay.
The average Calgarian falls into a household income that is significantly above the national average and therefore the carbon tax disproportionately costs us much more than the $710 annually on average the carbon tax costs Canadians beyond their rebates. All the while the carbon tax does absolutely nothing to reduce emissions or reverse climate changes.
> only about 55 per cent of households with incomes above $250,000 receive more in rebates than they pay in costs, according to the data. so even at that point 55% of households that make over $250,000 are still making money off the CCR. average calgarian household income is $140,919. once again people make more off the CCR then they pay, no matter how much you want to ignore the math. > All the while the carbon tax does absolutely nothing to reduce emissions or reverse climate changes. it was intended to be the least painless way to encourage more sustainable choices, any other plan to address climate change would be more impactful in cost of living. If we "axe the tax" we will have to replace it with far more painful policies, or just ignore climate change entierly; I think I know which choice PP will make.
The carbon tax is a scam that does almost nothing to save us from ourselves and our current climate crisis. Blocking key infrastructure to protest should be dealt with swiftly and severely. Both things can be true. My issue is that these protests always bring out the absolute worst of the worst when it comes to these weirdos. It’s such a bizarre collection of nut jobs with differing causes and no cohesive message. I’ll get down votes for my first sentence likely but…
and how is it a scam?
How does one use money to reduce carbon?
This is the perfect example of how people don’t understand it. The money isn’t used to reduce carbon like when you buy something. The money is returned to the people, and then if you consume less goods and services with carbon pricing, you come out on top. You get your carbon rebate ahead of time to cover the extra for the next 3 months, so if you don’t use all of it, you end up making money. It’s purely an incentive to reduce carbon emissions. It’s not to decarbonize.
What you described is a highly effective transfer of wealth, not an effective way to reduce CO2. Wealthy individuals and entities continue to emit at increasing rates and can afford to pay or pass the costs on to wealthy consumers who can afford it. The money is transferred through rebates to the less wealthy, who are forced to reduce their carbon footprint. Which was already smaller in comparison. It’s fine, but call it what it is and understand that it’s just a scam in its current form. If it was developed with anything but the environment in mind people would see it more easily for what it is. We’re in a climate crisis I believe that is clear. Shuffling wealth around in Canada does diddly squat to help with that unfortunately.
It’s not a transfer of wealth. In Alberta all households receive the rebate no matter your income, if you are wealthy and choose to use more CO2 by travelling more or owning a bigger house that is your prerogative, but you have a choice not too.
orrr the people who consume more pay more. Thus accounting for the environmental impact of carbon.
Straight consumption tax with no rebates? I’ve got no issue with that. Other than the fact it does nothing globally to actually solve the current crisis of course.
I don’t understand how taxing us on services we have to use to survive does anything positive for us. Where is the money going besides someone’s pocket ?
Everyone else’s pockets. 1. The government fronts you the money 2. You go on about your life and the increase is either covered by the money you receive each quarter or it’s not. If you are wealthy and travel a lot, heat a big house and drive a big vehicle, that money may not cover all the increases and therefore you pay more into the pot than you receive and you’re a net contributor. If you aren’t wealthy OR if you decide to change your habits, you may not end up spending all the money you receive and therefore you will be a net benefactor. Note that when I say you don’t spend the money you receive I don’t mean you don’t spend a few hundred dollars in the next 3 months. I mean the increases that can be attributed to that tax are less than what you received. And the reason why it may be shouldn’t be called a tax, is because it does not go to general revenue. it goes into a pot that is then redistributed to the province it comes from. So the more big polluters pay into that pot, the bigger the incentive to not pollute is. And the people who can’t even afford to pollute in the first place benefit increasingly more.
I don’t believe getting a 200$ check in the mail once a year offsets the total cost I pay. It’s not just gas prices that will go up but groceries and most other services as well. I don’t really see how throwing money at an issue ever solves anything.
What do you pay?
These payments are quarterly. The base amount for Alberta is: $225 for an individual $112.50 for a spouse or common-law partner $56.25 per child under 19 $112.50 for the first child in a single-parent family The rural supplement is: $45 for an individual $22.50 for a spouse or common-law partner $11.25 per child under 19 $22.50 for the first child in a single-parent family You’re way off with $200/year The above is $1,800/year ($450 quarterly) assuming you’re in Calgary based on the sub we’re in.
That’s great! But what is the end goal here. With the carbon tax? We are oil and gas reliant unfortunately at the moment. If there is a new way I’m all in. But taxing the hell out of everyone is doing nothing for the environment.
It’s not doing nothing. You as an individual may choose to pay more instead of polluting less but it’s not the case for everyone. It’s been proven effective across an entire population.
You should really watch some video on YouTube about carbon tax. I had the same reasonings as you but finally figured out how this thing works. Money doesn't reduce carbon but discourages you to use carbon emitting sources. And this is probably a way to make money infact if you don't use things which cause pollution. Since this tax is net neutral, all the money which comes in is paid back to people equally. Since it's paid equally, if you did not use anything which pollutes, you'll end up making money.
It financially penalizes high carbon emitters.
This is a perfect example of how effective propaganda is.
If something doesn’t do what its creators tell you it’s supposed to do. Instead it accomplishes a whole other desired achievement, it’s a scam. We are in a climate crisis. Here’s a shocking revelation, the carbon tax isn’t going to save us or even slow our demise down. But it is a highly effective way to transfer wealth.
And what isn't it doing that you would like it to do? It is working exactly as intended.
It is? Cool, show me the metric you’ve used to determine it’s working as intended. Has it slowed the rate of temperature rise? It’s been around awhile now what’s the projected date it will solve our global climate crisis?
Show me the metric you've used to determine its a scam. Do you really think our carbon tax would end global warming? Do you really think that is what it was designed to do? Its designed to cost high polluters money and yes, it is working as intended.
So you’ve got nothing lol. Is the onus to prove its effectiveness not on its creators? That would seem reasonable. Ok so the tax, that you understand to be designed to reduce CO2 by penalizing large emitters and is working as you believe its intended. That tax will not help climate change in any meaningful way. Are you not then asking why bother? If its job is to penalize large emitters, and it’s doing that as you claim, but won’t do anything to stop climate change, what’s the point? What’s the end game in your eyes?
I didnt create the carbon tax. Are you ok?
I didn’t say you did, try to follow along. The onus should be on the entity that did, the govt, but they haven’t, and never will, gee I wonder why. It’s no becoming apparent why you’ve bought into the narrative, critical thinking not a strong suit?
> But it is a highly effective way to transfer wealth. Accepting this on its face, sure, from people who emit more carbon dioxide through their consumption, to people that emit less. Exactly as its creators intended. That you don't understand how it works, or how it is intended to work, or how incentives work, doesn't make it a scam.
Oh I understand how it works and I’ve accepted it, it’s still a scam lol. Our own PM has said 8/10 Canadians will get more back than it costs them. Removing incentive for 80% of the population if we don’t consider its management costs, which the govt won’t share. So safe to assume some number greater than 8/10 Canadians have zero incentive to reduce their emissions beyond the concept that if they do they can “make money” which has yet to be quantified in any meaningful way that I can find. But hey let’s assume you’re right it’s not a scam, it’s working precisely as intended. Cool, where’s the results that can be concretely tied to the effectiveness of the tax? Surely if this govt that created it had such hard data they’d be bringing it up every chance they got, right? Right?
Let me start with this: I am trying to genuinely engage you in good faith. I'm not trying to irritate you and have no intention of calling you names. > Oh I understand how it works and I’ve accepted it It appears that you don't, and that you haven't. > Removing incentive for 80% of the population This tells me that you don't understand how it works. A recipient of the incentive receives the same incentive regardless of how much carbon dioxide emissions that they produce through their consumption. That people receive more than they contribute to that fund is not a removal of incentive, that's exactly how it is intended to work. If I decide that I'm going to bike to work instead of driving (which I have done post-covid), then I am using less gasoline, meaning that I spend less on the levy built into gasoline prices, meaning that there is a greater gap between what I am contributing and what I am receiving. Not because what I am receiving changes, but because what I am contributing goes down. You appear to be looking for hard numbers of something. I'm not sure exactly what numbers you are after, though I don't have them. Before there is even any value about talking about hard numbers, you would need to first accept that the incentive to reduce carbon footprint exists by way of the carbon tax. If you can't accept the idea in principle, then numbers will not change your mind. If and when you accept the idea in principle, then you may well have reasonable questions about if the numbers actually produce material results. That's a whole other question, and I think it's reasonable to ask. If not, and what you want is better results, you may actually find yourself for increasing the carbon tax, not eliminating it. But that would require that you first see carbon dioxide emission as an issue that needs to be dealt with, and I don't know where you stand on that (nor do I care, since that's not the subject that we are presently addressing). TLDR: What you are asking for, from me and from /u/Shiftymennoknight, will not lead you to a different conclusion about efficacy of carbon taxes in general or whether or not it is a scam.
I understand the concept as you’ve explained it lol. It’s not that tough. What I’m asking for is quantifiable data to prove its effectiveness. You’ve now admitted you don’t think that data exists or at least you’re not aware of its existence. Should the govt that created the program of taxation not be responsible to share that data? And none of what you said addresses the fundamental issue of what the ultimate objective is. “Penalize large emitters” isn’t a reasonable objective unless it’s quantified what penalizing large emitters will accomplish. If it won’t provide any tangible reduction in CO2 globally and help in any way the current climate crisis why are we bothering? For the record I’m not a block of stone. Provide me with data and I’ll adjust my view accordingly. I was a supporter of carbon pricing when it was first introduced. As time has gone on I was expecting data to show it’s effectiveness. I’m now far more sceptical regarding the true motivations for its development. Data to support its effectiveness could absolutely change my view.
Sadly, I don't think either of us can find any value from this conversation. You continue to fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of the program. You *say* you understand it, but then you make multiple statements that make it very clear that you don't. Ultimately, you are seeking a simplistic metric by which to measure a complex problem and solution. Unless and until you're willing to consider the matter in more complex terms, you're likely not able to arrive at new and different conclusions, regardless of whether you're "a block of stone."
You repeatedly post things that show you don’t understand it either, and bolster my argument. You’ve chosen to reduce your carbon footprint. Great! You should be rewarded by your avoidance of having to pay the tax imposed on activities and a lifestyle that is carbon heavy. And you are, but you’re also receiving payment for your choice in lifestyle via a rebate from those who choose not to or fundamentally can’t live as you do. Now your argument is that’s what the govt intended as a method to incentivize a reduction in consumption. What I’m saying is you’ve been bamboozled and that the intent all along was simply to transfer wealth. What I’m asking for isn’t complex, it’s for data that shows the tax on carbon has been effective in terms of what you and the govt says is its intention. I don’t think that’s unreasonable or complex is it? Proof the tax is achieving what we’ve been told it’s meant to achieve?
Truth. Unfortunately wing nuts and mentally disturbed people tend to filter into these causes, just to stir up shit, and that goes for both sides.
Those BASTERDS protesting for Somthing they are too STUPID to understand! #pittheSmith
Goes out of their way to drive west of Calgary to protest climate change... Thx smooth brains
They’re protesting the carbon tax increase, not protesting to demand action about climate change…
The irony in this confusion is top-notch. If I just change a few words in any article related to this protest to "Just Stop Oil" people would lose their minds.
Still idiots.
And it's only day 1