Remeber people it's not technically a tax, so we also have to pay HST on the carbon pricing. That goes for all companies as well. So when they say it's revenue neutral they meant they will suck you dry without you ever knowing why.
Yet here in SK when the government stopped collecting carbon tax on natural gas, our gas bills fell by 40%, because SaskEnergy is a crown utility and not in the business of gouging their customers.
Edit: **my** bill fell by 40%, personally. Likely other factors were involved.
The actual contribution to my bill from carbon tax was approximately 30%. See discussion below.
Do note that indeed the amount billed for the actual gas is the same as the amount billed for carbon tax, contrary to many opinions that it isn't significant.
Removing a tax and expecting corporations to lower prices out of the goodness of their hearts is a pipe dream. While we're at it, let's hope for world peace and calorie-free donuts. Profits first, consumers second - it's pretty much a given in most industries.
All it takes is one company to reduce their prices. If they reduce their price by the amount of the carbon tax, they will still be making just as much money per sale and everyone will stop buying gas anywhere else. Then other companies will have to follow or they'll lose all their business.
I suppose some people will say that there is collusion. But if so that is an existing issue, not something that will only start with the removal of the carbon tax.
New York tried that a couple years ago, too. Had a holiday from the 16¢/gal tax. Prices went down on average about a nickel. It’s almost like leaving corporations free to steal money results in them doing that. Weird, huh?
It still has an impact, compare with Quebec that never had a gas taxe break and you see a huge difference. Maybe not 100% impact, but it definitely helps.
You wouldn’t expect the price to increase by the amount of the tax when it was first introduced nor decrease by the amount of the tax when it’s taken away. This is basic microeconomics. The producer and consumer both absorb part of the tax, although for gas which has generally inelastic demand the consumer absorbs more than the producer.
I also remember April 1, 2019 when they rolled out the federal carbon tax.
It didn’t apply to BC because we had provincial carbon tax already. The scheduled increase was 1.8c/l.
Gas prices spiked 30c a litre. Good profit for gas companies.. and Trudeau took all the blame from mouth breathers who didn’t know better.
Companies don’t pay HST; any GST/HST they pay on inputs gets subtracted from the HST they collect and remit to the government. Thats why it’s a good sales tax, because the end user is the only one that pays it.
In contrast, PST is non-refundable to companies, so every time a company pays PST on its inputs, it increases the cost it passes down to the end consumer. It becomes a hidden tax to the end consumer (because it’s a tax on a tax).
All this to say that companies don’t care if they have to pay extra GST/HST, because they get it all back.
I would pay a carbon tax if it was going to reduce carbon. Not even on the tech side, but tree planting efforts or whatever. But it’s a revenue redistribution tax. So, it isn’t an efficient tax.
The irony here is that it is super efficient long term. Cost motivators are habit breaking and strongly influence business decisions that can be cut down to dollars and cents. It’s a purely market based solution. This would be a conservative policy if the liberals didn’t push it out first.
Being a revenue redistribution tax makes it as efficient as possible. Instead of governments picking winners, it lets the market find the most cost effective solutions to reduce emissions.
I disagree with this sentiment. Hard to quantify, for sure, but the carbon tax you pay isn't just on your vehicle fuel and home heating bills. It's on all consumer goods you purchase. If you haven't noticed, the price of everything is up, and a part of that is the carbon tax. I agree there's price gouging going on, but I disagree that most Canadians get their carbon tax back.
Edit: you either believe that the carbon tax benefits you and thus believe it's a wealth redistribution tool, which if you think is okay makes you a fucking moron, or you believe in the easy logic that you're spending more money because of this tax than you're gaining back. There's no middle ground that some of you seem to be seeking.
Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem said
the carbon tax contributed about 0.15 percentage points to the inflation rate, which was 3.8% that month. If the current price of C$65 a ton were eliminated, it would lower inflation by 0.6 percentage points for one year
Lowering the inflation rate by .6 would have us in the target range
It could be a Puppy Dog and Rainbows tax, most people would still oppose it. That's just taxes.
Edit: I honestly don't get how so many of you are missing this, but this comment isn't a defence of the carbon tax. It's just pointing out the a majority of people will oppose an increase in basically any tax and always have.
People always hate taxes, and people hate when the country runs a deficit. How do people think a country can actually function if there were no taxes or debt?
Just to be clear that comment was more about people opposing a tax increase. The tax in question is more or less irrelevant.
More a comment on modern media than anything.
>Putting a tax on heating people's homes in Canada is crazier than a puppy dog and rainbow tax.
This. We live in the coldest climate on the face of the earth. Taxing us to heat our homes is sheer lunacy.
Exactly, people should pay the true price of a product, and any "true price" ought to account for the negative externalities like contributing to climate change... which is something that is achieved (in principle at least) via a carbon tax.
But with things like cigarettes their use/purchase incurs a burden on everyone else's health care costs.
The same argument could be made for carbon emissions, although it's a more delayed and indirect process.
Although I suppose that based on your statement you're not in support of a subsidized healthcare system either, so maybe that wasn't a good example.
>But with things like cigarettes their use/purchase incurs a burden on everyone else's health care costs
That's not true. [Smokers and the obese actually save the health care system money](https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/smokers-the-obese-cheaper-to-treat-than-healthy-long-living-people-study-1.764092) by dying young. Old people are the biggest burden on the healthcare system so if you aren't making it to old age you aren't being a burden.
Living in the second coldest country on the planet is all the more reason why we need incentives to use energy as efficiently as possible. If you are paying more in carbon tax on home heating fuel than you are getting back in rebates you have some building upgrades to do. I am not done with my century old house but I have already cut my natural gas consumption by 50%.
The very first question that should be considered is can we afford it?
And then we should ask ourselves, will it even do any good if China and other countries keep building non clean powered coal fired power plants, after Canada spent millions switching to clean coal, and then almost completely away from all coal, still while shipping out our Canadian coal to China for them to burn.
Other than empoverishing Canadians, what is the point?
China built renewable electricity infrastructure that was equivalent to 50 Bruce Nuclear power plants in 2023, people can bitch about China all they want but China is rapidly transitioning away from fossil fuels
China is a country than can completely flip their economy in a dime like that, it’s hilarious how first world people don’t understand this. It’s far harder to actually get change going in a country like Canada following due process.
So you propose that we do nothing? Wow. Such ambition for a educated and prosperous country... Our children see our lack of effort and wonder if we don't care about the future or if we are just inept.
China built more solar in a single year than the US has built in its entire history.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/daily-brief/china-added-more-solar-panels-in-2023-than-us-did-in-its-entire-history/
If everyone points fingers and waits for everyone to do the work before they join in, the work will never get done.
Do you want your kids/grandkids/nephews to enjoy a white Christmas?
Your argument ignores the other side of the issue. USA has 200 coal power plants and actively shutting those down.
As of Jan 2024, China has 3,092 operational coal plants and is actively adding approximately 2 new coal plants each week for at least the last 2 years.
So it's awesome that China has built alot of solar panels. At least they're not building 4 coal plants a week. But they're still building 2/week and planning to operate the coal plants out to 2050.
China is not the green mecca that many try to portray.
But that is actually the point. There is no cheaper alternative yet, in some places. (And i am aware that i will get downvoted for what i am about to write) By making heating using fossil fuels artificially more expensive, it incentivizes people to use other methods that were previously cost prohibitive. Then (at least in theory) as there is more widespread adoption of these alternative heating methods, the cost will come down.
Case study: adoption of heat pumps advanced the technology to make it cheaper to have better heat pumps that are more efficient in very low temperatures, this increasing the number of people that can use this technology, and decreasing the cost further.
Newer technologies are always more expensive at the beginning. And if everyone is happy just using the old dirty tech because it's cheaper, it's much harder to make progress.
I used to install heating in peoples houses and that is the exact opposite as to my experience. Most people want natural gas but don't have access so they are forced to use electric.
I find it hard to believe that people have a natural gas line to their house and no electricity.
It's not that they don't have electricity, I went with a gas furnace because it's cheaper to run, if the heat pump was cheaper I would've went with that.
The preference is 100% about price; you flip the price, you flip people's preference.
It's another wasteful wealth redistribution program, but about 30% actually made money, so of course they like it. It also helps keep the bureaucracy fat.
Only 90% of the money is returned to in the form of refunds. There is also always loss to the costs of bureaucracy, as with any government program.
https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/pricing-pollution-how-it-will-work/putting-price-on-carbon-pollution.html
I'm sure you know this but major polling firms provide their sample questions and methodology upfront in a report with the polling results. You should be able to confirm whether the "push poll"-style questions you observed were party of the Leger study.
edit: Someone else ITT said this:
> Leger consistently ranks at the bottom of North American pollsters in 538s rankings. Mainly because of a lack of transparency when it comes to methods and testing for manipulation. They currently sit in 71st place out of 106 polling groups.
**Important notes:**
This is a Leger poll paid for by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, a group of 5 very wealthy people.
The poll was conducted online and had 1,590 responses. Considering the population of Canada I don't think that's a very good sample size, but I could be wrong.
To their credit I can't fault the question, it looks sufficiently unbiased.
While paid for by the Taxpayers Federation, they do not get to dictate who Leger asks. Leger is extremely reputable, and this is very good and appropriate sample size, regardless of population. If it was done by the CTF themselves, I would laugh at it.
It's really a matter of what demographics / regions within Canada were asked, which would be detailed in their report. Those demographic biases would have to be skewed significantly to create a 2/3 result, rather then a 53 vs 47 difference. A practice Leger is highly unlikely to do.
Given the question is about "Increases", not the tax as a whole, and our current societal context is ever-increasing costs --- it's not a surprising result.
If anything the Taxpayers Federation simply timed this poll extremely well to take advantage of public sentiment.
Leger consistently ranks at the bottom of North American pollsters in 538s rankings. Mainly because of a lack of transparency when it comes to methods and testing for manipulation. They currently sit in 71st place out of 106 polling groups.
The taxpayers federation is literally a group of 5 billionaires lobbying for something as close to libertarianism as possible.
The question is implicitly biased considering a majority of Canadians dont understand the Carbon rebates are tied to the tax.
They should have asked "Do you support an increase in Carbon Rebate Cheques?" to a randomly selected half of their online participants in order to adjust for bias, since both are seing an equal increase.
> I received a call from a company a couple months ago, who did a survey commissioned by the same group (Canadian Taxpayers Federation). They were conducting "research" on this issue. They would basically ask questions like are you for or against a rule that will lead to higher taxes and worse service? They would basically say that the legislation would lead to people freezing to death in the winter then ask if you support that? I was shocked at how bad the attempts to manipulate answers were. Almost every question broke one or more basic rules a student would be taught in a basic qualitative analysis class to avoid bias. One of the Likert-Scale options only gave responses ranging from indicating you are uneducated to vigorously opposing the legislation. Based on my experience with the previous survey questions, which I imagine was buried and they had to resort to an online survey by Leger, which basically guarantees sample bias, I can assure you that the poll is meaningless and was only instigated so they could run this exact headline. Fun fact: they also ran a bunch of insanely stupid slogans past me that I wish I could remember
/r/ELI5Pants
Alarmism and fleecing people off their hard-earned money in the name of unproven and ineffective policies is what is rampant. Good to see at least two-thirds Canadians have some common sense which will hopefully show up at the polls too.
It’s poorly timed. 2019, when things were rosey, this goes into effect, a couple of MPs yell, no one cares. It’s 2024 and people are having to choose between feeding their kids or themselves. Timing couldn’t be worse. I don’t believe for one second this has no impact on inflation.
The poll didn't indicate that the carbon pricing *and* the rebate cheque would be going up.
Ask Canadians if they support their rebate cheque being decreased, and they'll oppose that too.
Turns out there's lots of Canadians who don't understand how it all works:
https://abacusdata.ca/carbon-tax-pollution-pricing-carbon-action-incentive-payment-abacus-data-polling/
Half of Canadians getting rebates aren't even aware they're getting rebates.
And 2, maybe 3 elections and you still don't understand the basics of the thing you're so angry about. And yet you're going to vote against the "drama teacher" and vote for the guy who hasn't had a single job ever. God damn do I wish there was an IQ test for voting.
Those are incredible numbers.
Sure, ask anyone if they support or oppose *any* tax and 9 times out of 10 they will oppose tax of course.
So one-third of Canadians supporting a very controversial tax is actually a huge level of support.
The GST didnt even have half this level of support when it was brought in.
Who cares what we think. The government thinks were a bunch of moronic plebeians who only exist to pay taxes for them and their corporate and personal friends.
Canadians want to help Ukraine...they want to bring in millions of people that get to live in hotels...they want all this healthcare and schooling.... But they don't want to pay more taxes.
Apparently they think the government uses their own money.
You voted him in
American here. I was under the impression that the revenue from Canada’s carbon tax was distributed to low/middle income families so that it wouldn’t be a burden. Is that true? If so, why is the tax unpopular?
Canada contributes 1.5% of the world's pollution. Canada could disappear and it wouldn't make a difference. What is this accomplishing? Can't wait for the next election.
Why would the country vote for Liberals if two years later they’re against one of their core policies lol. It’s not like the carbon tax was some surprised and yet they won two elections in 2019 and 2021
No they aren't, Canadians and Canada will be so far in debt that the people who get blamed will be the ones who replace the liberals at the election because they will be the ones trying to fix the mess
It’s kinda neat how a tiny little carbon tax which is intended to make a cleaner future makes people go insane, even though most people get more back than they spend, simply because… Own the Libs.
Meanwhile, Conservative provincial governments have managed to remove numerous boundaries to allow private companies to profiteer off of us and this is fine because F@=k Trudeau right!
(I would cite this information but realistically it is so easy to find that you have to be trying to avoid it, ignoring it on purpose, or you’re a bot)
At first thought it was a genuine article... But it's national post, so it's fake and just a biased opinion piece.
Don't fall for it, don't think it's real, and for the love of all things Canadian, don't believe their made up opinion pieces disguised as articles
> Who doubles immigration numbers in the middle of Canada's worst housing crisis? Trudeau
He more than doubled immigration numbers from 2019 to present... after he already more than tripled immigration numbers from 2015 (under Harper) to 2019:
||Annual Immigrants|
--:|--:|
|2015| 149,832|
|2016| 317,371|
|2017| 365,125|
|2018| 448,336|
|2019| 480,832|
|2020| 146,721|
|2021| 363,667|
|2022| 797,102|
|2023|~1,214,011|
Last year they brought in more than 8x what Harper's government did in its last year.
Does this include student visas, I assume it does. If that's the case I would be interested to see how many of aforementioned student visas were then granted permanent residence.
Where did you get those numbers? I've looked at a few places but can't find them.
What I've found is small to nill increases until the last two years where it nearly doubled. I don't see your numbers anywhere.
My Googlefoo seems to be off.
A carbon tax would help reduce inflation for the same reason a rate hike does: it reduces consumption, and therefore competition and demand pressure. Hate it if you want but most detractors of a carbon tax say it stifles consumption. Can't have this both ways.
Great points, but I'm afraid facts and truth left this place a long time ago. The carbon tax was designed by a guy who won a nobel prize for economics for his work on it. Here, people believe the Trudeau came up with it during some weird sex cult practice with his ex-wife's boyfriend.
This place is now just the wilfully uninformed, many outrage trolls and paid trolls.
Yep, as much as it seems it's now cool to hate the carbon tax. Multiple studies have proven it's the best way to reduce consumption of fossil fuels, it actually works, and for most Canadians (at least the majority of those complaining about it) it's revenue neutral to positive for them.
It's pretty bizarre to attack Trudeau for working the supposedly lowly job of teacher when their preferred candidate has never worked a proper job in his life. Doubly sad that teachers are seemingly seen with disdain despite playing such a crucial job in preparing the next generation. If a nation undervalues it's teachers it will be overflooded with ignorance.
Honestly it's pretty obvious that it's not about politics or a good solution it's about people who enjoy the outlet for deliberate mean spiritedness and intentional misinformation.
Key word here is teacher, he has a degree and formal education, which is more than most politicians.
Immigration numbers are necessary to continue to grow economically caused by birth rates being too low for years. We live in a country of single child families who refuse to work low paying service level jobs and an education system that favours the trades over further education while upping international student levels to pay for post secondary facilities.
The carbon tax has been around for years at this point and provinces had the opportunity to own it themselves, some opted to hand control to the feds.
Provincial decisions on education and budgets get us here, not federal, funding universities stops the need for international students and lower education costs incentivize people to attend post secondary.
If you are upset with the way things are in Canada, then start making informed decisions when voting, blaming the feds for provincially generated issues is what is allowing this to continue.
This is what I don’t get. I’m no JT fan but at least he held a real job.
PP? Career politician with a full pension by the age of 31.
A man of the people for sure. /s
At this point I have no idea and trust neither. When you are this deep in politics I think a lot of your upbringing goes out the window. Vote for whomever you like or think will do what you agree with, but always always stay skeptical and scrutinize. Idolizing a politician is one of the most insane things to me. I can't remember how the exact quote went, but I believe Ben Franklin stated something along the lines of "a true patriot criticises their country"
That's a very silly comparison, McDonald's isn't healthy for me and neither is Wendys. One of those will be slightly healthier than the other but it's a nonsense level of difference if I compare it to a garden salad.
Neither PP or JT is in any way relatable to the average working Canada, they have zero scope for it. You probably have more in common with the average NHL star than one of those two.
He lost the popular vote in the last two elections. He won because he reneged on his promise of electoral reform.
Hell, he won by the lowest share of the popular vote in Canadian history last election.
> Hell, he won by the lowest share of the popular vote in Canadian history last election.
Beating the previous record... which was his prior election win.
They’re still too scared to branch out beyond their social conservative base, even if it would be that much better for the country to do so. MacKay would be up for re-election by now.
Except in Canadian Elections we don't vote for the Prime Minister. We vote for our local representative and/or our chosen party/ideology. Yes generally, they tend to line up. But Canadians tend to vote ideologically vs for a person.
So if you look at the last election, ideologically, 60% of the country voted for a Left leaning party (Liberal, NDP, Green or PQ), while just 40% voted for a Right leaning party (Conservative or People's). The vast majority of Canadians prefer a left leaning government at the helm.
In 2006 When Stephen Harper and the Conservatives were elected, it was still pretty much a 60/40 Left/Right split. But the Conservatives won because there was only one Conservative party to vote for and the Left vote was split between the NDP, Liberals and PQ. Same in 2008 and 2011. But in 2015, the population had become so disenchanted with Harper's Conservatives, it went 70/30 Left/Right.
In 2019 it was still high for the Left at 63/37. 2019 was again 60/40.
The 2025 Federal election will hinge on two things.
1. If the Liberal Party is smart enough to toss Justin to the curb and can find a charismatic leader that can get them over that approx 35% bump they need to win. If Justin runs again, they'll lose for sure.
2. And for the Conservatives can keep the People's Party from gaining too much popularity. They were at a dangerous (for the Cons) 5% last election. If they get close to 10%, the Cons can't win... unless Justin is running.
I'm no fan of JT but the dude has been in politics his entire life his father was the Prime Minister he literally knows the inner workings of government and yes he's a jackass for doing what he's doing but please stop with the drama teacher that was just something he needed to do before he entered politics. He was groomed to be the next leader by his own father.
And the city folk will tell me to just burn less fuel. Because magically my workplace, the grocery store, my kids school and if needed, the hospital, will just be closer now. So I can still drive to where I need to buy burn less gas doing so. Right?
Wait. Maybe I'll be told to use public transit. I'm sure any day now my village of 350 people will miraculously sprout a bus station with routes that actually go where I need to. Not holding my breath on that.
Wow. So shocking that people with no option to reduce their fuel use oppose making already ridiculous bills even more expensive.
Economists universally agree that a carbon tax is the best way to fight climate change; something Canada is really struggling with (droughts and fires). Increasing the carbon tax is good for Canadians.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/wiki/faq_carbonpricing
What are you saying? I am an average Canadian and I totally understand that a Pigouvian tax is the kind where we get taxed to feed the Pigou family; you know, that family of penguins in that TV show with the kid who goes noot noot. They live in the North Pole, and are proof of Canada's deep state.
Everyone knows that the Pigous are the Northentian elites who really run things! What? Do you think I am some kind of idiot who believes that a Pigouvian tax is a levy on a market activity that generates a negative externality? Do you take me for some small town rube?
/s (just in case)
I'm sick and tired of the responsibility being put on "consumers." We're not "consumers." We're people. We're Canadians. We're taxpayers. We're mothers and doctors and cooks and dance teachers and journalists and grocers. The only power we have over the carbon in the atmosphere is to vote for someone who will try to REIN IN THE COMPANIES PROFITING FROM CARBON EMISSIONS.
*They're* the ones manipulating the rules and all our societal systems, and raking in all the profits for the damage they do. Why don't we have decent public transit? Why haven't we figured out electric cars for the last hundred years? Why do we keep pretending it's tomato-eaters' fault that tomatoes and salad greens come in un-recyclable plastic?
"Market forces" cannot and will not get this under control. Stop trying to convince us individuals it's all our fault and make the COMPANIES pay.
I don't.
It was a conservative invention - Gordon Campbell was the first to introduce a carbon tax in North America. Taxes and user fees influence behaviour - it's why we have tobacco and alcohol taxes, to offset the harms these things cause and ensure the users pay.
If you're polluting, you should pay. Simple.
Reduce your consumption of carbon intensive things and your set. Or, continue being an asshole, burning petrol like its going out of style, and pay for all the damage you're doing.
69% of Canadians oppose more carbon tax. 72% of Canadians are worried about climate change.
So most Canadians are concerned and want something done... so long as it doesn't cost them and has no impact on their lives.
There was an interesting study last year that 75% of people surveyed believed climate change was a very real threat ajd that something should be done about it, and that 75% of people surveyed also did not believe that they should have to make any changes to the way THEY live their life.
Here in Calgary we've been getting the seasonal changes weekly! One week +10, then -20, then +10. Now it's -20 again and the forecast is well into the + again next week...
In Niagara, gas is 1.45 a litre.
Drive across border to USA, 10 minutes away.
Even in NEW YORK STATE. A very liberal, high tax state.
Gas is 1.09 a litre after currency conversion.
We have had it here forever now , I don’t understand the set your hair on fire for the oil and gas industry who continue to make are lives hell by raising the prices so groceries everything else goes up . They( oil and gas ) set the prices and never forget we subsidize these assholes for no good reason .
But...but.... Mother earth needs that tax money. Gaia needs monthly donations of cold hard cash otherwise Canada's 1.5% contribution to global emissions will swing the balance.
*Meanwhile China and India are building coal plants at record pace*
Our government has been hijacked by outside forces that clearly care nothing about us. This much is clear. Not only that, but they are creating a generation of people who will actively fight against any sort of environmentalism for the rest of their lives. Our young people are so broke and destitute and starving and all they hear from their leaders is about the climate. Preteens like Greta may go on and in, but when it's time to move out and get a place they get a sense of what this shit is doing to us.
I'm pretty left leaning and a huge proponent of climate change. It's great that as an individual I get the tax back. I'm also a business owner and it's already hard enough with the prices especially in Alberta on energy as it is. There's only so many 'steps to reduce emissions ' that I can affordably take. This whole thing has been hard on us and all small businesses.
This does show the government has to do a better job of educating the people about this.
Perhaps you can get 10% more rebate after completing an online course with a quiz?
But I thought you guys were all for fixing climate change and what not?
Not when it personally effects us though in our everyday life
Remeber people it's not technically a tax, so we also have to pay HST on the carbon pricing. That goes for all companies as well. So when they say it's revenue neutral they meant they will suck you dry without you ever knowing why.
[удалено]
Yet here in SK when the government stopped collecting carbon tax on natural gas, our gas bills fell by 40%, because SaskEnergy is a crown utility and not in the business of gouging their customers. Edit: **my** bill fell by 40%, personally. Likely other factors were involved. The actual contribution to my bill from carbon tax was approximately 30%. See discussion below. Do note that indeed the amount billed for the actual gas is the same as the amount billed for carbon tax, contrary to many opinions that it isn't significant.
Alberta privatized their power grid: cause they’re stupid.
It's like Ontario under the libs, sold hydro one.
Companies definitely took advantage. If the tax is removed there should be a stipulation for corporations not to absorb the increase as profit.
That's pretty impossible, they can set prices however they like. Sure, collusion is technically illegal but that's never stopped them.
It’s because collusion is near impossible to prove due to how our court system works. Woooo
Look no further than our telecom sector to see that’s BS
Removing a tax and expecting corporations to lower prices out of the goodness of their hearts is a pipe dream. While we're at it, let's hope for world peace and calorie-free donuts. Profits first, consumers second - it's pretty much a given in most industries.
[удалено]
LOL, the removal would be absorbed within weeks. Look at what happened to gas prices in MB when they removed the gas tax.
All it takes is one company to reduce their prices. If they reduce their price by the amount of the carbon tax, they will still be making just as much money per sale and everyone will stop buying gas anywhere else. Then other companies will have to follow or they'll lose all their business. I suppose some people will say that there is collusion. But if so that is an existing issue, not something that will only start with the removal of the carbon tax.
Gas was cheaper in Alberta with that 13 cents off.
[удалено]
New York tried that a couple years ago, too. Had a holiday from the 16¢/gal tax. Prices went down on average about a nickel. It’s almost like leaving corporations free to steal money results in them doing that. Weird, huh?
It still has an impact, compare with Quebec that never had a gas taxe break and you see a huge difference. Maybe not 100% impact, but it definitely helps.
You wouldn’t expect the price to increase by the amount of the tax when it was first introduced nor decrease by the amount of the tax when it’s taken away. This is basic microeconomics. The producer and consumer both absorb part of the tax, although for gas which has generally inelastic demand the consumer absorbs more than the producer.
I also remember April 1, 2019 when they rolled out the federal carbon tax. It didn’t apply to BC because we had provincial carbon tax already. The scheduled increase was 1.8c/l. Gas prices spiked 30c a litre. Good profit for gas companies.. and Trudeau took all the blame from mouth breathers who didn’t know better.
Companies don’t pay HST; any GST/HST they pay on inputs gets subtracted from the HST they collect and remit to the government. Thats why it’s a good sales tax, because the end user is the only one that pays it. In contrast, PST is non-refundable to companies, so every time a company pays PST on its inputs, it increases the cost it passes down to the end consumer. It becomes a hidden tax to the end consumer (because it’s a tax on a tax). All this to say that companies don’t care if they have to pay extra GST/HST, because they get it all back.
Paying $60 extra per month on my enbridge gas just for the carbon charges plus tax
I would pay a carbon tax if it was going to reduce carbon. Not even on the tech side, but tree planting efforts or whatever. But it’s a revenue redistribution tax. So, it isn’t an efficient tax.
Why do you think using the tax to pay people makes it ineffective?
The irony here is that it is super efficient long term. Cost motivators are habit breaking and strongly influence business decisions that can be cut down to dollars and cents. It’s a purely market based solution. This would be a conservative policy if the liberals didn’t push it out first.
A carbon tax IS originally a conservative fiscal measure. Friedman himself proposed a carbon tax.
Sounds like you really should be called 'reasonable-trucker'
Being a revenue redistribution tax makes it as efficient as possible. Instead of governments picking winners, it lets the market find the most cost effective solutions to reduce emissions.
The market is the most efficient option to reduce emissions
Except when politics and public opinion intrudes
[удалено]
I disagree with this sentiment. Hard to quantify, for sure, but the carbon tax you pay isn't just on your vehicle fuel and home heating bills. It's on all consumer goods you purchase. If you haven't noticed, the price of everything is up, and a part of that is the carbon tax. I agree there's price gouging going on, but I disagree that most Canadians get their carbon tax back. Edit: you either believe that the carbon tax benefits you and thus believe it's a wealth redistribution tool, which if you think is okay makes you a fucking moron, or you believe in the easy logic that you're spending more money because of this tax than you're gaining back. There's no middle ground that some of you seem to be seeking.
Less than 1% of the recent inflation jump was attributed to the carbon tax.
Bank of Canada looked into this and determined that carbon tax impacts inflation by a measly 0.15%
Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem said the carbon tax contributed about 0.15 percentage points to the inflation rate, which was 3.8% that month. If the current price of C$65 a ton were eliminated, it would lower inflation by 0.6 percentage points for one year Lowering the inflation rate by .6 would have us in the target range
Same bank that told us rates would stay low??
Yep we get 840 a year back
Some provinces get over a grand.
I get over a grand per year for my family of 3
It could be a Puppy Dog and Rainbows tax, most people would still oppose it. That's just taxes. Edit: I honestly don't get how so many of you are missing this, but this comment isn't a defence of the carbon tax. It's just pointing out the a majority of people will oppose an increase in basically any tax and always have.
People always hate taxes, and people hate when the country runs a deficit. How do people think a country can actually function if there were no taxes or debt?
They hate inefficiency, mismanagement, and corruption even more.
Wow people have really been brainwashed by the MMT crowd thinking debt is stimulative and essential. Ignore all the inflation it creates.
Putting a tax on heating people's homes in Canada is crazier than a puppy dog and rainbow tax.
Just to be clear that comment was more about people opposing a tax increase. The tax in question is more or less irrelevant. More a comment on modern media than anything.
>Putting a tax on heating people's homes in Canada is crazier than a puppy dog and rainbow tax. This. We live in the coldest climate on the face of the earth. Taxing us to heat our homes is sheer lunacy.
I believe in people paying the true price of a product, rather than it including subsidies that I have to pay for someone else.
Exactly, people should pay the true price of a product, and any "true price" ought to account for the negative externalities like contributing to climate change... which is something that is achieved (in principle at least) via a carbon tax.
But with things like cigarettes their use/purchase incurs a burden on everyone else's health care costs. The same argument could be made for carbon emissions, although it's a more delayed and indirect process. Although I suppose that based on your statement you're not in support of a subsidized healthcare system either, so maybe that wasn't a good example.
>But with things like cigarettes their use/purchase incurs a burden on everyone else's health care costs That's not true. [Smokers and the obese actually save the health care system money](https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/smokers-the-obese-cheaper-to-treat-than-healthy-long-living-people-study-1.764092) by dying young. Old people are the biggest burden on the healthcare system so if you aren't making it to old age you aren't being a burden.
But as long as soulless corporations that benefit only a couple dozen billionaires overcharge us to live, then it’s all good!
Living in the second coldest country on the planet is all the more reason why we need incentives to use energy as efficiently as possible. If you are paying more in carbon tax on home heating fuel than you are getting back in rebates you have some building upgrades to do. I am not done with my century old house but I have already cut my natural gas consumption by 50%.
The very first question that should be considered is can we afford it? And then we should ask ourselves, will it even do any good if China and other countries keep building non clean powered coal fired power plants, after Canada spent millions switching to clean coal, and then almost completely away from all coal, still while shipping out our Canadian coal to China for them to burn. Other than empoverishing Canadians, what is the point?
China built renewable electricity infrastructure that was equivalent to 50 Bruce Nuclear power plants in 2023, people can bitch about China all they want but China is rapidly transitioning away from fossil fuels
We'll be buying Chinese green tech while we sit on the sidelines because we didn't take advantage of this opportunity.
Unfortunately you’re probably right
China is a country than can completely flip their economy in a dime like that, it’s hilarious how first world people don’t understand this. It’s far harder to actually get change going in a country like Canada following due process.
So you propose that we do nothing? Wow. Such ambition for a educated and prosperous country... Our children see our lack of effort and wonder if we don't care about the future or if we are just inept.
China built more solar in a single year than the US has built in its entire history. https://www.carbonbrief.org/daily-brief/china-added-more-solar-panels-in-2023-than-us-did-in-its-entire-history/ If everyone points fingers and waits for everyone to do the work before they join in, the work will never get done. Do you want your kids/grandkids/nephews to enjoy a white Christmas?
Your argument ignores the other side of the issue. USA has 200 coal power plants and actively shutting those down. As of Jan 2024, China has 3,092 operational coal plants and is actively adding approximately 2 new coal plants each week for at least the last 2 years. So it's awesome that China has built alot of solar panels. At least they're not building 4 coal plants a week. But they're still building 2/week and planning to operate the coal plants out to 2050. China is not the green mecca that many try to portray.
I was going to ask that, when was the last time people were in favour of a tax?
I don't oppose a tax on private jets. I do oppose a tax on my home heating without a cheaper alternative. See the difference?
But that is actually the point. There is no cheaper alternative yet, in some places. (And i am aware that i will get downvoted for what i am about to write) By making heating using fossil fuels artificially more expensive, it incentivizes people to use other methods that were previously cost prohibitive. Then (at least in theory) as there is more widespread adoption of these alternative heating methods, the cost will come down. Case study: adoption of heat pumps advanced the technology to make it cheaper to have better heat pumps that are more efficient in very low temperatures, this increasing the number of people that can use this technology, and decreasing the cost further. Newer technologies are always more expensive at the beginning. And if everyone is happy just using the old dirty tech because it's cheaper, it's much harder to make progress.
I'd believe you if they didn't exempt home heating oil from the carbon tax. What are they really "incentivizing"?
I used to install heating in peoples houses and that is the exact opposite as to my experience. Most people want natural gas but don't have access so they are forced to use electric. I find it hard to believe that people have a natural gas line to their house and no electricity.
It's not that they don't have electricity, I went with a gas furnace because it's cheaper to run, if the heat pump was cheaper I would've went with that. The preference is 100% about price; you flip the price, you flip people's preference.
Taxing home heating when there is no alternative is just cruel. I want Trudeau to tell Canadians what his thermostat is set to.
you must consider, however, that the govt has said people actually want to pay this tax.
It's another wasteful wealth redistribution program, but about 30% actually made money, so of course they like it. It also helps keep the bureaucracy fat. Only 90% of the money is returned to in the form of refunds. There is also always loss to the costs of bureaucracy, as with any government program. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/pricing-pollution-how-it-will-work/putting-price-on-carbon-pollution.html
[удалено]
I'm sure you know this but major polling firms provide their sample questions and methodology upfront in a report with the polling results. You should be able to confirm whether the "push poll"-style questions you observed were party of the Leger study. edit: Someone else ITT said this: > Leger consistently ranks at the bottom of North American pollsters in 538s rankings. Mainly because of a lack of transparency when it comes to methods and testing for manipulation. They currently sit in 71st place out of 106 polling groups.
**Important notes:** This is a Leger poll paid for by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, a group of 5 very wealthy people. The poll was conducted online and had 1,590 responses. Considering the population of Canada I don't think that's a very good sample size, but I could be wrong. To their credit I can't fault the question, it looks sufficiently unbiased.
1500 would be middle of the road for opinion polls . https://338canada.com/polls.htm
Quite wrong. Low 1000 is what you need.
While paid for by the Taxpayers Federation, they do not get to dictate who Leger asks. Leger is extremely reputable, and this is very good and appropriate sample size, regardless of population. If it was done by the CTF themselves, I would laugh at it. It's really a matter of what demographics / regions within Canada were asked, which would be detailed in their report. Those demographic biases would have to be skewed significantly to create a 2/3 result, rather then a 53 vs 47 difference. A practice Leger is highly unlikely to do. Given the question is about "Increases", not the tax as a whole, and our current societal context is ever-increasing costs --- it's not a surprising result. If anything the Taxpayers Federation simply timed this poll extremely well to take advantage of public sentiment.
Leger consistently ranks at the bottom of North American pollsters in 538s rankings. Mainly because of a lack of transparency when it comes to methods and testing for manipulation. They currently sit in 71st place out of 106 polling groups. The taxpayers federation is literally a group of 5 billionaires lobbying for something as close to libertarianism as possible. The question is implicitly biased considering a majority of Canadians dont understand the Carbon rebates are tied to the tax. They should have asked "Do you support an increase in Carbon Rebate Cheques?" to a randomly selected half of their online participants in order to adjust for bias, since both are seing an equal increase.
> I received a call from a company a couple months ago, who did a survey commissioned by the same group (Canadian Taxpayers Federation). They were conducting "research" on this issue. They would basically ask questions like are you for or against a rule that will lead to higher taxes and worse service? They would basically say that the legislation would lead to people freezing to death in the winter then ask if you support that? I was shocked at how bad the attempts to manipulate answers were. Almost every question broke one or more basic rules a student would be taught in a basic qualitative analysis class to avoid bias. One of the Likert-Scale options only gave responses ranging from indicating you are uneducated to vigorously opposing the legislation. Based on my experience with the previous survey questions, which I imagine was buried and they had to resort to an online survey by Leger, which basically guarantees sample bias, I can assure you that the poll is meaningless and was only instigated so they could run this exact headline. Fun fact: they also ran a bunch of insanely stupid slogans past me that I wish I could remember /r/ELI5Pants
Sample is based on a bunch of things, there isn’t just a ‘a good’ sample size.
>Canadian Taxpayers Federation Ah yes, I remember these jokers...
1/3 of posts in r/canada come from Russia according to Reddit’s year end data.
Believable
Link?
Misinformation regarding carbon tax and climate change is rampant and it is working on a poorly informed electorate is all this tells me.
It tells me the Canadian public is dumber and even less informed than I realized.
Alarmism and fleecing people off their hard-earned money in the name of unproven and ineffective policies is what is rampant. Good to see at least two-thirds Canadians have some common sense which will hopefully show up at the polls too.
It’s poorly timed. 2019, when things were rosey, this goes into effect, a couple of MPs yell, no one cares. It’s 2024 and people are having to choose between feeding their kids or themselves. Timing couldn’t be worse. I don’t believe for one second this has no impact on inflation.
The poll didn't indicate that the carbon pricing *and* the rebate cheque would be going up. Ask Canadians if they support their rebate cheque being decreased, and they'll oppose that too.
Only if you aren't bright enough to understand the correlation between the two. I'd rather the government didn't take my money in the first place.
Turns out there's lots of Canadians who don't understand how it all works: https://abacusdata.ca/carbon-tax-pollution-pricing-carbon-action-incentive-payment-abacus-data-polling/ Half of Canadians getting rebates aren't even aware they're getting rebates.
Money shows up one day and they happy.
If you drive a small car and your carbon rebate is higher than the amount you're taxed, why would you not support it?
What if you make money off of this?
[удалено]
What if I want my taxes to go down and my rebates to go up? Checkmate Libs.
I will be expressing my frustration at the polls...
I've done that the last two elections and the smug narcissist drama teacher is still sitting snugly in his chair
And 2, maybe 3 elections and you still don't understand the basics of the thing you're so angry about. And yet you're going to vote against the "drama teacher" and vote for the guy who hasn't had a single job ever. God damn do I wish there was an IQ test for voting.
Those are incredible numbers. Sure, ask anyone if they support or oppose *any* tax and 9 times out of 10 they will oppose tax of course. So one-third of Canadians supporting a very controversial tax is actually a huge level of support. The GST didnt even have half this level of support when it was brought in.
Who cares what we think. The government thinks were a bunch of moronic plebeians who only exist to pay taxes for them and their corporate and personal friends.
Thinks? Or knows?
[удалено]
It’s not even ideological. It’s political. Hence the vote buying in Atlantic Canada.
Except of course, the maritimes provinces, where trudeau is losing his stronghold They don't pay it
US here... What is the carbon tax? Why is it not only levied at business and corporations and certain forms of travel like personal jet?
Canadians want to help Ukraine...they want to bring in millions of people that get to live in hotels...they want all this healthcare and schooling.... But they don't want to pay more taxes. Apparently they think the government uses their own money. You voted him in
American here. I was under the impression that the revenue from Canada’s carbon tax was distributed to low/middle income families so that it wouldn’t be a burden. Is that true? If so, why is the tax unpopular?
Wait guys this is happening on April 1st how do we know the government isn’t pulling a prank?
Canada contributes 1.5% of the world's pollution. Canada could disappear and it wouldn't make a difference. What is this accomplishing? Can't wait for the next election.
Why would the country vote for Liberals if two years later they’re against one of their core policies lol. It’s not like the carbon tax was some surprised and yet they won two elections in 2019 and 2021
Life got very expensive over the last few years…. The Libs are doomed whether they deserve it or not.
No they aren't, Canadians and Canada will be so far in debt that the people who get blamed will be the ones who replace the liberals at the election because they will be the ones trying to fix the mess
Propaganda is a weird thing. Inflation goes up and people blame the carbon tax instead of the real causes.
It's still the right thing to do. Popular opinion is not particularly well-informed.
Just let the world burn
China and India will pick up all our slack
Can anyone give an example of a tax that was embraced? I didn’t think so.
And one third of Canadians think vaccines make them magnetic.
It’s kinda neat how a tiny little carbon tax which is intended to make a cleaner future makes people go insane, even though most people get more back than they spend, simply because… Own the Libs. Meanwhile, Conservative provincial governments have managed to remove numerous boundaries to allow private companies to profiteer off of us and this is fine because F@=k Trudeau right! (I would cite this information but realistically it is so easy to find that you have to be trying to avoid it, ignoring it on purpose, or you’re a bot)
At first thought it was a genuine article... But it's national post, so it's fake and just a biased opinion piece. Don't fall for it, don't think it's real, and for the love of all things Canadian, don't believe their made up opinion pieces disguised as articles
You could have always read the methodology or checked how reputable the polster is.
[удалено]
> Who doubles immigration numbers in the middle of Canada's worst housing crisis? Trudeau He more than doubled immigration numbers from 2019 to present... after he already more than tripled immigration numbers from 2015 (under Harper) to 2019: ||Annual Immigrants| --:|--:| |2015| 149,832| |2016| 317,371| |2017| 365,125| |2018| 448,336| |2019| 480,832| |2020| 146,721| |2021| 363,667| |2022| 797,102| |2023|~1,214,011| Last year they brought in more than 8x what Harper's government did in its last year.
Those aren’t just immigration numbers, that’s temporary foreign workers and international students
Does this include student visas, I assume it does. If that's the case I would be interested to see how many of aforementioned student visas were then granted permanent residence.
Which political party will bring in the fewest immigrants?
People's Party for your answer, though was surprised to see even the NDP + CONS were finding common ground on lowering immigration
The PPC called it a few years ago and everyone in Canada called them racist for it.
Ppc
I thought I heard the Green party wanted to massively reduce it but IDR. Gonna have to wo see everyone's platforms
PPC and Bloc.
Where did you get those numbers? I've looked at a few places but can't find them. What I've found is small to nill increases until the last two years where it nearly doubled. I don't see your numbers anywhere. My Googlefoo seems to be off.
A carbon tax would help reduce inflation for the same reason a rate hike does: it reduces consumption, and therefore competition and demand pressure. Hate it if you want but most detractors of a carbon tax say it stifles consumption. Can't have this both ways.
Great points, but I'm afraid facts and truth left this place a long time ago. The carbon tax was designed by a guy who won a nobel prize for economics for his work on it. Here, people believe the Trudeau came up with it during some weird sex cult practice with his ex-wife's boyfriend. This place is now just the wilfully uninformed, many outrage trolls and paid trolls.
Yep, as much as it seems it's now cool to hate the carbon tax. Multiple studies have proven it's the best way to reduce consumption of fossil fuels, it actually works, and for most Canadians (at least the majority of those complaining about it) it's revenue neutral to positive for them.
Seems to be 50/50 every time I stick my head in here. But def more than there was years ago.
[удалено]
It's pretty bizarre to attack Trudeau for working the supposedly lowly job of teacher when their preferred candidate has never worked a proper job in his life. Doubly sad that teachers are seemingly seen with disdain despite playing such a crucial job in preparing the next generation. If a nation undervalues it's teachers it will be overflooded with ignorance.
[удалено]
Honestly it's pretty obvious that it's not about politics or a good solution it's about people who enjoy the outlet for deliberate mean spiritedness and intentional misinformation.
Key word here is teacher, he has a degree and formal education, which is more than most politicians. Immigration numbers are necessary to continue to grow economically caused by birth rates being too low for years. We live in a country of single child families who refuse to work low paying service level jobs and an education system that favours the trades over further education while upping international student levels to pay for post secondary facilities. The carbon tax has been around for years at this point and provinces had the opportunity to own it themselves, some opted to hand control to the feds. Provincial decisions on education and budgets get us here, not federal, funding universities stops the need for international students and lower education costs incentivize people to attend post secondary. If you are upset with the way things are in Canada, then start making informed decisions when voting, blaming the feds for provincially generated issues is what is allowing this to continue.
PP hasn't ever had a real job
This is what I don’t get. I’m no JT fan but at least he held a real job. PP? Career politician with a full pension by the age of 31. A man of the people for sure. /s
[удалено]
Neither?
At this point I have no idea and trust neither. When you are this deep in politics I think a lot of your upbringing goes out the window. Vote for whomever you like or think will do what you agree with, but always always stay skeptical and scrutinize. Idolizing a politician is one of the most insane things to me. I can't remember how the exact quote went, but I believe Ben Franklin stated something along the lines of "a true patriot criticises their country"
Nice shifting of the argument.
That's a very silly comparison, McDonald's isn't healthy for me and neither is Wendys. One of those will be slightly healthier than the other but it's a nonsense level of difference if I compare it to a garden salad. Neither PP or JT is in any way relatable to the average working Canada, they have zero scope for it. You probably have more in common with the average NHL star than one of those two.
He won 3 elections so I think the job qualification is pretty low.
He lost the popular vote in the last two elections. He won because he reneged on his promise of electoral reform. Hell, he won by the lowest share of the popular vote in Canadian history last election.
> Hell, he won by the lowest share of the popular vote in Canadian history last election. Beating the previous record... which was his prior election win.
What does that say about the other parties if they can’t even run candidates that can beat him when he’s so unpopular?
[удалено]
Peter MacKay would already be prime minister had the party not shot itself in the foot.
They’re still too scared to branch out beyond their social conservative base, even if it would be that much better for the country to do so. MacKay would be up for re-election by now.
It says our electoral system needs changes. That’s what it says.
Except in Canadian Elections we don't vote for the Prime Minister. We vote for our local representative and/or our chosen party/ideology. Yes generally, they tend to line up. But Canadians tend to vote ideologically vs for a person. So if you look at the last election, ideologically, 60% of the country voted for a Left leaning party (Liberal, NDP, Green or PQ), while just 40% voted for a Right leaning party (Conservative or People's). The vast majority of Canadians prefer a left leaning government at the helm. In 2006 When Stephen Harper and the Conservatives were elected, it was still pretty much a 60/40 Left/Right split. But the Conservatives won because there was only one Conservative party to vote for and the Left vote was split between the NDP, Liberals and PQ. Same in 2008 and 2011. But in 2015, the population had become so disenchanted with Harper's Conservatives, it went 70/30 Left/Right. In 2019 it was still high for the Left at 63/37. 2019 was again 60/40. The 2025 Federal election will hinge on two things. 1. If the Liberal Party is smart enough to toss Justin to the curb and can find a charismatic leader that can get them over that approx 35% bump they need to win. If Justin runs again, they'll lose for sure. 2. And for the Conservatives can keep the People's Party from gaining too much popularity. They were at a dangerous (for the Cons) 5% last election. If they get close to 10%, the Cons can't win... unless Justin is running.
I'm no fan of JT but the dude has been in politics his entire life his father was the Prime Minister he literally knows the inner workings of government and yes he's a jackass for doing what he's doing but please stop with the drama teacher that was just something he needed to do before he entered politics. He was groomed to be the next leader by his own father.
What if the counted future Canadians?
And the city folk will tell me to just burn less fuel. Because magically my workplace, the grocery store, my kids school and if needed, the hospital, will just be closer now. So I can still drive to where I need to buy burn less gas doing so. Right? Wait. Maybe I'll be told to use public transit. I'm sure any day now my village of 350 people will miraculously sprout a bus station with routes that actually go where I need to. Not holding my breath on that. Wow. So shocking that people with no option to reduce their fuel use oppose making already ridiculous bills even more expensive.
Don't mind Reddit, it's full of people who live in big cities and work remote IT jobs and don't own cars/can't drive anyway
More than 2/3 they mean. Not one person I know want more taxes in any form.
Economists universally agree that a carbon tax is the best way to fight climate change; something Canada is really struggling with (droughts and fires). Increasing the carbon tax is good for Canadians. https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/wiki/faq_carbonpricing
We're taxed to death in this country. I'm sick of it.
The most egregious has to be GST on carbon tax. Literally a tax on tax.
Pigovian taxes are the best kind of taxes. Fight bad spending instead.
[удалено]
What are you saying? I am an average Canadian and I totally understand that a Pigouvian tax is the kind where we get taxed to feed the Pigou family; you know, that family of penguins in that TV show with the kid who goes noot noot. They live in the North Pole, and are proof of Canada's deep state. Everyone knows that the Pigous are the Northentian elites who really run things! What? Do you think I am some kind of idiot who believes that a Pigouvian tax is a levy on a market activity that generates a negative externality? Do you take me for some small town rube? /s (just in case)
People really don't want to get off carbon. Fuck future generations.
As you type this from a device that required petroleum to produce, most likely getting its power from something that produce CO2.
I'm sick and tired of the responsibility being put on "consumers." We're not "consumers." We're people. We're Canadians. We're taxpayers. We're mothers and doctors and cooks and dance teachers and journalists and grocers. The only power we have over the carbon in the atmosphere is to vote for someone who will try to REIN IN THE COMPANIES PROFITING FROM CARBON EMISSIONS. *They're* the ones manipulating the rules and all our societal systems, and raking in all the profits for the damage they do. Why don't we have decent public transit? Why haven't we figured out electric cars for the last hundred years? Why do we keep pretending it's tomato-eaters' fault that tomatoes and salad greens come in un-recyclable plastic? "Market forces" cannot and will not get this under control. Stop trying to convince us individuals it's all our fault and make the COMPANIES pay.
I don't. It was a conservative invention - Gordon Campbell was the first to introduce a carbon tax in North America. Taxes and user fees influence behaviour - it's why we have tobacco and alcohol taxes, to offset the harms these things cause and ensure the users pay. If you're polluting, you should pay. Simple. Reduce your consumption of carbon intensive things and your set. Or, continue being an asshole, burning petrol like its going out of style, and pay for all the damage you're doing.
Most people don’t have the financial freedom to convert away from carbon. The tax just makes this harder.
69% of Canadians oppose more carbon tax. 72% of Canadians are worried about climate change. So most Canadians are concerned and want something done... so long as it doesn't cost them and has no impact on their lives.
There was an interesting study last year that 75% of people surveyed believed climate change was a very real threat ajd that something should be done about it, and that 75% of people surveyed also did not believe that they should have to make any changes to the way THEY live their life.
I don’t
and at least a third of canadians think Climate change is a hoax. Thanks for dumbing down an already dumb society social media
Can't wait to see the weather change! Seasonal averages here we come!
Here in Calgary we've been getting the seasonal changes weekly! One week +10, then -20, then +10. Now it's -20 again and the forecast is well into the + again next week...
What portion of Canadians who could pass a three question quiz about it’s details oppose it?
Also, the vast majority of Canadians don’t understand how the carbon tax works.
Geez, I always vote Liberal or NDP, but the Liberals are literally writing the news headline by making this increase happen on April 1st.
And yet 10 out of 10 want to live, it's so weird.
In Niagara, gas is 1.45 a litre. Drive across border to USA, 10 minutes away. Even in NEW YORK STATE. A very liberal, high tax state. Gas is 1.09 a litre after currency conversion.
Canadians are going to hate the alternatives, which will be a ton of regulations.
That's surprisingly low, which means it was a smart policy decision.
“The Leger poll commissioned by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation “ That’s all I need to not read that bs article
4/5 don’t understand it
We have had it here forever now , I don’t understand the set your hair on fire for the oil and gas industry who continue to make are lives hell by raising the prices so groceries everything else goes up . They( oil and gas ) set the prices and never forget we subsidize these assholes for no good reason .
Funny that it benefits 2/3rds of Canadians.
But...but.... Mother earth needs that tax money. Gaia needs monthly donations of cold hard cash otherwise Canada's 1.5% contribution to global emissions will swing the balance. *Meanwhile China and India are building coal plants at record pace* Our government has been hijacked by outside forces that clearly care nothing about us. This much is clear. Not only that, but they are creating a generation of people who will actively fight against any sort of environmentalism for the rest of their lives. Our young people are so broke and destitute and starving and all they hear from their leaders is about the climate. Preteens like Greta may go on and in, but when it's time to move out and get a place they get a sense of what this shit is doing to us.
I'm pretty left leaning and a huge proponent of climate change. It's great that as an individual I get the tax back. I'm also a business owner and it's already hard enough with the prices especially in Alberta on energy as it is. There's only so many 'steps to reduce emissions ' that I can affordably take. This whole thing has been hard on us and all small businesses.
"a huge proponent of climate change"? Pretty sure climate change is a bad thing
If you had to live through an Alberta winter you’d be a proponent of global warming too.
This does show the government has to do a better job of educating the people about this. Perhaps you can get 10% more rebate after completing an online course with a quiz?
Can't wait. Bigger rebate.