[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33696671]To all the people blaming this on Harper, it's Chretien you should be blaming, HE'S the one who ratified us into the protocol and committed to reduce our outputs by, what was it, 5%-7%, then upped them in the remainder of his term by over 20%. This is the only thing left to do other than pay some kind of fines, and I'm sure right now we don't want to add to our deficit. It's not Harper who didn't try, it was Harper who was dumped with an impossible task by the Liberals before him who didn't try and is now being blamed for something he didn't do and couldn't improve.
To show you an example of how little the Liberals committed, here's a link to the CBC's website, showing the average CO2 output per captia of the country, it didn't start going down until ~2005, and saw a dramatic drop in 2008-2009, in the middle of a Harper minority. Granted, news sources then say it spiked in 2010, however it still illustrates that the Grits did fuck all to reduce our pollution output.
[url]http://www.cbc.ca/news/interactives/canada-kyoto/[/url][/QUOTE]
no this was very possible to accomplish, it wasn't the money he was losing, it was his relationship with the oil companies
Research and develop cleaner forms of fuel, or fund mainstream electrical vehicles while raising taxes on gasoline.
[QUOTE=Sumap;33694459][img]http://infobeautiful2.s3.amazonaws.com/kyoto_550.gif[/img]
Yeah, I can start to see why the conservatives want to pull out.
Stop tempting me Sweden.[/QUOTE]
For the life of me, I can't make heads or tails of that chart.
They have a point though. The kyoto isn't gonna accomplish anything without China, india, US, etc.
If canada is less than 2% of global emissions, then why the fuck are we in it anyways?
Just so canada can go further in debt just like the rest of the carbon producing world just to say they are part of some stupid kyoto protocol?
I say good riddens to that waste of my tax dollars.
Edit:
Also, It feels like harper has been in office forever. I'm so tired of him.
On the other hand, everbody else is a lying thief as well. Lose - lose.
Wow, just learned it in class.
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;33696752]no this was very possible to accomplish, it wasn't the money he was losing, it was his relationship with the oil companies[/QUOTE]
No, it wasn't possible considering the state Chretien left the country in. And I take it those are the same oil companies who must have lobbied the Liberals to privatize Petro Canada, leading to the government losing control over oil prices and landing us where we are today, where gas hovers around $1.20/litre.
I don't think people realize it's not just Harper who's been "sucking corporate dick," the Grits did a fair bit of it in their day too, I think that was the main thing about the Sponsorship Scandal. About the only party I'd trust to be off corporate wang right now are the NDP, but now that they've lost their magnificent moustache they're fucked, and they're on union wang instead, which could lead to financial problems.
Not cool Canada, not cool.
It is indeed not the current government's fault, but still. Not cool.
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;33696891]If canada is less than 2% of global emissions, then why the fuck are we in it anyways?
[/QUOTE]
2% is a massive amount of emissions.
But even if it wasn't, if everyone thought their own emissions were insignificant, the whole idea would fall apart. 191 states have signed and ratified the protocol. The sum of everyone's efforts is the whole point.
I don't really understand the point of the Kyoto Protocol if you can dodge fines by ditching it.
I mean, at that point it's just a symbolical pact.
"weh weh i dont want a competent and rational government i want a useless one who dreams of communism and eco-friendliness while failing at its goals and sending the country broke"
-dumb commie hippies itt
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;33696714]Give it about 10 or so years so all the old generations can die off. Then maybe we will get a decent government.[/QUOTE]
I'm sure people said that 10 years ago
[QUOTE=Lambeth;33697298]I'm sure people said that 10 years ago[/QUOTE]
I'm sure people said that 2000 years ago.
[QUOTE=MIPS;33694278]Does this mean I can burn old tires for heat?[/QUOTE]
Sure. Just be sure to breathe through your mouth. Use your teeth as a filter.
[QUOTE=abcpea2;33697206]"weh weh i dont want a competent and rational government i want a useless one who dreams of communism and eco-friendliness while failing at its goals and sending the country broke"
-dumb commie hippies itt[/QUOTE]
- pathetic brainwashed rightwing consumer idiot.
[QUOTE=abcpea2;33697206]"weh weh i dont want a competent and rational government i want a useless one who dreams of communism and eco-friendliness while failing at its goals and sending the country broke"
-dumb commie hippies itt[/QUOTE]
Someone needs to give you a [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shawinigan_Handshake]Shawinigan Handshake[/url].
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;33697382]- pathetic brainwashed rightwing consumer idiot.[/QUOTE]
haha ok
[QUOTE=abcpea2;33697422]haha ok[/QUOTE]
final defence of a losing troll
[QUOTE=abcpea2;33697206]"weh weh i dont want a competent and rational government i want a useless one who dreams of communism and eco-friendliness while failing at its goals and sending the country broke"
-dumb commie hippies itt[/QUOTE]
except Harper has been a huge spender and is already making the country broke
only instead of spending the money on something useful like reducing carbon emissions he's spending it on giant prisons to put pot smokers in and planes without engines
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33697515]except Harper has been a huge spender and is already making the country broke
only instead of spending the money on something useful like reducing carbon emissions he's spending it on giant prisons to put pot smokers in and [B]planes without engines[/B][/QUOTE]
Haha, what? This is news to me, or is this related to the F-35's we soooooo desperately needed?
how is a clean environment communist
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33696671]To all the people blaming this on Harper, it's Chretien you should be blaming, HE'S the one who ratified us into the protocol and committed to reduce our outputs by, what was it, 5%-7%, then upped them in the remainder of his term by over 20%. This is the only thing left to do other than pay some kind of fines, and I'm sure right now we don't want to add to our deficit. It's not Harper who didn't try, it was Harper who was dumped with an impossible task by the Liberals before him who didn't try and is now being blamed for something he didn't do and couldn't improve.
To show you an example of how little the Liberals committed, here's a link to the CBC's website, showing the average CO2 output per captia of the country, it didn't start going down until ~2005, and saw a dramatic drop in 2008-2009, in the middle of a Harper minority. Granted, news sources then say it spiked in 2010, however it still illustrates that the Grits did fuck all to reduce our pollution output.
[url]http://www.cbc.ca/news/interactives/canada-kyoto/[/url][/QUOTE]
Except if you look at that chart you'll see that greenhouse gas emissions were steadily decreasing during the liberal government, and then instantly shot up the year they lost power to the conservatives.
The Clean Air Act of 2007 was a cop-out made to mitigate some of the damage that the conservatives did by ignoring our Kyoto commitments.
I can't make the claim that the trend would continue and our GHG emissions would be lower now had we kept a liberal government, but your own chart shows that emissions increased immensely under the conservatives
[editline]13th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=chunkymonkey;33697552]Haha, what? This is news to me, or is this related to the F-35's we soooooo desperately needed?[/QUOTE]
Well it's more satire than anything, it's standard for the engines to be separate
A better joke would be the communication systems in them being unable to work with the systems in our existing planes
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33697625]Except if you look at that chart you'll see that greenhouse gas emissions were steadily decreasing during the liberal government, and then instantly shot up the year they lost power to the conservatives.
The Clean Air Act of 2007 was a cop-out made to mitigate some of the damage that the conservatives did by ignoring our Kyoto commitments.
I can't make the claim that the trend would continue and our GHG emissions would be lower now had we kept a liberal government, but your own chart shows that emissions increased immensely under the conservatives
[editline]13th December 2011[/editline]
Well it's more satire than anything, it's standard for the engines to be separate
A better joke would be the communication systems in them being unable to work with the systems in our existing planes[/QUOTE]
Are you looking at the same chart I am, because I see an almost steady increase until 2004, a spike in 2007, and a drop from 2008-2009, The individual case per person did decrease, albeit with abnormalities, the total amount increased, and therefore the per captia increased. It wasn't until Martin's Grits we saw any decrease, and we saw a dramatic decrease for 2008-2009, which was under a Harper minority.
My charts support my statement; Chretien, who got us into this mess, did fuck all to commit to it, and in fact did the opposite.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33697679]Are you looking at the same chart I am, because I see an almost steady increase until 2004, a spike in 2007, and a drop from 2008-2009, The individual case per person did decrease, albeit with abnormalities, the total amount increased, and therefore the per captia increased. It wasn't until Martin's Grits we saw any decrease, and we saw a dramatic decrease for 2008-2009, which was under a Harper minority.
My charts support my statement; Chretien, who got us into this mess, did fuck all to commit to it, and in fact did the opposite.[/QUOTE]
Emissions were decreasing from 2004 to 2006, then the liberals lost the election to the conservatives. From 2006 to 2007, emissions increased drastically, undoing any progress the liberals had made.
In 2007, the Clean Air act began to fix that. But if you analyze the trend, it isn't unreasonable to assume that if the liberals stayed in power the trend would have continued downwards and our total emissions would be lower than they currently are.
[editline]13th December 2011[/editline]
like I said, I'm just following the line because I don't have a What If machine
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33697714]Emissions were decreasing from 2004 to 2006, then the liberals lost the election to the conservatives. From 2006 to 2007, emissions increased drastically, undoing any progress the liberals had made.
In 2007, the Clean Air act began to fix that. But if you analyze the trend, it isn't unreasonable to assume that if the liberals stayed in power the trend would have continued downwards and our total emissions would be lower than they currently are.[/QUOTE]
If you'll note, after the clean air act, in 2009, our total emissions were at a low they hadn't seen since 1997. It was a dramatic drop. Yes, we [i]may[/i] have seen a steady, slow decrease under Martin, but we saw a rapid one under Harper. Matter of fact, that place it was at in 2009 is around where it likely would have been, maybe just a bit above, if the downward trend of 2004-2006 had continued, which was unlikely.
[editline]13th December 2011[/editline]
Actually, never mind, it would be likely, but we would have seen a much worse recession, higher costs of living, and likely more job loss due to Dillon's carbon tax he campaigned on.
[QUOTE=tehperzon;33693330]We were just learning about this stuff today in class :v:[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=garychencool;33696944]Wow, just learned it in class.[/QUOTE]
You guys in the same class? :v:
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33697750]
Actually, never mind, it would be likely, but we would have seen a much worse recession, higher costs of living, and likely more job loss due to Dillon's carbon tax he campaigned on.[/QUOTE]
Is there evidence of these carbon taxes harming the economy as much as people seem to want me to believe?
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33697984]Is there evidence of these carbon taxes harming the economy as much as people seem to want me to believe?[/QUOTE]
The amount of polluting refining industry in the country would cause the cost of refined materials to rise under a carbon tax, meaning manufacturers of things like cars would seek cheaper places to produce parts, leading to job loss. The cost of transporting goods across the country would rise, due to emissions caused by trains, planes, and trucks, thus causing the cost of shipping services to rise, and causing retailers to raise the cost to compensate, meaning things would cost more. Because industry would be looking for somewhere else to manufacture, we'd lose jobs, meaning that while cost of living would go up, average income would decrease, not to mention a new tax on the average person that they'd have to pay. Then it would also likely harm tourism, as costs of travelling to and inside Canada would increase, as airlines would raise costs to compensate the tax, as would rail lines, and car rental places, and the cost of gas would increase, yet again. I have a feeling we'd be at at least $1.50/Litre by now if it had been instated, and a buck twenty is bad enough.
All in all, I don't believe it would have been a good move for our country, especially in the time of a recession, because I feel it would have sunk us deeper into it.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33698074]The amount of polluting refining industry in the country would cause the cost of refined materials to rise under a carbon tax, meaning manufacturers of things like cars would seek cheaper places to produce parts, leading to job loss. The cost of transporting goods across the country would rise, due to emissions caused by trains, planes, and trucks, thus causing the cost of shipping services to rise, and causing retailers to raise the cost to compensate, meaning things would cost more. Because industry would be looking for somewhere else to manufacture, we'd lose jobs, meaning that while cost of living would go up, average income would decrease, not to mention a new tax on the average person that they'd have to pay. Then it would also likely harm tourism, as costs of travelling to and inside Canada would increase, as airlines would raise costs to compensate the tax, as would rail lines, and car rental places, and the cost of gas would increase, yet again. I have a feeling we'd be at at least $1.50/Litre by now if it had been instated, and a buck twenty is bad enough.
All in all, I don't believe it would have been a good move for our country, especially in the time of a recession, because I feel it would have sunk us deeper into it.[/QUOTE]
He asked you if there was concrete evidence to suggest that carbon taxes hurt the economy. All you did was say 'x would do y' over and over again.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;33698248]He asked you if there was concrete evidence to suggest that carbon taxes hurt the economy. All you did was say 'x would do y' over and over again.[/QUOTE]
Of course there isn't concrete evidence, because it wasn't implemented. That also means there isn't concrete evidence that it wouldn't harm the economy, and there never will be unless it is implemented, specifically here, because policies don't work the same everywhere. Therefore, all there is to the argument is speculation, but that doesn't bode well for the general public because of corporations trying to maximize profits.
Quite honestly, I think it's better we didn't run a carbon tax program, I feel it would have affected the standard of living here too much, especially since it was proposed in 2008.
So no, there's no concrete evidence that carbon taxes affect the Canadian economy be it at all, for better, or for worse, because there haven't been carbon taxes here. I can tell you, though, that McGuinty's tax on electronics in Ontario has, in the past, prevented me from buying a printer due to the additional cost (yes, how tragic I couldn't afford a printer, though it applies to all electronics, from Computers to (as far as I know) iPods), and the 5 cent plastic bag program in Toronto, that was supposed to see corporations invest that additional money in ways of improving the environment, has done nothing but raise CEO bonuses and provide a nearly free source of extra revenue for big businesses in Toronto.
Quite frankly, it's not a risk I'm willing to take, to see if it will indeed ruin our economy. I also don't want it because I know my parents don't want to have to pay another tax on top of the SUV that already consumes a bunch of expensive gas that they got because we needed something smaller than a van but larger than a car for when we go on vacation, outings, or carting things around, and that I need to get to work. Moreover, I could see the cost of power going up... Again... If such a tax was implemented.
The bottom line is, all we have is speculation on the topic, as it has not been attempted, to my knowledge at least, in Canada before, and until it is we can't know the affects of it, but then we'd be taking a gamble, given the kinds of industries that operate here, and the distances shipping companies have to cover to supply goods and fuel to communities.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
