Carbon tax needs to go.

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby rustled » Aug 20th, 2019, 8:44 am

We don't need to be sucked into spreading alarmist propaganda and ramping up alarmism.

You've presented a list of small countries deforesting up to 2005 to convince us we should be alarmed, and tossed in a clear cut and a stump for emotional impact.

You've said "China's getting paved over with factories" and "population growth must be reversed". Not stabilized (globally, we passed "peak child" several years ago), but reversed.

What, then, are we to make of this?

The world is literally a greener place than it was 20 years ago, and data from NASA satellites has revealed a counterintuitive source for much of this new foliage: China and India. A new study shows that the two emerging countries with the world’s biggest populations are leading the increase in greening on land. The effect stems mainly from ambitious tree planting programs in China and intensive agriculture in both countries.


You'll find more here:
viewtopic.php?f=28&t=77264&start=870

Maintaining a "we must have a carbon tax" narrative requires an extraordinary refusal to acknowledge facts and evidence contradicting the narrative.

3 people like this post.
rustled
Guru
 
Posts: 7577
Likes: 12600 posts
Liked in: 9786 posts
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 1:47 pm

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby nepal » Aug 21st, 2019, 9:26 pm

rustled wrote:We don't need to be sucked into spreading alarmist propaganda and ramping up alarmism.

‘We live in a time where news pours into our life 24/7, so creating a certain image about a subject or person is extremely easy and so is pushing inaccurate news to laymen.‘
. :130:

rustled likes this post.
nepal
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 744
Likes: 16 posts
Liked in: 267 posts
Joined: Jul 19th, 2009, 7:04 pm

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby rustled » Aug 22nd, 2019, 10:55 am

nepal wrote:
rustled wrote:We don't need to be sucked into spreading alarmist propaganda and ramping up alarmism.

‘We live in a time where news pours into our life 24/7, so creating a certain image about a subject or person is extremely easy and so is pushing inaccurate news to laymen.‘
. :130:

Indeed. (That bit I'd posted about the world being greener and people being responsible for that greening was from directly NASA: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/ames/human ... tudy-shows )

We also have unprecedented ability to source information, and to examine the sources we rely on. For example, people who didn't read Discovery Magazine in 1989 may never have come across this statement of intent from leading climate scientist Stephen Schneider, if it were not for the internet:
"On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but – which means that we must include all doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This “double ethical bind” we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both."

Bit of a bio, to help forum readers understand the extent of Schneider's influence on what we see in the media today:
Schneider was the founder and editor of the journal Climatic Change and authored or co-authored over 450 scientific papers and other publications. He was a Coordinating Lead Author in Working Group II Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Third Assessment Report and was engaged as a co-anchor of the Key Vulnerabilities Cross-Cutting Theme for the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) at the time of his death. During the 1980s, Schneider emerged as a leading public advocate of sharp reductions of greenhouse gas emissions to combat global warming.


According to his Amazon bio, "He has been involved with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in every assessment since 1988."

Book marketing often involves lobbying. Here's a link to a review of an earlier book he authored, doomsaying the coming ice age:
https://www.nytimes.com/1976/07/18/arch ... spect.html

If you choose to look, you'll find nuggets like this one:
But Schneider quotes University of Wisconsin climatologist Reid Bryson as saying that 1930–1960 “was the most abnormal period in a thousand years—abnormally mild.” In fact, conditions of steady, warm weather in the northern hemisphere during that time favored bumper harvests in the United States, the Soviet Union, and the wheat belt of northern India and Pakistan. In 1974 Schneider and Bryson tried to explain to a White House policy‐making group why conditions are likely to worsen. One of the most depressing anecdotes in the book is Schneider's description of the deaf ear their warnings received.
Bear in mind this was 1976, and he was trying to drum up alarm about the impending ice age.

The internet can be a wonderful resource for people who truly wish to understand more about the people and organizations they have trusted, and the motivations of the scientists they get their information from, and what the have done to make that information produce a desired result. For most of us, "capturing the public's imagination" by offering up "scary scenarios" and making "simplified, dramatic statements" while intentionally making "little mention of the doubts"is a far cry from pure science.

ckil likes this post.
rustled
Guru
 
Posts: 7577
Likes: 12600 posts
Liked in: 9786 posts
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 1:47 pm

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby nepal » Aug 24th, 2019, 5:46 pm

Lots of hysteria easily generated these days, but eventually hopefully the truth comes out. Lots of gullibles who are quick to jump onto the latest cause. C02 is impossible for laymen like me to quantify. The CO2 debate is likely most acute in smog-laden areas such as LA and other concentrated centres. Burning the Amazon rain forest to plant mono crops doesn’t seem like a smart thing to do, nor conversion of jungle to mono-plantations in Borneo. When I read both sides of hysteria issues, sometimes there is some middle rational. World population growth is something that is a quantifiable and real issue, increasing the demand for products and raw resources, so maybe rapid population expansion is the real issue to solve.
https://climatechangedispatch.com/massive-volcano-emissions-warming/
:admin:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

2 people like this post.
nepal
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 744
Likes: 16 posts
Liked in: 267 posts
Joined: Jul 19th, 2009, 7:04 pm

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby rustled » Aug 25th, 2019, 2:12 pm

Yes, very easily. While it is concerning that Borneo is still deforesting, we need to keep it in perspective. For example, Canada is 13 times as large and as the NASA map shows, that's but one very large country that is in the process of reforesting.

The best way to slow population expansion is by improving the lives of people living in poverty in third world countries. As a bonus, while people coming out of poverty will use more resources per capita in the sort term the uptick in resource use tends to level out at about the same time the community turns more of its attention to reducing pollution and other projects to improve the environment, like reforestation.

Hans Rosling did a lot of work to increase our understanding of population growth (impacts of health, education and religion) before he died.

Here's one:
https://www.gapminder.org/videos/religions-and-babies/

The carbon tax has been at best a distraction, at worst an impediment.

ckil likes this post.
rustled
Guru
 
Posts: 7577
Likes: 12600 posts
Liked in: 9786 posts
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 1:47 pm

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby bb49 » Aug 25th, 2019, 4:53 pm

With this topic into it's 45th page, I haven't read much of it but the odd thought regarding the Carbon Tax does come to mind.
1. Has anyone here turned down their heat in the winter in order to oblige the purpose of this tax.
2. The same applies to driving vehicles. Has anyone cut back on the amount of driving they're doing?

Isn't that the purpose of the Carbon Tax? Getting us to produce less carbon.

For me, the answer to both is NO.
Diversity is our Burden

3 people like this post.
User avatar
bb49
 
Posts: 86
Likes: 164 posts
Liked in: 74 posts
Joined: Jul 16th, 2019, 2:38 pm

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby mikest2 » Aug 25th, 2019, 6:32 pm

bb49 wrote:With this topic into it's 45th page, I haven't read much of it but the odd thought regarding the Carbon Tax does come to mind.
1. Has anyone here turned down their heat in the winter in order to oblige the purpose of this tax.
2. The same applies to driving vehicles. Has anyone cut back on the amount of driving they're doing?

Isn't that the purpose of the Carbon Tax? Getting us to produce less carbon.

For me, the answer to both is NO.


Yup, me too, I'm as low as I can go with the limbo. I could sell the house, move into a sod hut (which would require burning wood) Had my air conditioning go down on the friday of the last long weekend, so we did a seven day test with fans and bug screens. The only way we could have cooled the house sufficiently would of required moving it to the lower mainland or Vancouver island. I'm waiting to hear about the Parliament turning down the heat and turning off the air conditioning. I only have electricity for heat and cooling, so at least I'm not a two faced natural gas burning virtue signaler. The only way I can cut down on burning vehicle fuels is to stop working. Wow, i fell better now !
Once I thought I was wrong.....but I was mistaken...

3 people like this post.
mikest2
Übergod
 
Posts: 1277
Likes: 1065 posts
Liked in: 1777 posts
Joined: Aug 7th, 2006, 10:00 pm

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby Jlabute » Sep 4th, 2019, 8:16 pm

Justin Trudeau? NO! Trust in Judo!

2 people like this post.
User avatar
Jlabute
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2481
Likes: 1486 posts
Liked in: 1744 posts
Joined: Jan 18th, 2009, 2:08 pm

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby csm » Sep 6th, 2019, 8:56 am

Verum wrote:
Walking Wounded wrote:...
Carbon taxes have proven to work. More taxes less carbon released.

B.S. people need to heat their homes, some people need to drive for work so they either lose money or charge more for their services. Carbon taxes are a complete rip off that won’t do a damn thing to cut carbon emissions. It’s just another way politicians can steal our money to pay for their expense accounts and golden pensions.


So, improve the insulation in your home, wear a sweater when it's cold, charge more for the services and get a more efficient vehicle when it is time to replace the old one, etc. The whole idea of carbon tax is to shape behaviour, put the cost of the emissions on the emitter and complaining that such isn't trivial or without requiring changes to one's life is to miss the whole point. It's like complaining that you pay more for water when you use it to water your private golf-course, than someone who just grows a few vegetables in their back yard.
Carbon taxes are widely accepted by economists to help lower emissions (not enough, but a start) as they help address one of the major problems of capitalism (as seen by capitalist economists like Friedman), the negative externality problem.[/quote]
Well, it isn't "widely accepted" - it's widely forced upon us - like any communist autocracy!!

Perhaps that "Carbon Tax" should go to grants so people can improve home insulation, install more energy efficient furnaces, replace single pane windows, Solar, Wind - the list goes on??

There was an engine invented in the 60's, that was driven by water ( H20) - it never made it to market - the guy was murdered - and fingers pointed to either the oil cartel or the U.S. Government itself. The technology got patented by one of the U.S.'s puppet private corporations never to be heard from again.

If one guy can do it, so can others.

Secondly - we also get charged GST on that tax - so - you say people should improve their - well, if the government taxes all the money out of your pocket, just exactly how are we suppose to pay for it? Also, what about renters that pay the utilities - they don't have a choice to improve efficiency - all they can do is "freeze" in the winter since the Government is not only taking all their heating budget, but it cuts into food budgets as well.

But, I'm sure your well heeled and don't have to live from paycheck to paycheck like most do. I call that the Marie Antoinette Syndrome - "if the people are starving, let them eat cake"!! That statement got her a haircut, and the rest of the "elite" better watch their butts because there will come a turning point when we have had enough of being ripped off.
Amazing how Liberal Fanatics are great at blaming others for Canada's problems, but when asked about their accomplishments - have nothing to say!

Fidel Trudeau is an Autocrat and Dictator - "Ship Him Back To Cuba"!!
User avatar
csm
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 737
Likes: 932 posts
Liked in: 661 posts
Joined: Apr 26th, 2005, 1:14 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby csm » Sep 6th, 2019, 9:14 am

bb49 wrote:With this topic into it's 45th page, I haven't read much of it but the odd thought regarding the Carbon Tax does come to mind.
1. Has anyone here turned down their heat in the winter in order to oblige the purpose of this tax.
2. The same applies to driving vehicles. Has anyone cut back on the amount of driving they're doing?

Isn't that the purpose of the Carbon Tax? Getting us to produce less carbon.

For me, the answer to both is NO.


Actually, I keep my heat at just what's comfortable, and I wear a sweater - I have done that since long before any carbon tax. I have a 4 bedroom home, and my electrical is on an equalized payment plan of $103/mo., and I paid $758 last year for gas ( including tax ).

I'm single, so I don't use my oven much ( use a countertop convection oven ), I use my air fryer, and I have changed all my lightbulbs to LED and have an energy efficient TV.

On the downside, - I'm getting older - my circulation isn't as good as it used to be and I feel the cold more - and my arthritis also gets triggered by it - so how is it fair I have to pay more when I actually am earning less?

I've paid about $1 million in tax over my lifetime ( in today's money ) - now you expect me to pay more simply to survive? Just how "justifiable" is that??

I have a right to live comfortably - and I (still ) work to do so - I don't work just to give everything I have to an autocracy that will just take it, pay themselves generously, and squander the rest.

In my opinion is there are Di's infesting this forum running interference for their "Special Interest's" and I've got a pretty good idea who they are now. What bugs me, is some of them are likely getting paid well with MY honestly earned tax money, not dishonest "Tax Hogs"!!

Don't forget - Trudeau's "Carbon Tax" portion is paid by us "Taxpayers" since we pay his living and travel expenses.
Amazing how Liberal Fanatics are great at blaming others for Canada's problems, but when asked about their accomplishments - have nothing to say!

Fidel Trudeau is an Autocrat and Dictator - "Ship Him Back To Cuba"!!
User avatar
csm
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 737
Likes: 932 posts
Liked in: 661 posts
Joined: Apr 26th, 2005, 1:14 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby Merry » Sep 10th, 2019, 8:01 am

Proof positive that the carbon tax doesn’t work
Carbon emissions in British Columbia in 2017 were only slightly below 2007 levels despite a long-running strategy to fight climate change that includes a carbon tax, new data show.

The data released Monday by the B.C. Ministry of Environment and Climate Change measured 64.46 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions in 2017 compared with 64.76 million tonnes in 2007.

B.C. implemented North America’s first broad-based carbon tax in 2008 to put a price on carbon pollution, which currently stands at $40 per tonne and is slated to increase to $50 per tonne by 2021

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/ ... -near-200/

If we truly want to improve our environment we need strong regulations, with strict enforcement. Not a silly “feel good” tax that achieves nothing except making life more expensive.
"In a world swathed in political correctness, the voting booth remains the final sanctuary where the people are free to speak" - Clifford Orwin

csm likes this post.
User avatar
Merry
Guru
 
Posts: 9606
Likes: 9007 posts
Liked in: 8453 posts
Joined: Nov 2nd, 2008, 12:41 pm

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby floppi » Sep 10th, 2019, 8:11 am

Except, if not for the Tax, 2017 levels would be even higher than the 2007 levels. There was a significant drop off of ghg after the tax was introduced but the BC Liberals capped the Tax and used the rebates for other things. After the Tax was capped, the emissions started to go back up again but it's still no where the levels it would be without the Carbon Tax.

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/soe/indicators ... sions.html
floppi
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3417
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 1134 posts
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007, 12:46 pm

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby csm » Sep 10th, 2019, 9:08 am

floppi wrote:Except, if not for the Tax, 2017 levels would be even higher than the 2007 levels. There was a significant drop off of ghg after the tax was introduced but the BC Liberals capped the Tax and used the rebates for other things. After the Tax was capped, the emissions started to go back up again but it's still no where the levels it would be without the Carbon Tax.

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/soe/indicators ... sions.html


| guess you aren't taking into account the last 5 years of forest fires that aren't even factored into the equation?

I'm getting sick of people advocating for more and more taxes - that just doesn't seem "normal" to me and puts up a whole row of red flags - and my suspicions are that some of these "people" either aren't even "taxpayers" but government sponsored disinformationists ( who may even be in another country ) and placed into these forums for only one reason - to help with Government Propaganda.


removed
Last edited by Catsumi on Sep 10th, 2019, 9:16 am, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Off topic
Amazing how Liberal Fanatics are great at blaming others for Canada's problems, but when asked about their accomplishments - have nothing to say!

Fidel Trudeau is an Autocrat and Dictator - "Ship Him Back To Cuba"!!

Merry likes this post.
User avatar
csm
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 737
Likes: 932 posts
Liked in: 661 posts
Joined: Apr 26th, 2005, 1:14 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby csm » Sep 10th, 2019, 9:11 am

butcher99 wrote:
seewood wrote:^^^ Never happen unfortunately. Once governments get a taste of revenue producing tax especially under the guise of being " green" there is no way any government will get rid of it entirely....unless your Rob Ford.


Carbon taxes have proven to work. More taxes less carbon released.


That's BS - if you make a statement like that - show some "legitimate" proof, not government propaganda - remember, it's the government that is the direct beneficiary, of course they are going to "say" it works - it's a pile of *bleep*, the same stuff Trudeau is made of.
Amazing how Liberal Fanatics are great at blaming others for Canada's problems, but when asked about their accomplishments - have nothing to say!

Fidel Trudeau is an Autocrat and Dictator - "Ship Him Back To Cuba"!!

Merry likes this post.
User avatar
csm
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 737
Likes: 932 posts
Liked in: 661 posts
Joined: Apr 26th, 2005, 1:14 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Carbon tax needs to go.

Postby floppi » Sep 10th, 2019, 9:43 am

https://cichprofile.ca/module/8/section ... -and-2015/

http://behindthenumbers.ca/2017/05/24/c ... port-card/

Except for Alberta, who we all know is oil friendly and was caught recently cheating on their ghg emission level reporting, all the other Provines who had either Carbon Tax or Cap and Trade, like Ontario did until Ford, their ghg emission levels from 2005 levels went down in 2015.
floppi
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3417
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 1134 posts
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007, 12:46 pm

PreviousNext

Return to B.C.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], George Orwell 1984 and 1 guest