carbon tax

[fjlip]

"You don't want to do anything because there is no climate crisis and more CO2 in the atmosphere is good for the planet!"

Absolutely! Total BULLSHIT, LIES made up C02 %, average my AZZ, impossible! World temp to a tenth of a degree, F*CKING joke! A CULT/ RELIGION, nothing can be proven, no forecast has ever come true in past 100 years. Climate always changing, always will, we can do SFA about it. ADAPT, think about important stuff, not warming a few degrees. Nothing could be better for this ICEBOX than warmer. CC you never refuted the data cherry picking yet... https://moneymaven.io/mishtalk/economics/global-warming-fraud-exposed-in-pictures-bA-1mNrK0kiarserpfa9iA/2019-10-02T22:29:32.6266770Z/zqymapiRiEykgCTlPDGg9Q/?replyPage=1 https://moneymaven.io/mishtalk/economics/global-warming-fraud-exposed-in-pictures-bA-1mNrK0kiarserpfa9iA/2019-10-02T22:29:32.6266770Z/zqymapiRiEykgCTlPDGg9Q/?replyPage=1

[blackpowder]

It's a consumption tax going into general revenues.
Reduce emissions?
Hopefully not like sin taxes have reduced tobacco and alcohol usage.
Maybe Kenney can at least keep it all here.

[chuckChuck]

Why do you keep deflecting back to BC's CO2 tax instead of responding to questions about the CO2 tax as it applies to grain farmers? Is it some type of attention deficit disorder? This is as ridiculous as the previous thread when you kept pointing at Saskatchewans lax off-shore drilling regulations when asked to compare Sask's oil spill record to the rest of the world. And there was a map attached to the thread in which you could have actually checked into how many of Sask's spills were off shore, but you didn't.

But since you brought it up, great point about the CO2 tax being returned to CONSUMERS. Farmers are not consumers, they are businesses, using orders of magnitude more fossil fuels than any average consumer, their personal rebate is irrelevant compared to the expense. And that is what the politicians et al refuse to acknowledge, that this is a transfer of wealth from productive businesses who don't vote, to buy off individual voters. They keep saying consumers will get more back than they paid, without ever mentioning how that is possible, or who is paying more than their share.

Saskatchewan and Alberta had a chance to ask for a rebate on the carbon tax on drying fuels at the premiers conference. There was not a mention of it or anything about agriculture. Call your Premier and ask why he didn't bring this up!

So there is your answer on how important it is to Saskatchewan and Alberta governments.

It doesn't matter whether farmers are large or small, they still consume energy and the rebates can match their consumption.

The oil industry is trying to become energy efficient and reduce carbon emissions per unit of production. Why shouldn't agriculture also try to do this?

You don't want to do anything because there is no climate crisis and more CO2 in the atmosphere is good for the planet! Correct?

[chuckChuck]

Yes Chuck when the B.C. Liberal's implemented the carbon tax they endeavoured to make it revenue neutral, that went out the window when the NDP was elected. They have increased the carbon tax, they have increased corporate taxes and brought in many other taxes and the carbon tax is now nowhere near revenue neutral. Governments look at a carbon tax as an publicly acceptable way to increase taxes and therefore revenue!!!!

The two biggest budget items in most provinces are healthcare and education. I doubt anyone supports cutting either with lower tax revenues. The provinces just asked for more federal help with healthcare.

A carbon tax can be used for general revenues it can also be used to cut other types of taxes. Each province can decide.

The evidence is BCs carbon tax cut emissions as a percentage of GDP and strong economic growth continued.

Governments can provide support to industries or sectors who are not able to pass on carbon taxes through rebates, tax cuts or by other means.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

That's why I said there is case for an exemption or a rebate of the carbon tax on propane or natural gas. But that wont change the fact that drying is still expensive or that farmers have low margins.

Yes, but this is a climate crisis, exempting farmers will only encourage us to do the wrong thing, and keep emitting planet killing CO2. That is not the type of action you take in the middle of a crisis, please act like this is a crisis that you take seriously. If you need refreshed, Grassfarmer linked a 102 page report from NFU detailing how the climate crisis will affect farmers, and how to fix it.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

BC used their carbon tax to reduce other taxes. So it isn't just about collecting more revenues for government.

Moe and Kenney never mention that a lot of the federal carbon tax is being returned to consumers with a tax credit! That wouldn't fit with their stories about how bad the carbon tax is. LOL

"its just politics" right!

Why do you keep deflecting back to BC's CO2 tax instead of responding to questions about the CO2 tax as it applies to grain farmers? Is it some type of attention deficit disorder? This is as ridiculous as the previous thread when you kept pointing at Saskatchewans lax off-shore drilling regulations when asked to compare Sask's oil spill record to the rest of the world. And there was a map attached to the thread in which you could have actually checked into how many of Sask's spills were off shore, but you didn't.

But since you brought it up, great point about the CO2 tax being returned to CONSUMERS. Farmers are not consumers, they are businesses, using orders of magnitude more fossil fuels than any average consumer, their personal rebate is irrelevant compared to the expense. And that is what the politicians et al refuse to acknowledge, that this is a transfer of wealth from productive businesses who don't vote, to buy off individual voters. They keep saying consumers will get more back than they paid, without ever mentioning how that is possible, or who is paying more than their share.

[Hamloc]

BC used their carbon tax to reduce other taxes. So it isn't just about collecting more revenues for government.

Moe and Kenney never mention that a lot of the federal carbon tax is being returned to consumers with a tax credit! That wouldn't fit with their stories about how bad the carbon tax is. LOL

"its just politics" right!

Yes Chuck when the B.C. Liberal's implemented the carbon tax they endeavoured to make it revenue neutral, that went out the window when the NDP was elected. They have increased the carbon tax, they have increased corporate taxes and brought in many other taxes and the carbon tax is now nowhere near revenue neutral. Governments look at a carbon tax as an publicly acceptable way to increase taxes and therefore revenue!!!!

[chuckChuck]

Did you forget about the climate emergency? We are evidently in the middle of a climate crisis, and suddenly you want to stop and do a cost-benefit analysis ?

For some reason it wasn't necessary to do them for solar or wind, And that was back in the days when we just had climate change, not yet a crisis.

How do you hypocrites expect the rest of us to take this seriously when you obviously don't yourselves?

Nope I didn't forget.

This talk about modular nuclear happened many times before in Saskatchewan and nothing has happened! Blakeney, Devine and Wall, all signed MOUs to look at small scale nuclear before.

The plan is at at least 10 years away if ever, so its not a solution at this point. Not off the drawing board yet. How is it possible to know what it will cost if there are no plans?

Sask power is already installing gas, wind, solar, and importing hydro from Manitoba. They obviously have priced it out and decided what they want to do. Gas and hydro are going to replace coal for base load.

Why did Sask Power never offer nuclear as an option? Too expensive for a small market and coal and hydro were less expensive.

At this point the carbon tax is too small to motivate farmers to change. But we all know if prices for anything rise and there are affordable and effective alternatives consumers will choose those options. Or they will reduce consumption, which is the reason for a carbon tax.

When the price of gas was very high during the peak of commodity boom consumers started choosing more energy efficient vehicles. It was hard to sell pickups. Why? There was no carbon tax at the time, what was the motivation?

Even with a full carbon tax rebate or exemption, farmers are still stuck with a very high cost of drying. Many farmers will look for ways to reduce drying costs through management. There is a case for exemptions or rebates. Rebates are good because the incentives still remain and you are rewarded for reducing carbon emissions by keeping more of the rebate in your pocket.

Just kidding about the nuclear option! LOL

why ??? you have never heard of an electric heat source for a dryer ???? powered by a nuclear generator ? **** man , you gotta get out more

[chuckChuck]

Is there something radically wrong with you ??
Are you not aware there is not a lot of disposable income left in this buisness?
Maybe you dont understand that farmers cannot pass this on as every other buisness did ?
I seriously wonder about your mental state ?

That's why I said there is case for an exemption or a rebate of the carbon tax on propane or natural gas. But that wont change the fact that drying is still expensive or that farmers have low margins.