Test Danielle Smith wins AB Premier Test

Rural Issues

Tools

Danielle Smith wins AB Premier

Test
Nov 19, 2022 | 08:55 211
Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
Moe's message to the federal government is taxes kill the economy but he still has the fuel tax.

So how come the fuel tax doesn't kill the economy but the carbon tax does? LOL

And the carbon tax is rebated in a large amounts directly to average consumers where as the provincial fuel tax is not except for this years $500 vote buying refund.

One of Moe's own commissioned study from a few years back on the impact of carbon taxes showed a very small impact on GDP when you count all the investments and economic activity made to reduce carbon emissions.

He didn't like that one so it was shelved and the last one he only mentioned the costs and none of the benefits that come back to the economy. Economists like Trevor Tombe from the U of C said it was crap.

Moe is like Trump who depends on the big lie and supporters who don't know the difference.

"On Tuesday, the provincial government released a policy paper titled Drawing the Line: Defending Saskatchewan's Economic Autonomy.

The 18-page document lists four options for the province to increase its autonomy, but the first section contains a claim that nine federal climate change policies will cost the economy $111 billion by 2035. The government said the provincial Ministry of Finance did the cost analysis.

University of Calgary economist Trevor Tombe said the government's analysis is well off the mark.

"The headline estimate here of $8.8 billion on average per year is massive, suggesting that federal climate policy will shrink Saskatchewan's economy by nearly 10 per cent, which is insane and completely un-credible."

Tombe said the government's analysis makes a lot of assumptions while also omitting several factors.

"They estimate [the federal carbon tax] will have a cost to Saskatchewan between now and 2035 of approximately $25 billion. But with that policy, they are ignoring that the revenue that it raises is not lit on fire. [It is] returned to Saskatchewan residents through these lump sum credits that people now receive quarterly," he said.

"Right there alone, the estimate put forward by the Saskatchewan government ignores the rebates and so that makes the cost of that particular policy [in the paper] way larger than it actually is."

Chuck2 please explain to me what benefit is a tax that according to the government 80% of taxpayers will receive back as much or more than they payed and the other 20%, those harvesting and transporting the commodities required to live and build our societies, where there really isn’t an alternative to fossil fuels, pay a significant amount of tax. What is the benefit? The U.S. is projecting it will reduce C02 emissions without a carbon tax, why do we need this tax?

Personally I think it is a perfect example of how Justin Trudeau governs. The appearance of doing something while really accomplishing nothing!!
Last edited by Hamloc; Nov 19, 2022 at 08:58.
Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Nov 19, 2022 | 08:59 212


    Reply With Quote
    Nov 19, 2022 | 09:01 213 https://leaderpost.com/news/local-news/sask-politics/economists-scorch-moes-climate-cost-analysis-in-autonomy-paper

    Economists scorch Moe’s climate cost analysis in autonomy paper

    One economist says the paper looks like “a transparent attempt to undermine support for climate change policies.”
    Author of the article:
    Jeremy Simes
    Publishing date:
    Oct 13, 2022 • October 13, 2022 • 4 minute read

    Premier Scott Moe is standing by the government’s math after some economists say cost estimates outlined in his autonomy paper don’t add up.

    Moe’s paper, which was created by Ministry of Finance officials, states federal climate policies could cost Saskatchewan $111 billion by 2035, but some economists suggest that number is too high because it fails to account for carbon tax rebates and ignores realities over the use of electric vehicles.
    Regina Leader Post Headline News Banner
    Regina Leader Post Headline News

    “Overall, it looks like a transparent attempt to undermine support for climate change policies rather than a serious cost-benefit analysis,” said Joel Bruneau, the head of the University of Saskatchewan’s economics department. “They pretend that the federal carbon tax is not refunded to the province. It is.”

    When asked why carbon tax rebates were not included in the analysis, Moe told reporters on Wednesday, “It doesn’t actually go back to who is ultimately paying it.”

    He said the Ministry of Finance’s estimates are “bang on.”

    “You’ll have economists that will say they should be higher, they should be lower,” Moe said. “We asked the Ministry of Finance to do a financial dive into what are the costs that are coming out of these nine policies.”

    Along with Bruneau, University of Regina assistant professor in economics Brett Dolter and University of Calgary economics professor Trevor Tombe agreed the policy paper fails to mention the rebates and doesn’t account for savings associated with switching to electric vehicles.

    Dolter characterized the government’s claims as “half-truths,” arguing the province is misleading the public because the analysis does not account for the benefits of going green.

    Tombe said even though climate policies will cost the government, it won’t be as high as $111 billion. Costs should be “tenths of a per cent” overtime, he said, not 10 per cent of the province’s economy.

    The finance ministry had said the carbon tax could cost the province $24.7 billion by 2035 — or $1.9 billion annually — but Tombe explained 90 per cent of the tax is rebated back to people in Saskatchewan.

    The province based its estimates on a tax of $65 per tonne in 2023 with increases of $15 per tonne, reaching $170 per tonne in 2030 and then $245 per tonne by 2035.

    “They’re presuming implicitly that that revenue is lit on fire. And it’s clearly not,” Tombe said. “This is just an egregious error and then an incredibly misleading way to approach estimating the cost of federal climate policy.”

    He added, “I think there are several aspects of the analysis that are incredibly and transparently weak.”

    In addition to not including the climate rebate, Bruneau said that while he agrees there are costs associated with expanding electric vehicles (EVs), the province doesn’t mention the savings that come when people switch to EVs from conventional gas vehicles.

    The government’s paper assumes 40 per cent of Saskatchewan’s vehicle fleet will be electric by 2035 should Ottawa require that all new light-duty vehicle sales be EVs by that year.

    It states the average cost to purchase an EV at an average premium will be $18,500 per vehicle, noting there will be extra costs that come with installing charging stations in homes and reinforcing the electrical grid.

    In total, the province says switching to EVs will cost $10.3 billion by 2035 — or $789.6 million annually.

    Even with these costs, Bruneau said consumers will pay less in gas when they switch to an EV.

    Without the policy, people will be changing to EVs regardless, he added, noting the province needs to be prepared. Major vehicle manufacturers have said they will stop making fuel-based cars in the 2030s, he said.

    Dolter said he would give back an assignment “dripping with red ink” if a student handed in a cost-analysis paper that did not include the savings.

    The government’s paper also states “fertilizer use mandates” will cost Saskatchewan $19.3 billion by 2035, but the federal government has said it’s not mandating fertilizer use.

    Moe said the government didn’t include Bill C-69, noting costs associated with that legislation would make the overall estimate higher.

    However, Dolter and Bruneau said costs associated with climate change should also be taken into account.

    “The white paper and climate policy analysis is likely influenced by both climate insincerity and good old fashioned prairie populism,” Dolter said. “People deserve honest policy debates.”

    Moe said the government is committed to addressing environmental concerns.

    jsimes@postmedia.com Reply With Quote
    jazz's Avatar Nov 19, 2022 | 09:04 214 Ha, US of S economists, might as well quote a crack addict.

    Moe is on the right track especially if left heads are exploding.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by jazz; Nov 19, 2022 at 09:08.
    Reply With Quote
  • 2 Likes


  • Nov 19, 2022 | 09:04 215 I’m going to try again chucky
    The carbon tax is on everything over and over and over again , plus GST
    Gas tax is used to build roads ,it only gets taxed on the liter once
    Carbon tax is used to finance liberal scams
    If you think you get most of your carbon tax back you are delusional
    Your lucky Pierre has your back on carbon tax on grain drying
    Even Justines new husband could see that was insane to say the least and he supported Pierre’s bill as did the bloc , only 5 greasy corrupt “pig at the trough” liberals voted against it
    Danielle has lit a fire under the west’s ass
    And you and your liberals cronies have a right to be very afraid
    What CBC does to her on a daily basis is sad and shameful Reply With Quote

  • Nov 19, 2022 | 09:07 216
    Quote Originally Posted by jazz View Post
    BC has had a carbon tax for a decade and its done zero.

    Name:  bc2.jpg
Views: 289
Size:  20.4 KB
    Oh ,I don’t know
    It has definitely supported some pretty left wing governments that think money falls from the sky
    You know , the same kind that think it’s ok to dump raw human shit into the ocean laced with every drug imaginable Reply With Quote

  • Nov 19, 2022 | 09:08 217 Moe is a liar and doesn't want to do anything that might hurt his friends in the oil and gas industry.

    Meanwhile the oil and gas industry which is based mostly somewhere else than Saskatchewan is extracting massive profits far exceeding any carbon tax on the backs of consumers and all we hear is crickets?

    Meanwhile in Great Britain the Conservatives have put a windfall tax on the oil industry to help out consumers. Reply With Quote
    Nov 19, 2022 | 09:13 218 Those who claim humans aren't causing climate change and then won't have a fair objective discussion about the costs of global climate change don't get to make climate change policy.

    With OPEC raking in billions daily and another energy crisis takes hold of the world because Russia is a pariah, the transition to low carbon energy is speeding up as every country on earth wants to have as much independence as possible from fossil energy sources.

    Carbon taxes will play only a small part. Very high market prices and Russia are having much more influence than carbon taxes could ever hope to have in the short term
    Last edited by chuckChuck; Nov 19, 2022 at 09:20.
    Reply With Quote
    Nov 19, 2022 | 09:23 219
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
    Moe is a liar and doesn't want to do anything that might hurt his friends in the oil and gas industry.

    Meanwhile the oil and gas industry which is based mostly somewhere else than Saskatchewan is extracting massive profits far exceeding any carbon tax on the backs of consumers and all we hear is crickets?

    Meanwhile in Great Britain the Conservatives have put a windfall tax on the oil industry to help out consumers.
    Chuck2 you never responded to my question for your on post 204. Why is that? It is in reference to your constant attacks on oil company profits. Reply With Quote
    Nov 19, 2022 | 09:30 220
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
    Those who claim humans aren't causing climate change and then won't have a fair objective discussion about the costs of global climate change don't get to make climate change policy.

    With OPEC raking in billions daily and another energy crisis takes hold of the world because Russia is a pariah, the transition to low carbon energy is speeding up as every country on earth wants to have as much independence as possible from fossil energy sources.

    Carbon taxes will play only a small part. Very high market prices and Russia are having much more influence than carbon taxes could ever hope to have in the short term
    And that is why they are switching to coal. 2022 will be an all time high for coal consumption.

    Tied for highest ever (projected) oil consumption.

    Projected to be highest ever nat gas consumption.

    Sounds like alternative energies are making a real dent in fossil fuel's market share.

    They sure have been successful in isolating Germany from natural gas supply shocks caused by the war. Reply With Quote
    Nov 19, 2022 | 09:34 221
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
    Those who claim humans aren't causing climate change and then won't have a fair objective discussion about the costs of global climate change don't get to make climate change policy.
    And those who claim that profits are evil and capitalism should be destroyed in the name of climate change, then won't have a fair objective discussion about the costs of destroying the energy infrastructure and economy and global climate change don't get to make climate change policy. Reply With Quote

  • Nov 19, 2022 | 10:06 222
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
    Moe is a liar and doesn't want to do anything that might hurt his friends in the oil and gas industry.

    Meanwhile the oil and gas industry which is based mostly somewhere else than Saskatchewan is extracting massive profits far exceeding any carbon tax on the backs of consumers and all we hear is crickets?

    Meanwhile in Great Britain the Conservatives have put a windfall tax on the oil industry to help out consumers.
    meanwhile , our sorry leader , is jetting around the world shovelling our money out the hatch , and i have never known him to tell the truth , what are your thoughts on true dope , is he a liar ?????? Reply With Quote
    Nov 19, 2022 | 10:26 223
    Quote Originally Posted by AlbertaFarmer5 View Post
    And those who claim that profits are evil and capitalism should be destroyed in the name of climate change, then won't have a fair objective discussion about the costs of destroying the energy infrastructure and economy and global climate change don't get to make climate change policy.
    So are you in favour of OPEC and Russia manipulating the price and supply of oil and keeping it higher priced during an energy crisis? Sounds like it!

    So where is the utopian free market capitalism that you so dream of when it comes to OPEC and Russia? You are very naive! Reply With Quote
    jazz's Avatar Nov 19, 2022 | 10:35 224
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
    You are very naive!
    Looks to me like Europe wants nuclear war more than they want nuclear energy.

    Not going to feel sorry for the willfully stupid of this world who would destroy themselves to follow the green cult into the abyss.

    Russia is just giving them what they want. Reply With Quote

  • Nov 19, 2022 | 11:21 225
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
    So are you in favour of OPEC and Russia manipulating the price and supply of oil and keeping it higher priced during an energy crisis? Sounds like it!

    So where is the utopian free market capitalism that you so dream of when it comes to OPEC and Russia? You are very naive!
    energy crisis
    FFS , you were the visionary that said fossil fuels were dead , said we didn't need anymore pipelines ? , YOU ? Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • jazz's Avatar Nov 19, 2022 | 11:28 226 Smith has to dangle some big carrots in Calgary to thwart the commies.

    Name:  dft.jpg
Views: 164
Size:  86.3 KB Reply With Quote
    Nov 19, 2022 | 13:00 227
    Quote Originally Posted by jazz View Post
    Looks to me like Europe wants nuclear war more than they want nuclear energy.

    Not going to feel sorry for the willfully stupid of this world who would destroy themselves to follow the green cult into the abyss.

    Russia is just giving them what they want.
    Correction. European politicians are guilty of all of the above mentioned crimes, the people themselves are hosting Mass protests against the war and against the sanctions and against closing nuclear energy and against giving aid to Ukraine and against the high energy costs from the failed green revolution.

    They will most likely get the revolution, it just won't be the red one that Chuck has in mind Reply With Quote
    Nov 21, 2022 | 10:45 228
    Quote Originally Posted by AlbertaFarmer5 View Post
    What happened to The narrative that Canadians got more rebates back then what they paid in carbon tax?
    I see you are slowly changing your tune and claiming that they get a lot of it back.
    More broken promises.
    Just thought I would bump this up since Chuck seems to have conveniently missed it during his hard-earned days off.

    So why did you change your tune? Remember when you and the liberals used to claim we get more back than we paid? Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • jazz's Avatar Nov 23, 2022 | 07:59 229 Smith speech last night; suspended fuel tax, inflation rebate to families and low income groups, etc

    https://twitter.com/ABDanielleSmith/status/1595240705940914177 Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Nov 23, 2022 | 08:24 230 Danielle, what a breath of fresh air!

    Alberta strong and free, take us along. There should be a western avalanche of support behind her.

    Think Trudeau and Free Loader are shaking in their boots? Reply With Quote

  • Nov 23, 2022 | 09:26 231
    Quote Originally Posted by caseih View Post
    energy crisis
    FFS , you were the visionary that said fossil fuels were dead , said we didn't need anymore pipelines ? , YOU ?
    chucky? oh chucky ?????? Reply With Quote
    Nov 23, 2022 | 09:28 232
    Quote Originally Posted by jazz View Post
    Smith speech last night; suspended fuel tax, inflation rebate to families and low income groups, etc

    https://twitter.com/ABDanielleSmith/status/1595240705940914177
    thats what moe shoulda done
    we sent our $1k moe bucks to stars Reply With Quote