I never said they could not do the job. As an example Freeland was a journalist and Trudeau at best a arts teacher. Now lets say John Carney was the Prime Minister he has extensive financial experience which many would say can come in handy

We all have our specialties. Its a learn on the fly job. That is why I do not understand when you have a competent minister and you switch them to another portfolio.

Were do you find fault in my opinion on F35"s or Trudeaus 2030 climate goals? Its not like I do not provide support on both. On the F35's I actually provide Justin Trudeaus own policy stance when he got elected that this was a bad contract which I agree with. Nothing has changed the plane is still plagued with problems.



The difference is I can be critical of all politicians and yes I use Whataboutisms but I do not troll every post

You and I are not really in a proper position to know all the gradations of a competent minister. Sure, the extreme cases are kind of obvious, but politics is politics, so often times there is more to it than whatever simple variables you or I would use from the outside looking in.

You have a comical history of crazed whatabout style posting, nearly always with an anti-Trudeau angle, so when you post another whatabout anti-Trudeau post, that post will quickly fall into the "there he goes again." By sheer math you may have an actual reasonable point once in a while, but why should anyone else really spend time trying to determine when that happens given your posting history. Better to play the math and assume its another "you do not like Trudeau, we get it" post and move on. I know you regard posts like this as trolling, but it is not. You carved your narrow lane, so you have to accept the consequences in how your opinions are valued as a result.

Just filled up my tank this morning. It's great living in a province that doesn't hate it's constituents.

You do understand why this is why folks have no sympathy for Albertan's when the economy goes bad. Why not use that tax you are collecting to pay down the deficit or save it for a rainy day.

On the bright side Danielle Smith is back in the game for Provincial Politics. If she had never crossed the floor she might be Premier of the Province of Alberta right now

https://calgarysun.com/opinion/colum...186c197633a3b5

Pretty much why you would never be able to get wealth like Norway did .
Congrats .

You do understand I don't care if people have sympathy for Albertans. Why not, not charge the tax and let people pay down their deficit or save it for a rainy day? Crazy concept I know.

his talking about government deficit....

shifty complains about high inflation, high taxes, high debts

How and when u suggesting to pay it down ?

ps: btw they did exactly what u propose for decades and look where it got them....always complaining not enough money and look how they manage it lol
But yeah, we get you dont care about anyone but yourself ...

Yes, I do not like any of those. Alberta government isn't paying down their debt?

I understand it's a bit shocking to people (a government voluntarily lowering taxes) but it is possible if you vote properly.

Yup keep lowering tax ,
create more deficits,
forcing government to print even more money while being force to keep interest low for creating more Inflation …..
and keep lowering tax afterwards …..and repeat !
U will get there


MEanwhile Norway at over 1.4 trillion in its wealth funds while alberta sovereign funds not even 20 billions .
Nice success story bro !

But hey , u got lower taxes and saves 13 cent Per litres , your rich !

Isn't it bizarre how all these anti-carbon tax politicians just never, ever, ever mention that 90% of the tax is rebated back to citizens? OMG the tax goes up! (never say anything about the refund going back). It's fine to not like the carbon tax. But at least criticize it in a halfways honest way.

Right wing always focus on spending and cost and never on refund and benefits .
So obv they will always see things negatively and out of context .

90 % goes back to the citizens. I am curious were you get that number?

This is a perfect example of what I’m talking about. Lozen is moderately well informed, more so than the average citizen. Yet because conservative politicians just endlessly lie through omission about the carbon tax, he is unclear about perhaps the most basic point: that 90% of the revenue is debated right back to the pockets of Canadians.

No I am asking you show me were you get that? If its from the government I may question it.

From my understanding is it is based on Income on the rebate.

I do not believe talking points I look at what I pay at the pump and on my utility bills. I think you forget that carbon tax adds to the cost of everything as suppliers have to add that into their costs. The feds do not account for that either

Lozen, it’s in the ****ing law. If you only look at what you pay at the pump and on utilities, you are going to miss out on noticing the rebate which is a little over a 1000 in Alberta for a family of four iirc.

Want to lower your carbon tax? Make choices that use less carbon. Incredibly, you still get the same amount back!

Family of four Great that does nothing for me. Again were do you get your 90% number because I call BS .

I have no issue with the carbon tax overall I think Kenney was an idiot not to collect and invest in carbon capture. Notley had that right.

So please provide me with the link that says 90% of CDNs get more money back than pay

ffs man, it’s 90% of the revenue is rebated, not 90% of families getting more money back. How are you this ignorant about how the law works. Sure, I’ll link you the first google result so you don’t have to: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carb...cing_in_Canada

My apologies for being so ignorant. So were does this 90% of revenues go? Do we have some accounting of that?

My main point on the carbon tax is that it is a conservative tax as it effects rural folks more. As well it does next to nothing in lowering emissions on the individual side as noted Canada has increased its emissions every year .

You know as well as I do they are never hitting their 2030 goals with the Oil & gas sector lowering emissions by 42%

Why not just pay 100% tax on everything instead of 70%. Then the government won't have a deficit and we can get bigger rebates! It'll be great!

What are you just even talking about …..

Fwiw 70% ? Lol .
Typical exaggeration trying to make a point that in the end makes no sense at all, trying to diverge the discussion to a less obvious failure of government policy from kenney and the right .

Mind as well say 13 cent a litre = 70% of taxes ?
U strong in math …

I'm genuinely shocked that after all this time you don't understand the most basic way the carbon tax works. The 90% of revenues from the tax go directly to the people in the provinces the tax was raise from. Say alberta got $100 million in tax revenue, then Alberta citizens would get $90 million in rebates.

You've been getting the rebate in your tax returns already. You just didn't realize it.

I paid $45.29 in carbon tax on my January bill and add in the carbon tax I pay on my fuel and no way I am getting more back than I pay.

Call me ignorant like 75 % of CDN's than

I'm going to come to lozen's defense on this one - it's not at all surprising he doesn't know how it works. It seems to change every year or two, and there are differences between the provinces. I pay little attention to it, because here in BC it's income-based. Family income over $60-65,000 means you get nothing. I think that's great, but since I get nothing, like lozen I don't have an in-depth knowledge of it.

Lozen, from my reading I think in Alberta it's somewhere around $500-600/year for a single adult, and 50% more for a second adult in a family.