Again with another misogynistic "The View" comment? What a weird trash talking hole that is you created for yourself. Do you mutter about Whoopie (who I now know is on the show when you said that the last time you went weird on that show) when you walk around or is it just Trudeau that does that for you?

There is no rule - you can post crazy derpy manifestos and call them "news stories" if you like, just as I can point out how your references should generally be dismissed because you always misrepresent them. You do not seem to disagree as all you do when you mislabel your derpy sources is whine about "The View." Maybe learn to cite better sources or be more truthful about them to others or even yourself. Or - don't - in the end it is not like your posts have any influence anyway. Perhaps an episode of the View can help you with that in the future.

All the best.

Rebates though! And half the country is burning so what choice do we have!

https://www.westernstandard.news/bus...df5f6b312.html

As much as you want that derpy source and story to be taken seriously, the reality is that on that site it falls below the most popular story which is of course...

https://www.westernstandard.news/new...a55ca782f.html

"XXX-rated photos from Hunter Biden laptop released "

Hunter! Hunter!

All the best.

Man, that half the country is burning line sure did a ****ing number on Shifty huh. I wonder if he got far enough past the headline to realize the professor fully supports the carbon tax?

There's been a bit of an uptick in faux-science journalism where derpy websites grab some isolated contextless detail from a PhD econ student or whatever and it starts getting shown around social media to support one's pre-formed conclusions. That isn't science journalism. That's weaponizing science for the sake of punditry.

This is an interesting potential consequence mentioned in the study. And it makes sense, actually. High-emitting borrowers are at higher credit risk of emissions based regulations like the carbon tax - as they should be - and so paying higher interest rates helps mitigate that risk. This is an example of the carbon tax working, that high-emitting industries are disincentivized in the economy.

Of course half the country is burning . We do not have the resources to battle all these fires. Is climate change responsible ? Of course it is Will any of Justin's policies solve this issue including the carbon tax other than destroy CDN jobs and increase the cost of living . Not a chance

What does it matter JT destroy jobs or not ?
Workers are missing not jobs …..

He is shipping those jobs to China that is the problem . A regime that doesn't care about workers rights or safety and is the biggest polluter out there

Lozen, do you think Canada does or does not have a moral responsibility to try to limit it's greenhouse gas emissions?

That is a really good question . I would say Canada needs to do its part on reducing emissions as well as becoming energy independent even though anything it will do will have little impact as climate change can not be solved unless China, India and South America jump aboard

I think Canada has to assess which areas provide the most economic benefit to Canada and which do not. It also should determine the biggest polluters and reduce those first. Sadly it does not do that . The policies in place are based on votes were you lose and gain votes . I have also said I do not have an issue with a carbon tax just the way it is administered . Again its nothing more than buying votes

I am still not convinced an electric car is better overall than a combustion one but that is the path were headed. I do agree our biggest priority should be eliminating the use of coal but that is not the federal governments plan

All we need to do is look at Europe the biggest failure yet in going green

Morally which is better a combustion driven vehicle or an electric vehicle?

lol?
its been happening for over 25 years .
nafta been made under mulroney .
welcome to the real world ....

describe the failure ?

Ok, and what mechanism do you think the government should put in place to reduce emissions? There are basically three models:

• Government regulates. Example Cap & trade like califoria
• Government prices carbon. Ex Carbon Tax
• Government incentivizes non-carbon sources. Ex feed-in-tarrifs in Ontario

Which of those three primary mechanisms do you think the government should pursue to reduce emissions?


This is false. The liberals have been steadily phasing out the remaining coal with a complete phase-out of all electricity providing coal by 2030 that doesn't use carbon capture and storage- including the american pass-through you like to bring up. Of course the conservatives plan no such thing.

Europe has brought back over 30 coal fired power plants with Germany the most . They are rationing in many countries the power or gas you can use

We're do you think the majority of clean energy is produced ?
Batteries,solar panels .....

I personally do not think any of them will have any effect on climate change


Lets be clear when you take office and you take 15 years to phase out American pass through on coal one of the easiest things to do is halt it in one to two years your not serious about climate change but more BC Votes

Please do not use the whataboutism the conservatives have no plan.

all temporary due to inflation.
now tell me u really believe that green switch was possible without inflation?

without russia idiotic move, all the problem u enumerated would not of happened.

how jt succesfull on conservative votes with its oil policies ?

if it was only for votes, oil investment would of been finish a long time ago.
so try find another gimmick...

so ?

if those policies wouldnt work what will ?

fwiw i believe the taxing policies are usually the best because it forces corporations / consumers to make adjustment while leaving the government out of the free market to find solution how it should work !
lord knows how usually it ends up bad when government start to meddle with economics right ?

So your relying on China for your energy . Ask Germany how that worked out for them with Russia.

Let's keep CDN energy and CDN jobs right were they are .

Inflation ??? WTF

Try supply

Canada rely on china energy ?
lol we have massive amount of hydro and oil/gaz.

like i said we already have too much jobs, companies missing workers.

lack supply causes inflation.
too much money create inflation.

they had both which obv. no one could of predict a pandemic crisis and russia going ******.
does that mean making the turn to green was a mistake ?
absolutely not because once the hard transition being done, europe will laugh thier ass off on those that didnt.

You slipped off the argument. Set this talking point aside. You just agreed that Canada DOES have a moral responsibility to "do it's part" to reduce emissions. So then the question turns to by what mechanism do you think Canada should do it's part? What approach should the government take? You seem to oppose the carbon tax - the most market based approach - so what alternative do you instead prefer?


I agree that it can and should be done faster, but it isn't a whataboutism to note that conseratives don't plan to do it AT ALL. It was conservatives that brought it in, it was under the conservatives that the decade long contracts were signed, and it is conservatives who want to keep it. I also think the Liberals should have closed it faster than the same 2030 deadline they use for all their climate policies, but at least it is consistent with all the other plans. And it is worth noting that electrical coal generation HAS been falling under the liberals (and before that, it's halfed between 2011 and 2021). Mostly the electrical coal generating occurs in Alberta and Saskatchewan and it is the fault of those provinces and their conservative leaders that it hasn't been eliminated like it has in previously high coal places like Ontario. Shame on the conservatives all round. Who are you voting for again? Oh, that's right. So you don't get a right to talk about coal.