This is the danger of embracing your whataboutisms. Each becomes its own ****ing rabbit hole when the answer doesn't matter one iota. But if you don't plug all the whataboutims of yours, you just keep repeating them ad nauseum.

So fine, let's explain the basic facts of how carbon taxes work. For everything - oil, coal, smelting, railroads, mining, etc - it is the same thing. The carbon tax charges per tonne of consumed carbon released in Canada. So if you produce oil or coal in Canada, the charges are based on the carbon emissions that it takes to produce it. Exported oil from Alberta doesn't get a carbon tax put on the emissions that oil would create when burned, it gets taxes on the emissions needed to produce it. Same as coal. That's what everyone is complaining about, the tax on the production.

And that structure makes sense. We don't incentivize japanese smelting plants from refining our metalurgical coal more efficiently by putting in a charge before hand. But we DO incentivize our miners to be more energy efficient by charging for those production emissions in Canada.

But let's be clear: you are arguing exactly backwards of the conservative position. The conservative position is to issue export-rebates so the carbon tax on production of things like oil and coal are rebated so as to not create competitive disadvantages, thus keeping the carbon tax more constrained to things fully inside of Canada. You are basically advocating for a much MORE expansive Carbon Tax that would have much more crippling effects on the economy. That's great, I might even support such a much more aggressive tax, but it makes your whole "I would like the carbon tax BUT WHAT ABOUT" position pretty silly.

You can keep claiming it's basic economics all you want, it doesn't change the fact that you are wrong. I am not surprised by what you are saying I am surprised that people think it's a good idea. You used to claim a carbon tax was to create imaginary green markets now your argument is you want to make things so expensive people consume less.

Again you are confusing luxury economics to necessity. This is really going to have a negative impact on low income people. Higher income people will just pay extra, soccer mom's won't be trading in the safety and conveince of SUV's/Vans anytime soon. Most people that are willing or able to use public transportation for daily commutes already do. Just like you were wrong about the economics of cancelling pipelines you are wrong about the negative of a carbon tax.

Weird, you would think it would have been the states that lifted the mask mandate and lockdowns.

Lets be clear I understand the carbon tax but do not believe it is effective in saving the planet from climate change. Its a drop in the bucket on a world problem were countries like China do not care about it. You may say Canada needs to be a leader on Climate change. Well than why not be a leader on China and Saudi Arabia?

My other point is its hypocritical to be against all of Alberta's dirty oil as a province when you allow coal that is not allowed through the ports of California and Washington that do not allow it as a climate strategy but allow it through your port to generate jobs and income for your province. Its also hypocritical to make your stance as you pollute the oceans releasing by releasing 40 million gallons a year.

My position is we have a population that is growing at a rate that the earth can not accommodate as well these people consume more and more every year .
Sadly the only thing that has a chance of saving us is technology or to wipe out 25% of the earth's population.

Were stuck with the carbon tax and reality is the conservatives have no chance at winning the next election. Though Justin has little chance as well.
I think the liberals would have a better chance of a majority dumping Justin and running Chrystia Freeland . Justin just keeps on racking up scandal after scandal and ethics violations.

Terrible sad position.

There is a difference between ressource available to consume from human production and ressource available from the planet itself .

Im not sure your quote talks about the latter.

gtfo. Like sure, throw out your WHATABOUTISMS if you really must, but I slapped this the **** down already:
To say that I am hypocritical because my city was - note the past tense was - the last major jurisdiction in Canada to dump raw sewage - is pathetic. I have been advocating for the recently built sewage treatment plant for 20 ****ing years. Not that this would remotely be an argument against a carbon tax even if I was an opponent of sewage treatment - that would make it just a pathetic WHATABOUTISM - but to accuse me of being hypocritical despite me already explaining I supported sewage treatment....I don't even know....like do you even read my posts? wtf is the point?

Call me crazy but I'd rather be where Australia and New Zealand are than where Florida is. Both are currently at zero community transmission while Florida still has cases raging and is about to be hit by the third wave, even while getting tons of vaccine.

The world leader in response should really be Taiwan anyways. They did literally everything right by listening to their expert, who was himself educated in the USA. No lockdown at all and just a handful of cases and deaths.

Ok, what's your point? The post was talking about the differences between California and Florida.

Covid "now completely out of control on ontario" ummm

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...ario-1.5968720

Plus now we have this Astro Zeneca Vaccine question

Now they are saying they do not want folks under 55 taking it . I am not sure if they still do want folks over 65 taking it.
I personally have some reservations once we get some more vaccines here in Alberta about taking the Astro Zeneca and may wait for a Pfizer or Morderna

This is the wrong attitude. The virus is raging NOW, so now is when you need protection. Wait two or three months for a 'better' vaccine and all you're doing is exposing yourself to more risk from covid. It's like passing on a bulletproof vest made of kevlar in favor of one made of ceramic three months from now. But the gunfight is happening now.

Also you're at far worse risk of a bad result stemming from covid than you are from the AZ vaccine. By orders of magnitude.

Me being 56 thinks along your lines but damn show me any science that says only give the vaccine to folks 55-65

I have also dropped 15lbs in the last 3 months and take my zinc, vitamin C&D

Ill probably cave and get it and not tell my siblings whom think I should wait

Also Canada moved up to 5th in the world on Vaccines Kudo's to the Liberals on that

Lock up the olds in solitary for 15 months, and slam small business cross the board. Ontario is a joke. If u wanna lockdown ok then do it properly and harsh, this half assed whack a mole patch work is just ridiculous. Oh and while you're locking up the olds might as well extort citizens at the border too. Ik that's federal but still in the yahoo category. Yes I have no point just venting
https://www.cp24.com/mobile/news/it-...ment-1.5368555

My wife and a bunch of her fellow teachers got the AstraZeneca vaccine on Sunday, then they halt it on Monday and the rest of the teachers are getting Pfizer. Sigh. No issues that I've heard of, although her and everyone she works with all seem to be having a bit of a rough go, by which I just mean the expected vaccination symptoms - sore arm, headaches, not feeling great.

AstraZeneca is taking a bit of a beating, and I would definitely say if I came in for a vaccination and they gave me a choice, AZ would be bottom of my list. If my turn comes up and waiting a week or driving out of my way would get me Pfizer or Moderna, I'd probably do it. But if I get in there and it's AZ, then that's what I'll get. We need to remember they're being SUPER cautious here.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ast...r-55-1.5968128

So, while it might not be our first choice, I don't think we should be worrying if AZ is what we're given. It's quite unlikely they're going to be giving us a choice.

I try to avoid judging too much as I'm across the country and don't know all the circumstances and details, but as an outside observer, I can understand your frustration. Seems like there have been a lot of lockdowns that were quite a bit harsher than anything we've had here, and overall Ontario's numbers have been worse than ours. Even now, we've suddenly surged, but ON is almost matching us. BUT, that doesn't mean they did the wrong thing, as maybe the numbers would have been even worse - population density is substantially greater there, and there may be other factors. Schools also seem a mess there, but again, I don't fully understand the system.

Regardless, I hope you and we bring our numbers back down in April and then the restrictions start easing into a great summer.

Let me complicate your decision then.


You are a little older than me but we fall in the same category in the chart below.



My view is we face only a very small risk from the dominant strain of covid in most of N.America in our age bracket and it is the variants that are our biggest threats.

With a vaccinated populace who are mostly vaccinated against the current strain that will make it even easier for variants to spread in the short term, until levels of true herd immunity are reached.

So the short to mid term risk is highest for us again via variant spread not that it has less and less competition for hosts as the main vaccine kicks in.

So in that mid or short term if you have any reasonable window you can ask your doctor about that would see you get the better vaccines against the variants (J&J, other?) then I would wait.

OK, so that means you accept more risk (albeit small) of catching the main covid strain until that happens. Again see the chart and how low that risk is but also understand that if you do catch that covid strain, one that is far less likely to damage you, you then get some interim protection against the more virulent strains. We are not seeing cases of the more virulent strains over lapping, in the same host at the same time. So while the lesser threatening strain is in your body you are protected in this more dangerous period as pharmaceutical companies race to get out boosters to deal with the variants.

Think of that like parents who would purposely expose their kids to Chicken Pox to help them ward off the much more dangerous Shingles strain in later life. Not 100% protection but very good protection.

Hope you are confused now!

(edit, above assumes you are not in a 'vulnerable' group and your age is your main risk factor)

(edit 2 . I posted this exchange in the covid thread as I am interested in replies to my position but do not think they belong here if this becomes a prolonged exchange)

My buddy same thing for a day and half than fine


Agreed total joke family of four shopping at Costco and everywhere else 1/2 the shoppers are in pairs or families yet you close fitness and salons

Thanks for all that info as well and as it stands of this morning I will be waiting till I can get a Moderna or Pfizer shot. Yes the risk of dying from Covid is higher than blood clots but that is assuming I contract covid.
The USA still has not approved this vaccine and we will have a ton of Pfizer coming so I am going to wait.

Though currently we have no Astro Zeneca vaccines in Alberta so right now its mute

*moot

before the ghost of d2 arises to say 'dude...'. lol.

Half a billion big ones going into a north york (toronto) vaccine manufacturing facility capable of supporting entire cdn population
https://www.cp24.com/mobile/news/can...cent-1.5369410

See I don't only doom and gloom post

Was on site today and spoke to the wife of a client who is a surgeon. She said Do Not get the Astro Zeneca vaccine and another friend texts me and says her two pharmacist friends opinion is the same

moot Thanks im a product of private christian education

Well I really have nothing more to say about this.


I guess you can say I am ... mute!

I find this very unpersuasive, because the unit of analysis is wrong. The pandemic has shown perhaps more clearly than anything else that a purely individual perspective is bad. We have a responsibility to not just weigh the risks to us individually, but weigh the risks to society more broadly. As in, as younger person may not be so at risk, but they can get it and spread it to many, many other people, some of whom may be older, and results in other people dying and other lockdowns with economic consequences etc etc etc.

I actually don't find your analysis persuasive on an individual level of analysis either; the risk from clotting for the astrazenica vaccine is tiny compare to so many other risks we common accept. But even if it was, it completely ignores the how you keep contributing to the spread of the pandemic and all the consequences of that.

Perhaps it is put simpler this way: would you rather the 300k astrazenica doses that will expire on April 2nd be flushed down the toilet or put in peoples arms? Well that relies on people accepting individual responsibility to try and help the pandemic, and not doing what you did which is run a (likely erroneous) calculation weighing individual risk and acting purely selfishly.

How will you feel if you get covid, and live because you are till relatively young, but someone's mom or granddad dies because of the spread you caused?

Well 56 is not exactly young Well I am basing my decision on the following facts

• Vaccine has not been approved in the USA
• Some countries have stopped using it do to bloodclots
• Originally they advised folks over 65 do not use than said it was OK
• Now they are saying under 55 do not take ?
• One Surgeon and two pharmacists said pass

I will continue to mask up and social distance and keep my contact to a minimum and have no guilt.