Good idea. Let’s replace income taxes with consumption taxes.
We could call it the FairTax.
Its amazing that it took a liberal Canadian to think of that. </sarc>
Tax cut=cause
Always....
What a mindset we are saddled with.
“Revenues Returned To The Economy In The Form Of Cuts To Other Taxes”?In a PIG’S EYE!!
It’s scary to think that this guy is walking around loose among us. He definitely has some serious “issues”.
Oh good after the carbon tax collapses the Canadian economy I will get to add socialist give-me-free-stuff Canadian illegal economic immigrants to the current give-me-free-stuff Latin American immigrants.
Simply brilliant! The fevered liberal mind at work.
Every layer of taxation requires a huge new government bureaucracy that will scrape off its take, further diminishing the productive power of society. That's a real recipe for success.
“Lets have another tax for the sake of having another tax”
WE are the "elsewhere". We have oil running our of our ears. Offshore (near and far), in Alaska, in shale. HUGE amounts of oil. Potential MASSIVE deposits offshore to be exploited as Brazil does. Natural gas too. If only we STOPPED government meddling on behalf of environmental "experts".
If we found an acceptable and viable alternative energy source, it would pay for itself without being financed with tax dollars. Wind, solar and ethanol don’t stand on their own and all-electric cars will never compete with the gold standard we’ve been so accustomed to.
Why the hell does the envirowhacko left always push us regressively instead of forward technologically?
The argument fails on purely economic terms. His arguments are too idiotic to refute in detail and not worth the time. Spare us.
In brief, he is assuming that there is a market failure than can be remedied by targeted taxes and subsidies. If one of his assumptions is invalidated, the whole house of cards collapses. Since the previous pretext (assumption) for targeted taxes is now widely greeted with skeptism if not outright derision, he shifts premises and hopes nobody notices.
Lookit, we’re not that stoopid and we noticed, now cut it out. Capish?
According to Bjorn Lomborg, even if the Kyoto Protocol had been fully adopted and implemented, it would only decrease global temperature by 0.008 degree Fahrenheit by the year 2100. Similarly, current European Union climate policy will cost $250 billion of GDP annually, yet it will likely decrease global temperature by a mere 0.1 degree Fahrenheit.
So who is actually going to benefit from these carbon taxes?
Great idea. Let’s tax all government salaries 70% and return the money to the taxpayers.
This dude must have been hanging around smoking crack in East Hastings for too long.
But, but it is working out so well in China (not):
The Unintended Consequences of Carbon Reduction in China
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2632563/posts
Yes, & it also raises the costs of EVERYTHING delivered by vehicles, food being a big one, & it raises the cost of powering/heating/cooling your home. Therefore a carbon tax will hurt the poor the most, followed closely by the middle class. The rich will laugh all the way to the bank.
Peak oil is a myth for the foreseeable future, with oil & ng being found virtually everywhere it is search for, & with only a small part of the planet having been searched.
Low energy costs are a boon to any economy. We should be finding/producing all domestic energy sources as a means to independence & to stop enriching our enemies.
It would reduce local air pollution,
Existing pollution/emmission controls already do that.
reduce the risk of catastrophic oil spills,
Drilling closer to shore could also do that.
buffer economies against the massive shocks inflicted by oil price spikes
Increased domestic drilling could do that.
and lessen the worlds vulnerability to instability in the Middle East and elsewhere.
Increased domestic drilling could do that.
It would also reduce the torrent of cash flowing from the developed world to the thuggish governments that control most oil-producing nations, including Saudi Arabia, Iran and Russia.
Increased domestic energy production could also do that.
And of course theres peak oil. If the peaksters turn out to be right, finally, how much of our economy is fuelled by oil will determine how badly we will suffer so carbon taxes would steadily reduce that threat, too
Increased domestic energy production could do ALL that WITHOUT a new tax!!
Just because nobody knows the future is no excuse to do nothing in the face of worrisome possibilities, says Dan Gardner...
Pass a carbon tax to address a Global Warming threat that may or may not be happening just because it might be a threat? So now we need to enact policies based on the apocalypse fantasies of others, independent of the actual truth? I can dream up a lot of other maybe-problems we should pass taxes to prevent:
1. A tax to prepare for Alien Invasion.
2. A tax to offset the coming Zombie/Vampire Apocalypse.
3. A tax to prevent the coming Ice Age.
4. A tax to avoid the world being taken over by "damn, dirty apes".
This is just more proof that environmentalism is a stalking horse for lefty causes.
That’s why I left Vancouver for America. The V Sun is probably the most idiotic “newspaper” in North America. The free dailies are more entertaining with their lies than paying for it.