Notices

Woo Hoo! It's carbon tax day.

 
Old 04-01-2019, 04:07 PM
  #1  
wc11
Super User
Thread Starter
 
wc11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Pickering, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,123
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Default Woo Hoo! It's carbon tax day.

Eff you Tru-doh!

wc11 is offline  
Old 04-02-2019, 03:41 PM
  #2  
Imo000
Captain Obvious
Super User
 
Imo000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cambridge, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 21,234
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Can't afford the $3.5 extra on a tank of gas?
Imo000 is offline  
Old 04-02-2019, 04:30 PM
  #3  
997turbocab
User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Imo000 View Post
Can't afford the $3.5 extra on a tank of gas?
When you own a small business with 9 vehicles on the road it isn't...."Just $3.5 extra per tank"

Why would business want to stay in Ontario to get taxed to death....
997turbocab is offline  
Old 04-02-2019, 04:59 PM
  #4  
Imo000
Captain Obvious
Super User
 
Imo000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cambridge, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 21,234
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 997turbocab View Post
When you own a small business with 9 vehicles on the road it isn't...."Just $3.5 extra per tank"

Why would business want to stay in Ontario to get taxed to death....
Ok, spread the extra cost of fuel (let's say it $5/tank) to the customers. If you have 5 customers/day, that's $1 more per customer or if it's just one customer than charge them all of it. I'm sure they can all afford it. Or next time get slightly more fuel efficient vehicles. The engine size of the service vehicles in North America are way more than what usually is required. Just look at what they use in Europe to do the same job. They always had a lot more expensive fuel and that's why they always had smaller engines.
Imo000 is offline  
Old 04-02-2019, 10:09 PM
  #5  
wc11
Super User
Thread Starter
 
wc11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Pickering, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,123
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Imo000 View Post
Can't afford the $3.5 extra on a tank of gas?
Why do many relate this to an individuals gas tank and fail to look at the big picture?
Multiply your figure by whatever and apply that formula to trucks, buses, planes, trains & ships. The federal carbon tax will increase the price of diesel by 5.4 cents per litre in 2019, rising to 13.4 cents by 2022
Pretty much everything you use or consume is transported which means the cost of everything like food and heating goes up.

If you have a loved one in a seniors home, the federal carbon tax will also increase annual heating costs for nursing and seniors' care homes by $6.7 million in 2019, rising to $16.7 million in 2022 so pay up.

Just try to convince me that that the $307 rebate will offset the total increase.

Again. Big picture.

Oh and the various little countries in Europe don't compare to the land mass of Canada so unfair comparison
wc11 is offline  
Old 04-02-2019, 11:01 PM
  #6  
Porsches
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Porsches's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 231
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

This is a tax. Period. Paying $3.50 more per tank does not magically eliminate pollution. It does not somehow make polluting ‘ok’. In fact, the worst polluters are exempt from the ‘tax’ itself entirely. The very worst vehicular and transportation polluters will not be paying a dime more. This is as big of a failed idea as universal income. But - it may take some time to see that - and claiming that making people pay more for ‘carbon’ will somehow make pollution vaporize is nothing more than another delusional idea. Now having said all that (and assuming someone will have their panties in a bunch) I would be all for it if they would actually just come ‘clean’ and call a spade a spade. Call it a transfer of cash ‘tax’ from people who can’t afford to pay the tax so that the cash they collect from me will just go and pay for more government waste.
Porsches is offline  
Old 04-03-2019, 04:31 AM
  #7  
Nate Tempest
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Nate Tempest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 451
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Porsches View Post
This is a tax. Period. Paying $3.50 more per tank does not magically eliminate pollution. It does not somehow make polluting ‘ok’. In fact, the worst polluters are exempt from the ‘tax’ itself entirely. The very worst vehicular and transportation polluters will not be paying a dime more. This is as big of a failed idea as universal income. But - it may take some time to see that - and claiming that making people pay more for ‘carbon’ will somehow make pollution vaporize is nothing more than another delusional idea. Now having said all that (and assuming someone will have their panties in a bunch) I would be all for it if they would actually just come ‘clean’ and call a spade a spade. Call it a transfer of cash ‘tax’ from people who can’t afford to pay the tax so that the cash they collect from me will just go and pay for more government waste.
There is plenty of supporting evidence for carbon taxes, and it's just false that the biggest polluters are "exempt" from the tax. It is true that many large producers of carbon emissions won't pay any net tax though. Since the tax is designed to be revenue neutral, the amounts earned are returned in rebates. Naturally, that means many companies (and individuals) will not end up paying any tax on net. However, what the opponents to this tax leave out when pointing out that fact is that that's exactly as intended, and the incentive still works. Just because the tax and rebate may cancel out for a given large greenhouse gas producer, it does not reduce their resulting financial incentive to reduce emissions, and thereby end up even better off.

Now, of course, just as many companies and individuals will end up net positive after tax and rebate, even before making any changes in behaviour, there will also be those who end up worse off. (As with any change in government spending or taxation.) I can understand how this would suck if you're operating a fleet of vehicles or similar. That said, multiple degrees of global temperature rise would also suck (to extremely understate it), and a carbon tax is one of the most efficient, and overall least painful ways to mitigate that. In an ideal world, other countries will see it working in Canada and will follow suit. (Well, in an ideal world everyone would have acted long ago, once the situation became apparent, but just maybe in this world this can do some good.)

So yeah, while I don't have a lot of sympathy for people complaining that they'll have to pay a few bucks more to fill up their 911 (especially since rebates will largely cancel out the tax in regular cases like that), I do sympathize with those who will feel a significant impact on their businesses. But I strongly believe climate change is one of the gravest threats we collectively face today, and that a carbon tax is one of the smartest things that can be done about it, so to me it seems like a price worth paying.
Nate Tempest is offline  
Old 04-03-2019, 09:33 AM
  #8  
wc11
Super User
Thread Starter
 
wc11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Pickering, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,123
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

1970's = the next ice age
1980's = acid rain
1990's = ozone layer
2000's = global warming
2010's = climate change
2020's = fresh water shortage...my prediction

all of the above = higher taxes
wc11 is offline  
Old 04-03-2019, 09:49 AM
  #9  
997turbocab
User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Imo000 View Post
Ok, spread the extra cost of fuel (let's say it $5/tank) to the customers. If you have 5 customers/day, that's $1 more per customer or if it's just one customer than charge them all of it. I'm sure they can all afford it. Or next time get slightly more fuel efficient vehicles. The engine size of the service vehicles in North America are way more than what usually is required. Just look at what they use in Europe to do the same job. They always had a lot more expensive fuel and that's why they always had smaller engines.

Find me something more fuel efficient that a Ford Transit Connect and I will gladly switch. Do you think service providers are driving around in blown V8's with 355"s on the back?....

Originally Posted by wc11 View Post
1970's = the next ice age
1980's = acid rain
1990's = ozone layer
2000's = global warming
2010's = climate change
2020's = fresh water shortage...my prediction

all of the above = higher taxes

...Yes but I CAN FEEL THE CLIMATE CHANGING AS WE SPEAK!!!!!!... Oh wait it's just spring. lol
997turbocab is offline  
Old 04-03-2019, 11:03 AM
  #10  
Porsches
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Porsches's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 231
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Nate Tempest View Post
There is plenty of supporting evidence for carbon taxes, and it's just false that the biggest polluters are "exempt" from the tax. It is true that many large producers of carbon emissions won't pay any net tax though. Since the tax is designed to be revenue neutral, the amounts earned are returned in rebates. Naturally, that means many companies (and individuals) will not end up paying any tax on net. However, what the opponents to this tax leave out when pointing out that fact is that that's exactly as intended, and the incentive still works. Just because the tax and rebate may cancel out for a given large greenhouse gas producer, it does not reduce their resulting financial incentive to reduce emissions, and thereby end up even better off.

Now, of course, just as many companies and individuals will end up net positive after tax and rebate, even before making any changes in behaviour, there will also be those who end up worse off. (As with any change in government spending or taxation.) I can understand how this would suck if you're operating a fleet of vehicles or similar. That said, multiple degrees of global temperature rise would also suck (to extremely understate it), and a carbon tax is one of the most efficient, and overall least painful ways to mitigate that. In an ideal world, other countries will see it working in Canada and will follow suit. (Well, in an ideal world everyone would have acted long ago, once the situation became apparent, but just maybe in this world this can do some good.)

So yeah, while I don't have a lot of sympathy for people complaining that they'll have to pay a few bucks more to fill up their 911 (especially since rebates will largely cancel out the tax in regular cases like that), I do sympathize with those who will feel a significant impact on their businesses. But I strongly believe climate change is one of the gravest threats we collectively face today, and that a carbon tax is one of the smartest things that can be done about it, so to me it seems like a price worth paying.
One of the best non-judgemental rebuttals I have read on this topic anywhere. Thank you. I see and appreciate your point. I would like to add that while in my travels around Asia and the world, these massive ocean going ships and huge transports give off way more pollution in a single day than a years worth of every car in the USA and Canada. Why not just solve the problem wherethe problem is - instead of creating a paperwork nightmare. Just do not allow any foreign ships to enter the waters unless it has a certification. California changed the boat engine pollution laws and every single boat motor changed to support it.
Porsches is offline  
Old 04-03-2019, 11:04 AM
  #11  
Porsches
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Porsches's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 231
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by wc11 View Post
1970's = the next ice age
1980's = acid rain
1990's = ozone layer
2000's = global warming
2010's = climate change
2020's = fresh water shortage...my prediction

all of the above = higher taxes
Having said that Acid rain was the 70's, and they did solve it. Shockingly.
Porsches is offline  
Old 04-03-2019, 11:05 AM
  #12  
Imo000
Captain Obvious
Super User
 
Imo000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cambridge, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 21,234
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 997turbocab View Post
Find me something more fuel efficient that a Ford Transit Connect and I will gladly switch. Do you think service providers are driving around in blown V8's with 355"s on the back?....




...Yes but I CAN FEEL THE CLIMATE CHANGING AS WE SPEAK!!!!!!... Oh wait it's just spring. lol
Your entire fleet are Transits and $3.50/tank is a big problem for you? If it really is, then just find a way to use them less to save the few litlres of fuel.

P.S. Climate change and weather are not the same.
Imo000 is offline  
Old 04-03-2019, 11:22 AM
  #13  
997turbocab
User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Imo000 View Post
Your entire fleet are Transits and $3.50/tank is a big problem for you? If it really is, then just find a way to use them less to save the few litlres of fuel.

P.S. Climate change and weather are not the same.


Global warming...I mean climate change...I mean whatever you want to call it doesn't exist.....How about instead of taxing everyone more the government taxes people less and is less intrusive? It's not the $3.50 a tank that the issue, it's the ADDITIONAL $3.50 per tank, on top of everything else....Corporate tax, personal tax, income tax, carbon tax, school tax....the 10 others I can't even think of. On top of that this carbon tax isn't going to stop people from taking their big SUVS up to the cottage, it isn't going to have people start all of a sudden taking public transport. It is simply a cash grab.
997turbocab is offline  
Old 04-03-2019, 11:56 AM
  #14  
Imo000
Captain Obvious
Super User
 
Imo000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cambridge, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 21,234
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 997turbocab View Post
Global warming...I mean climate change...I mean whatever you want to call it doesn't exist.....How about instead of taxing everyone more the government taxes people less and is less intrusive? It's not the $3.50 a tank that the issue, it's the ADDITIONAL $3.50 per tank, on top of everything else....Corporate tax, personal tax, income tax, carbon tax, school tax....the 10 others I can't even think of. On top of that this carbon tax isn't going to stop people from taking their big SUVS up to the cottage, it isn't going to have people start all of a sudden taking public transport. It is simply a cash grab.
Perhaps this tax should be 100% then and that will certainly change what people drive. It did when the oil price jumped about 10 or so years ago and then when it went down people started driving giant cars again. Also, it's not only about what they drive but also how often and how far they drive. The attitude of the average person (not car enthusiasts like us) actually is influenced by the cost of fuel. I understand the frustration of all the taxes and I'm not a big fan of it either but if that's the cost of living in Canada then so be it. Go visit/live in a 2nd or a third world country for a while and you will have a new appreciation of what we have here. Canada is a huge country when not many people. Taxes are one way to keep things going.

Also, you really haven't notice that our winters are getting less and less severe as the decades go by?
Imo000 is offline  
Old 04-03-2019, 01:24 PM
  #15  
wc11
Super User
Thread Starter
 
wc11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Pickering, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,123
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Imo000 View Post
Perhaps this tax should be 100% then and that will certainly change what people drive.
100% tax ? State owned cars? Like Cuba, China & North Korea ? Where do I sign up?
So when we have autonomous cars in 10, 20, 30 whatever years when we no longer even own cars, then what will they tax?
wc11 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - About Us - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: