So if you have the financial ability to do as you please.. you're good to go as eco acceptable

[oneoff]

Looks like if anyone can pay the carbon tax; you're free to behave in any manner you choose.

On that basis alone; there will be further divisions between those economically disadvantaged and those loaded with cash.

It's those referred to as the middle class who will notice most.

[bucket]

Trudeau

Cuts taxes for the middle class and they are happy.

Re taxes them with higher carbon taxes and the applaud because they think he's doing something for the environment?


Hmmmmmm....??

Smoking something?

[food4u]

What ever it is"It's away to green".

[chuckChuck]

From BC Government Website:
Carbon Tax
Overview of the revenue-neutral carbon tax

B.C. continues to be a leader in climate action by having a carbon tax.

The revenue-neutral carbon tax was implemented on July 1, 2008, and the final scheduled increase took effect on July 1, 2012.

The initial tax rate was relatively low and has increased gradually to allow families and businesses time to reduce their emissions. The tax is also intentionally broadly based and paid by all those who consume fossil fuels in the province.

The tax puts a price on carbon to

encourage individuals, businesses, industry and others to use less fossil fuel and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions;
send a consistent price signal;
ensure those who produce emissions pay for them; and
make clean energy alternatives more attractive.

The carbon tax is revenue neutral, meaning every dollar generated by the tax is returned to British Columbians through reductions in other taxes.

The Minister of Finance is required by law to annually prepare a three-year plan for recycling carbon tax revenues through tax reductions. This plan is presented to the Legislative Assembly at the same time as the provincial Budget. The Revenue Neutral Carbon Tax Plan and Report presented in Balanced Budget 2014 shows the tax reductions that return carbon tax revenues to individuals and businesses.

Based on the revised forecast of revenue and tax reduction estimates, revenue neutrality has been met for 2013/14. In fact, the reduction in provincial revenue exceeds the $1,212 million in carbon tax revenue by $20 million.

Carbon tax review

After a review last year, B.C. confirmed it will keep its revenue-neutral carbon tax, the current carbon tax rates and tax base will be maintained, and revenues will continue to be returned through tax reductions.

The review covered all aspects of the carbon tax, including revenue neutrality, and considered the impact on the competitiveness of B.C. businesses such as those in the agriculture sector, and in particular, B.C.’s food producers.

More information on the review outcomes can be found in the Carbon Tax Review Topic Box in the Balanced Budget 2014.

As other jurisdictions, especially within North America, introduce similar carbon taxes or carbon pricing, government may again review and consider changes to the carbon tax.

Tax Reductions, Funded by a Revenue Neutral Carbon Tax

What is a Carbon Tax?

Tax Reductions Funded by the Carbon Tax

Greener Choices Can Save You Money

How the Tax Works

Myths and Facts about the Carbon Tax

[chuckChuck]

RBC says BC's economy will grow by about 3% this year and next. See link below.

Kind of blows up the idea that a carbon tax is a job killer in BC.

[ado089]

Maybe I read it too quickly but I didn't notice the reduction in carbon emissions as a result of the tax?

[chuckChuck]

Oneoff take a serious look at the carbon taxes that are being redistributed to individuals and businesses in BC. Your broad based statements about this dividing the rich and poor is off base.

Are you a climate change denier?
Do you not realize that climate change will have a much more serious impact on the worlds poor that it will on the rich?

Why not take some time to read some research on the what most economists are saying about carbon taxes. The majority say this is the most effective method to reduce carbon emissions.

If economies around the world can absorb very high energy prices for many recent years in the past why can't they absorb relatively small carbon taxes?

In the case of high energy prices the excess profit(taxes)went to oil producing regions primarily Saudia Arabia, Russia, venezuela etc.

[bucket]

It's funny that as a farmer its expected that a carbon tax should be paid since we use fossil fuels.

But no mention of paying for the carbon sequestered in the ground.

Does my farm emit carbon ... sure. Do I do my part to help clean it up .... yup.

Why do I only get the bill?

[chuckChuck]

B.C. carbon tax an effective model for national climate change approach: report

MARK HUME

VANCOUVER — The Globe and Mail

Published Wednesday, Dec. 10, 2014 8:00AM EST

Canada could come close to hitting its 2020 greenhouse-gas emission targets by nationally adopting strategies British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec already have in place, a new study has found.

The report comes as world leaders convene in Lima at a United Nations climate-change conference and follows the release Monday of an Environment Canada update that confirms Canada is far behind targets set by Prime Minister Stephen Harper in 2009.
New Democrat MP David Christopherson is attacking the government's climate change policy in the wake of a U.S.-China emissions deal. Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq says the Tories have taken "real action" on the issue.
Video
Video: NDP blasts government for 'stalling' on climate change
The prime minister is shutting down opposition calls to regulate the oil and gas sector to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Stephen Harper says his government will not impose "unilateral penalties" on the sector.
Video
Video: 'It'd be crazy economic policy': Harper on unilateral penalties for the oil, gas sector

Canada’s goal is to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by 17 per cent from 2005 levels, but Environment Canada projects the country will only get half way to that goal under current practices.

However, the David Suzuki Foundation report, released Wednesday, states that by using provincial strategies that have been shown to work, Canada could come within 5.6 per cent of meeting its emission targets.

“The main finding is that if we had a unified approach to climate change, we would be within reach of meeting our target and upholding our climate-change commitment to the world,” said Ian Bruce, science and policy manager for the foundation.

Mr. Bruce said the study is the first to analyze what would happen if several key provincial climate-change strategies were applied nationally.

Mr. Bruce said B.C.’s carbon tax, Quebec’s cap on emissions and Ontario’s elimination of coal-fired power plants have all been effective in reducing greenhouse-gas emissions provincially without harming the economy.

“The report addresses some of the myths out there that it’s too difficult for a northern country like Canada to take action,” he said. “These are not radical new ideas in this report. They are proven solutions that work and they are being implemented right in our own back yard.”

Mr. Bruce said, over all, Canada continues to fall behind on its greenhouse-gas emission targets, however, because there is no national climate-change strategy.

“As far as how progress is being made right now in Canada, it has been a piecemeal approach,” he said. “I would say the main obstacle to Canada in meeting its target is a lack of leadership at the national level by the federal government.”

The Environment Canada report states the federal government “is focused on a pragmatic approach to addressing climate change that will reduce emissions while continuing to create jobs and encourage the growth of the economy.”

Mr. Bruce said if Canada wants to start making significant progress in reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, the country should adopt the successful provincial policies now.

“We have made-in-Canada solutions that are proven to work,” he said. “For example, adopting best-in-Canada policies on renewable energy, staged phase-out of coal power and pricing carbon pollution in Saskatchewan and Alberta would be three times more effective in reducing carbon pollution than current policies.”

In an interview from Peru, where she is attending the UN’s COP20 climate-change conference, B.C. Environment Minister Mary Polak said British Columbia and other provinces are leading by example and she hopes Ottawa takes note.

Ms. Polak said B.C.’s carbon tax has been a popular topic at the conference, and she was pleased to be able to tell delegates that B.C. is on target to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions 33-per-cent below 2007 levels by 2020.

“It’s great to have B.C.’s climate leadership recognized so publicly on the international stage,” she said. “Just [Monday], World Bank president Jim Yong Kim said B.C.’s carbon tax is, and I’m quoting here, ‘one of the most powerful examples of carbon pricing.’”

In 2008, B.C. became the first jurisdiction in North America to introduce a carbon tax.

Ms. Polak said there is “recognition globally that carbon pricing is necessary to reduce GHG emissions and that B.C.’s broad-based, revenue-neutral carbon tax is a successful model other jurisdictions could follow.”

[chuckChuck]

BEATY, LIPSEY and ELGIE
The shocking truth about B.C.’s carbon tax: It works

Ross Beaty, Richard Lipsey and Stewart Elgie

Contributed to The Globe and Mail

Published Wednesday, Jul. 09, 2014 6:00AM EDT

Last updated Wednesday, Jul. 09, 2014 6:00AM EDT
Ross Beaty is chairman of Pan American Silver Corp. and Alterra Power; Richard Lipsey is professor emeritus of economics at Simon Fraser University; Stewart Elgie is professor of law and economics at the University of Ottawa, and chair of Sustainable Prosperity.

When Mark Twain wrote, “Never let the facts stand in the way of a good story,” he could have been describing Canada’s current climate policy debate. Prime Minister Stephen Harper repeatedly claims that a carbon tax would “destroy jobs and growth.” Yet the evidence from the province that actually passed such a tax – British Columbia – tells a different story.

EDITORIAL CARTOON
Editorial cartoons for July, 2014

The latest numbers from Statistics Canada show that B.C.’s policy has been a real environmental and economic success after six years. Far from a being a “job killer,” it is a world-leading example of how to tackle one of the greatest global challenges of our time: building an economy that will prosper in a carbon-constrained world.

B.C.’s tax, implemented in 2008, covers most types of fuel use and carbon emissions. It started out low ($10 per tonne of carbon dioxide), then rose gradually to the current $30 per tonne, which works out to about 7 cents per litre of gas. “Revenue-neutral” by law, the policy requires equivalent cuts to other taxes. In practice, the province has cut $760-million more in income and other taxes than needed to offset carbon tax revenue.

The result is that taxpayers are coming out ahead. B.C. now has the lowest personal income tax rate in Canada (with additional cuts benefiting low-income and rural residents) and one of the lowest corporate rates in North America. You shouldn’t need an economist and a mining entrepreneur to tell you that’s good for business and jobs.

At the same time, it’s been extraordinarily effective in tackling the root cause of carbon pollution: the burning of fossil fuels. Since the tax came in, fuel use in B.C. has dropped by 16 per cent; in the rest of Canada, it’s risen by 3 per cent (counting all fuels covered by the tax). To put that accomplishment in perspective, Canada’s Kyoto target was a 6-per-cent reduction in 20 years. And the evidence points to the carbon tax as the major driver of these B.C. gains.

Further, while some had predicted that the tax shift would hurt the province’s economy, in fact, B.C.’s GDP has slightly outperformed the rest of Canada’s since 2008.

With these impressive results, B.C.’s carbon tax has gained widespread global praise as a model for the world – from organizations such as the OECD, the World Bank and The Economist. But in the rest of Canada, it is less heralded, which is a shame. Because when you look beyond the political rhetoric and examine the facts, B.C.’s experience offers powerful, positive lessons for Canada.

In particular, it shows that Canada can be competitively ambitious in shaping a 21st century economy that internalizes the real costs of pollution. And that is important, because carbon and other emissions from burning fossil fuels impose heavy costs on us all – as B.C. knows well. The mountain pine beetle infestation, resulting from warming winters, has devastated the province’s interior forest industry, closing mills and costing thousands of jobs. Similarly, air pollution, caused mainly by burning fossil fuels, costs thousands of lives and more than $8-billion a year to Canada’s economy. These problems will only get worse if we don’t get serious about tackling the causes of carbon emissions.

B.C.’s example shows that we can do that, while also building a prosperous economy, if we use smart policies. And it’s not alone in doing so. Both Alberta and Quebec, for example, have also put a price on carbon emissions, using different policy approaches. All three provinces offer instructive, made-in-Canada lessons for spurring clean innovation, advancing energy efficiency, and preparing Canada’s economy to compete with other nations that are already making this shift.

Canada has a history of taking pragmatic, far-sighted policy action to meet global economic challenges, like free trade, deficit fighting or the financial crisis. The shift to a low-carbon economic future poses a similar challenge. With such strong evidence of how to meet it from within our own borders, it’s time to set aside the stories and act.

[oneoff]

I am convinced that a good potion of the public pays no attention to price tags. If they want it or need it; it goes in the shopping cart without one moments hesitation about brand or even freshness; because "its what they have used and the blinders are on".

Nor consideration that prices vary widely on both sides of market value.

The same will apply to carbon taxes for these people when money is apparently no object; or its someone else's borrowed money or any other automatic buying response.

[oneoff]

And I suppose Canadians should feel good knowing that their industries (and jobs) have been moved to other countries from whom of finished products now come; and which are seen as being exempt of no made in Canada CO2 contributions.

Fact is that highest income persons will not lose any sleep whatever if the price of anything doubles. Those with needed inputs and no job may see things a lot differently.

Redistributing wealth; but CO2 taxes were supposed to reduce overall emmissions.

Volkswagon solutions coming up.; And keep an eye on when electricity rates do anything but continue to sky rocket. Solar power solution to general electrical generation in Sask...my ass.

Check out the battery or other storage cost as a game killer.