Climate barbie .....

[jimmy]

I am happy to let you all know that wind and solar does work drying my coveralls, acording to google I saved between .40/.70 cents. Now times 52 weeks for once a week wash times say 5mill households thats well over 100mill per yr now you see where all the money can be saved and save the planet to boot,

In most cities there is a bylaw on clothes lines. To many people offended looking at the neighbors underwear.

[farmaholic]

In most cities there is a bylaw on clothes lines. To many people offended looking at the neighbors underwear.

In keeping with my intelligent comments..."Who wears underwear these days"?

[fjlip]

Doomsday predictions that apparently have NOT happened, oh yes believe Climate change Nazis...

Doomsday!
1. Prophet Hen of Leeds, 1806
2. Millerites 1843
3. Mormon Armageddon, 1891
4. Halley's Comet, 1910
5. Pat Robertson, 1982
6. Heaven's Gate, 1997
7. Nostradamus, Aug 1999
8. Y2K, Jan. 1, 2000
9. May 5, 2000
10. God's Church Ministry, Fall 2008
11. @AOC @cathmckenna 2030

[Guest]

Think Climate Barbie is a Vegen, that explains her thought process.

Brain fogginess for sure

[Hamloc]

Evan Solomon made a very good point in his interview with Minister McKenna. If you raised the tax on cigarettes and then you rebated back more than they payed(the Liberal's claim on the carbon tax) what incentive would there be to quit smoking. The carbon tax as proposed by the Liberal's is a farce as is their claim it won't go higher than $50 after 2022!

[oldjim]

Happy carbon tax day.

[fjlip]

Hallelujah...

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Evan Solomon made a very good point in his interview with Minister McKenna. If you raised the tax on cigarettes and then you rebated back more than they payed(the Liberal's claim on the carbon tax) what incentive would there be to quit smoking. The carbon tax as proposed by the Liberal's is a farce as is their claim it won't go higher than $50 after 2022!

Do I understand it correctly that the trick they are playing here, is that consumers will get more back than they paid, but industrial and commercial users will get nothing back, so they will be subsidizing consumers? Industries, and businesses, who coincidentally don't vote(and almost guaranteed wouldn't vote for a government promising a carbon tax aimed specifically at destroying their sustainability). Industries who are voting with their feet instead, and moving out of the country?

I assume this is the only way to make it sound palatable to the average voter, bribe them with the hard earned dollars of businesses. Otherwise even the most brainwashed true believers like Chuck aren't going to vote for a carbon tax if it will cost THEM real money. So, it will have its intended benefit of lowering carbon emissions IN Canada, everytime a business leaves, they will cease to emit carbon IN Canada(and will continue to emit them profitably elsewhere).

But after a while, it will get increasingly difficult to bribe the voters with more rebates than they paid, when there are no businesses left to pay the carbon tax. But then, those voter also won't need to drive to their no longer existent jobs, so that will cut emissions even further. And without income, they won't be wasting money on frivolous luxuries such as electricity or heat. I can see where we this carbon tax could realistically result in Canada becoming the first zero emissions country. Unless of course you count the emissions from the torches and burning police cars from the resulting riots.

[Oliver88]

We will have to change her name now that it is known that she eats dogs and attends illegal **** fights when on Asian holidays. Chuck’s leader has some explaining to do....maybe the dogs had too high of a carbon footprint so she ate them during her fossil fuel consuming trip in Asia?

[chuckChuck]

Did you brainiacs forget that Preston manning father of the Reform Party supported a carbon tax as the most efficient market based way to cut greenhouse gases?

https://ipolitics.ca/2017/03/08/manning-calls-on-conservatives-to-stop-attacking-carbon-pricing/ https://ipolitics.ca/2017/03/08/manning-calls-on-conservatives-to-stop-attacking-carbon-pricing/

Conservative elder statesman Preston Manning is advising the Conservative caucus to lay off attacking the market-based concept of carbon pricing.

In an email obtained by iPolitics, Manning points caucus members at a Fraser Institute report on carbon pricing by conservative economists Jason Clemens and Ken Green, which he says is “right on” and “could be useful to you.” Manning attached the report to his email.

“I know all of you are wrestling with this issue and that there is considerable disagreement among conservatives on how to approach it, but hopefully this approach — focus on attacking the implementation rather than the market-based concept itself — will be helpful,” Manning writes.

While the Tories have been hammering Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over his plan to price carbon, Conservative leadership candidates and also some members have also attacked Michael Chong on this issue.

Chong is the only leadership candidate to publicly embrace pricing carbon; his arguments in favour of a market-based mechanism to reduce carbon emissions are often greeted by catcalls at leadership debates.

However, there have been few, if any, solid arguments from leadership candidates against Chong’s plan. Candidates merely say it’s a bad idea and attack the concept itself — which is exactly what Manning wants them to stop doing.

Manning writes that the Fraser Institute’s report states that using a pricing mechanism to drive down carbon pollution is preferable, from the perspective of market-oriented conservatives, to micro-regulation by governments.

“But then they assert that for this concept to work in practice it is absolutely essential that it possess certain characteristics: genuine revenue neutrality, a significant reduction in environmental regulations, and a no-subsidy policy with respect to alternative energy sources,” writes Manning.

He goes on to say that the report makes the point that none of the carbon-pricing regimes proposed in Canada meet the criteria — citing the federal, Alberta, Ontario and British Columbia schemes as examples. Manning steers clear of referencing Chong’s plan.

Manning writes that the implementation of a carbon-pricing regime is being “hopelessly bungled” by these administrations and it is “this bungled implementation which should be the primary focus of our attacks and opposition.”

Drilling down into the implementation of carbon pricing, says Manning, avoids “putting conservatives in the contradictory position of appearing to favour regulation over market mechanisms for dealing with environmental challenges.”

[Oliver88]

Chuck, how do you feel about Catherine McKenna should be penalized by the Liberal Party now that she has been busted for attending **** fights for recreation?

She also ate a dog, is it okay for Liberal climate alarmists to fly overseas to eat dogs....is this the end game for economy killing carbon taxes?

[chuckChuck]

In the height of the last oil boom because of market forces gas prices rose to a $1.50 per litre in many Canadian locations and the sky didn't fall.

But sending our hard earned income to oil companies is good and fine and causes no economic costs or hardship to consumers?

But if you put a carbon tax on consumers, the end of the world is near! Even when fuel is already taxed for various purposes.

Please explain the contradiction?

[chuckChuck]

Manning too? Hahaha. Maybe try to expand your analysis from the “poster is a dummy” ! It’s a bit more complicated than that! LOL. Just ask Preston!

[Guest]

Preston is a fk-n idiot
What the fu-k is your point ??

[farmaholic]

We will have to change her name now that it is known that she eats dogs and attends illegal **** fights when on Asian holidays. Chuck’s leader has some explaining to do....maybe the dogs had too high of a carbon footprint so she ate them during her fossil fuel consuming trip in Asia?

Was it a female dog? They say you are what you eat.

Haven't thought anything sarcastic up about the cöck fights yet.