April 1

[AlbertaFarmer5]

If I recall, the GST replaced a collection of VATs. The CT is no different.
The question is not which are the larger contributors to inflation. Rather, is the CT inflationary?
Is it efficient? Fair?
How many duplicate jobs did it create.

And that is why the GST was so politically unpopular, whereas the CO2 tax is an effective vote buyer.

The GST transferred the tax burden from behind the scenes on businesses, to the consumers, in their face, on every transaction.

The CO2 tax is primarily on businesses who don't vote, while claiming to "rebate" it back to the consumer, who rarely sees it on any transactions, even though it is built into every single transaction.

[chuckChuck]

If I recall, the GST replaced a collection of VATs. The CT is no different.
The question is not which are the larger contributors to inflation. Rather, is the CT inflationary?
Is it efficient? Fair?
How many duplicate jobs did it create.

The tax allows individuals and corporations to decide how best to increase efficiency and reduce emissions. It's more of market based approach, less intrusive and lower in cost than regulations which also have costs. It's one tool in the basket. Both Alberta and Saskatchewan have their own large emitters carbon tax plan. But they never mention it because of politics. They would rather follow little pp's bogus claim that the carbon tax is the only cause of inflation. And they could have designed their own consumer carbon tax system and done what they wanted. Instead they want to blame Ottawa for political gain!

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Can you provide some examples of how the trucker Hamloc mentioned will be able to improve his efficiencies and reduce his emissions to reduce his CO2 tax bill?

[newguy]

Canada is actually doing quite well as far as inflation globally.

[sumdumguy]

I remember that when GST was implemented, the government promised that within ten years, there would be no more duties or import tarries from US and Mexico. Hmmm, never materialized.

[blackpowder]

Can you provide some examples of how the trucker Hamloc mentioned will be able to improve his efficiencies and reduce his emissions to reduce his CO2 tax bill?

Exactly. By maintaining expensive systems that use nearly the same amount of carbon fuel.
Reuters last night full of biofuel news. That can ever only supply a tiny fraction of energy required. A fools shell game of epic proportions.
Marketing with a 2050 carrot. Fools.
The CT is simply a bad, expensive idea to satisfy fools. Where's your power bill going April 1 if on gas?
I'm sure that money going completely into R&D...
But no, it's all going back to the poor.
Fools. A costless tax, right....
I can only hope PP isn't all hat and no cattle like he sounds.

[WiltonRanch]

The ct scheme is absurd as its cheerleaders. When a certain industry is stretched to its maximum efficiency for what technology and economics can afford they will either quit or move to a jurisdiction where they can make money. At present there is the chinas Russias and other emerging economies which gladly take in corporations looking for a cheaper place to do business. Don’t we have a problem with China and Russia for being bad actors? It is bloody foolish and naive on the part of the boosters to ct domestic industry into oblivion or push them away to bad actor states while at the same time cry about China or Russia or every other third world place out competing us taking jobs and doing bad things. At this point international security I think is far more important than carbon emissions. Chuck and any of the same ilk are hypocrites living in a bubble so smart yet so dumb.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Can you provide some examples of how the trucker Hamloc mentioned will be able to improve his efficiencies and reduce his emissions to reduce his CO2 tax bill?

Apparently Chuck is having trouble finding examples of market-based solutions for Canadian truckers to be more efficient.
So I will offer him a starting point.
British Columbia has had 16 years of CO2 tax.
Do you know how many zero emission logging trucks are on BC roads in response to this market-based incentive?

Or is 16 years not long enough for the market to respond? Keeping in mind we are only 6 years away from the 2030 deadline, and only 26 years away from the 2050 net zero deadline.

[Hamloc]

Apparently Chuck is having trouble finding examples of market-based solutions for Canadian truckers to be more efficient.
So I will offer him a starting point.
British Columbia has had 16 years of CO2 tax.
Do you know how many zero emission logging trucks are on BC roads in response to this market-based incentive?

Or is 16 years not long enough for the market to respond? Keeping in mind we are only 6 years away from the 2030 deadline, and only 26 years away from the 2050 net zero deadline.

Seeing as Chuck2 only responds with insults and name calling, I did a quick google. Hmm six trucks, $16.5 million. Hydrogen trucks cost 4 times what a diesel truck costs. Should certainly lower freight costs. Funny, 16 years with a carbon tax, just trying it now?!

[furrowtickler]

The absurdity of it all is the most worrisome thing .

[blackpowder]

Yes CC, I will blame Ottawa as long as the money is going there. Sorry, but it's going the way of your last pet centralized socialist money waster.

Check out Edison Motors. A very interesting story. BC boys building a diesel electric log truck. Conversion kits as well. Also smaller truck conversion kits in the works.
The idea should work. Cat diesel gen. Had to source axles from China because NA manufacturers shut them out. Built in a tarp shed. No Ottawa involved.

[blackpowder]

And I might add, the incentive was more than fuel savings. Re-power conversions at half the cost of a new truck. No built in obsolescence, across the board, off the shelf parts availability. More to demand than a governments idea or scheme I guess.