Ding Dong, the witch is dead....

That's what the Auditor-General is supposed to do, hold the government's feet to the fire.
To call what they did stealing and hiding is to imply criminal activity.
If that is indeed the case then the Governor-General should demand an immediate inquiry.
And a website that calls itself MadeGreatCanadianMedia is not likely the best source for unbiased reporting IMO.
What ever site it's from, don't think the vid is edited. In saying that the liberals have been caught many times stealing and stuffing the pockets of their friends and their own pockets as well. Nope i'm not going to supply a link to this claim. if you want you can find it. been reported in many media forums
 
What i'm seeing and blows my mind are some on here still feeding off the liberal chumming the waters that they are spreading
 
Well, I 'did my research' as was suggested and this is all the information I can find that isn't at least two years old.
While absolutely outrageous, it's hardly a secret slush fund to benefit sitting members of parliament.
And while the unions are outraged, I don't disagree with feds position. If fund was short, liability would be 100% feds so if it's flush, surplus shpuld be 100% feds too. If union wants a cut of upside, they need to assume liability for cut of downside imo.
 
Won't defend JT's lack of experience when he was elected, that's well known, but as far as PP goes ... No, it doesn't. In any case, lack of any discernible policy to move forwards on climate change (PP "axe the tax" is a backwards move) means hard no from me, and Harper's muzzling of scientists the last time a Conservative was prime minister (Harper) reinforces the hard no.

I don't like any of the available choices.
Carbon tax was introduced in 2019. Like many liberal policies, they appear sound on paper but never achieve their goals. The carbon tax aims to reduce emissions, Canada's total emissions are minimal on a global scale, accounting for < 1.4% of global emissions.

So far, the impact has been mostly negative. Environment and Climate Change Canada estimates that by 2030, the carbon tax could reduce real GDP by approximately 0.92%, equating to a $25 billion decrease. The Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) reports that the carbon tax costs the average household up to $399 more than rebates received in 2024, with this net cost projected to rise to $903 by 2030. Cumulatively, households could face additional costs up to $4,388 by 2030, and will have caused the loss of approximately 185,000 jobs nationwide.

It’s also important to know that Canada's PBO notes that almost all the economic upside of reducing Canada's emissions benefits residents in other countries.

Public Perception is horrible, two-thirds of Canadians believe gov't should axe carbon tax, with a majority viewing it as ineffective in reducing fuel emissions. A growing number of Canadians are understanding the tax is simply a tax -- simply nother way to redistribute wealth.

Is it reducing carbon emissions? There is solid evidence that Carbon output is falling in Canada, but no evidence that ties reductions to Carbon pricing. For example, 12% of new cars are electric, and another 20+% some type of hybrid. None of these cars have a lower TCO than their ice counterparts - people's inherent will to contribute makes this change, nothing to do with the price of carbon.

Technology changes, regulations, and consumer choices have had a measurable impacts on reducing carbon in Canada -- sadly there is zero evidence carbon tax is making a difference.
 

Literally just Hitler, in a wig, cross-dressing.

I needed to think of a third woman to round out my top 3 female supervillains, but I couldn't think of a third woman who was in the same league as Wynne and Freeland, so I had to resort to Hitler, but feminized, to round out my list.
 
Technology changes, regulations, and consumer choices have had a measurable impacts on reducing carbon in Canada -- sadly there is zero evidence carbon tax is making a difference.

Then get your buddies in the Conservative party to propose a constructive carbon-reduction scheme that (you think, and can convince me) will actually accomplish something to reduce CO2 emissions, instead of what they currently propose, which is to DO NOTHING while pandering to the oil and gas lobby, which is a backwards move.

I'm waiting for a Conservative candidate to show up on my doorstep in the next election, so that I can give them a piece of my mind.

edit: This doesn't have to be hard. Get EV charging infrastructure everywhere (and subsidize it as appropriate) including incentives to put EV charging infrastructure in the problem spots - public parking, workplace parking, streetside. Continue EV purchase subsidies. Get solar, wind, and energy-storage projects approved. I am fine with using the existing carbon tax structure to subsidize this.
 
. I am fine with using the existing carbon tax structure to subsidize this.
There is the part the libs entirely blew. Collected money and lit it on fire. Very little was used constructively to reduce emissions. You need the collection and appropriate spending to make a difference. Collection only is just inflationary and wealth redistribution with greenwashing branding.

On the rare occasions where they may have scored a victory, they royally bungled it. $5000 rebate on heat pump is great until almost every hvac installer in the country adds 8K to their heat pump pricing. It should have been limited to systems under ~8k and then heat pump and a/c wpuld be equivalent pricing.
 
14 pages of this political crap!
Xmas break ppl :)
We will have elections next year but I dont see anything will change much unfortunately…
Here is a good meme i found for ya
So true, the way people argue about change they'll never see.
It'll be just a new guy digging a new hole...
 
EV subsidies were a complete boggle (imo). Only the people who could afford those high priced models in the first place bought them.

Where's the 30k 300km EV?
 
Get EV charging infrastructure everywhere (and subsidize it as appropriate) including incentives to put EV charging infrastructure in the problem spots - public parking, workplace parking, streetside. Continue EV purchase subsidies. Get solar, wind, and energy-storage projects approved. I am fine with using the existing carbon tax structure to subsidize this.

If you have to subsidize something... Doesn't that mean you're just artificially propping the scheme up..?

Widespread conversion to EVs is a pipedream. The larger pipedream is people think EVs are "green".
In most of the world, your Tesla is coal powered.
 
EV subsidies were a complete boggle (imo). Only the people who could afford those high priced models in the first place bought them.

Where's the 30k 300km EV?
Here’s something else to think about. I was talking to a local utilities linesman in Whitby last week. Homes here are typically fed off of a 50KVA transformer which has a rated output of 208 Amps at 240 Volts and will supply power to 10 homes usually. Most residential EV chargers are rated for 42 Amps at 240 Volts (some higher). I asked him what’s going to happen when 10 people get home in the evening from work and plug in their cars at the same time. He just laughed and said “Do the math”.
 
Last edited:
If you have to subsidize something... Doesn't that mean you're just artificially propping the scheme up..?

Widespread conversion to EVs is a pipedream. The larger pipedream is people think EVs are "green".
In most of the world, your Tesla is coal powered.
We subsidize the oil companies for billions still that could be redirected


Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
 

Back
Top Bottom