Money only purpose of Dion's carbon tax: PM

[Praxius]

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/07/31/harper-carbon.html

The only purpose of Stéphane Dion's carbon-tax plan is to spend taxpayer money and not to reduce Canadians dependency on fossil fuels, Prime Minister Stephen Harper charged Thursday.

In another attack on the Liberal Green Shift proposal, Harper rejected the notion that the plan, which calls for a tax on emissions in order to reduce the use of fossil fuels by Canadian industries and homeowners, will be revenue neutral or temporary.

"The purpose of Mr. Dion's carbon tax is to raise money for the federal government so that he can spend it," Harper told reporters as he wrapped up a two-day caucus planning session in Quebec.

"That is the only reason a politician ever puts in a new tax, and whenever a politician puts in a new tax, he says either it's temporary or it's revenue neutral. This tax will be neither temporary nor revenue neutral. No other tax has ever been."

"Mr. Dion needs money. That's why he wants the tax."

Harper pointed to his own plan to force industry through regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

"If you want industry to reduce emissions, you ask industry to reduce emissions. If what you really want is money for the government, you impose a tax and that's why Mr. Dion is doing it."

I'm not a huge fan of Harper, but what he just said follows exactly what I have been saying all along. Everybody here on the Atlantic Coast has already gone through this scam with the Liberals over their HST..... now he want's to go a step further.... the Liberals never change.

Dion has spent the summer trying to sell his plan, which will levy $15.4 billion in new taxes on Canadian industries that produce high carbon emissions. The higher prices for energy people would face would be offset by broad-based tax cuts, according to the plan.

He has also challenged Harper to a debate on his carbon-tax policy, a challenge Harper has dismissed.

In a speech on Wednesday, Harper in turn challenged Dion to stop delaying the current work of government with futile election threats unless he is prepared to force a vote.

Following on that theme, Harper said Thursday that the Tories will be pushing ahead with their legislative agenda and that the minority government will be holding confidence votes in the Commons this fall.

 

[dj03]

I believe that Harper is right on this. With the program cuts and tax cuts the Conservatives brought in it will make it difficult for the Liberals if they win and want to increase program funding or start new programs without raising taxes.

Just like the GST, this is being sold as "revenue neutral" but just like the GST, I suspect it won't be. If you really want to reduce emissions, especially quickly, you legislate it.

 

[#juan]

Before we forget, our government gets a bill every year for about 35 billion dollars. That bill is for the interest on the debt, most of which was piled up by the last Conservative government we had in this country under Brian Mulroney. It looks like Harper is starting to follow in Lyin' Brian's footsteps.

 

[Praxius]

Before we forget, our government gets a bill every year for about 35 billion dollars. That bill is for the interest on the debt, most of which was piled up by the last Conservative government we had in this country under Brian Mulroney. It looks like Harper is starting to follow in Lyin' Brian's footsteps.

Before we forget, the Liberals gave us Gun Registry and gave us the HST on the East Coast.... now they're trying to give us the Carbon Tax..... another crap idea that does nothing but take away more of our money, puts it into their pockets and solves nothing.

 

[Lester]

Before we forget, our government gets a bill every year for about 35 billion dollars. That bill is for the interest on the debt, most of which was piled up by the last Conservative government we had in this country under Brian Mulroney. It looks like Harper is starting to follow in Lyin' Brian's footsteps.

c'mon now Juan, How much did Trudeau run up when he was in? nevertheless we should be paying down that debt that THEY ALL ran up. This is a tax, and it won't do anything except to stifle industry and add to the debt. Putting the word "Green" or "Carbon" in the name is just branding to make it more palatable to schmucks like us.:smile:

 

[#juan]

c'mon now Juan, How much did Trudeau run up when he was in? nevertheless we should be paying down that debt that THEY ALL ran up. This is a tax, and it won't do anything except to stifle industry and add to the debt. Putting the word "Green" or "Carbon" in the name is just branding to make it more palatable to schmucks like us.:smile:

The deficit paste I had ran into horrible format problems so I took it out

 

[Avro]

I believe that Harper is right on this. With the program cuts and tax cuts the Conservatives brought in it will make it difficult for the Liberals if they win and want to increase program funding or start new programs without raising taxes.

Just like the GST, this is being sold as "revenue neutral" but just like the GST, I suspect it won't be. If you really want to reduce emissions, especially quickly, you legislate it.

Firstly government spending is rising under the cons, the GST was never sold as being revenue neutral and you could save money under this plan if you reduce your own personal carbon footprint while getting a fairly large income tax cut. You will pay more if you are not willing to change your poluting ways.

Makes sense to me. It dosen't make sense to Harper because he is to busy getting us back in the red.

 

[Praxius]

Firstly government spending is rising under the cons, the GST was never sold as being revenue neutral and you could save money under this plan if you reduce your own personal carbon footprint while getting a fairly large income tax cut. You will pay more if you are not willing to change your poluting ways.

Makes sense to me. It dosen't make sense to Harper because he is to busy getting us back in the red.

Back in the Red? We've had a surplus for the last number of years, our funding for our military has gone back up to where it should be, and the GST was just cut.....

Exactly wtf were the Liberals doing to turn our military into a clown college, stack up a deficit like they did and do nothing for taxes or funding things such as our health care system? In some areas of the country, such as where I live, they jacked up the taxes (but by scamming us into thinking we'd have less taxes)

Not to mention the whole sponsorship scandal which was one of the main factors why the Liberals lost power in the first place.

Do I even have to mention that Dion did jack-crap-de-poopoo during his time as environment minister?

Vote Dion in, and we'll be getting more of this:

"Soo'ree, Eye Dunno E'Whare De Moneys Gone. Eye Geess Ou Arr Sheet Oot O Luck, eh."

 

[Colpy]

Firstly government spending is rising under the cons, the GST was never sold as being revenue neutral and you could save money under this plan if you reduce your own personal carbon footprint while getting a fairly large income tax cut. You will pay more if you are not willing to change your poluting ways.

Makes sense to me. It dosen't make sense to Harper because he is to busy getting us back in the red.

Yep.

One minute they whine because of the unprojected "mistake" of a several billion dollar surplus applied to the debt.

the next they whine because we "might" be approaching the red.

Personally, I much prefer the first option: pay down debt.

i will bet you $20, here and now, that there is a budget surplus.

 

[Risus]

Firstly government spending is rising under the cons, the GST was never sold as being revenue neutral and you could save money under this plan if you reduce your own personal carbon footprint while getting a fairly large income tax cut. You will pay more if you are not willing to change your poluting ways.

Makes sense to me. It dosen't make sense to Harper because he is to busy getting us back in the red.

Don't forget that the 8% GST replaced the old 10% manufacturer's tax on manufactured items. It was only added to services.

 

[Avro]

Don't forget that the 8% GST replaced the old 10% manufacturer's tax on manufactured items. It was only added to services.

Actually it was 13.5%.

 

[Avro]

Yep.

One minute they whine because of the unprojected "mistake" of a several billion dollar surplus applied to the debt.

the next they whine because we "might" be approaching the red.

Personally, I much prefer the first option: pay down debt.

i will bet you $20, here and now, that there is a budget surplus.

Who is "they"?

 

[Avro]

Back in the Red? We've had a surplus for the last number of years, our funding for our military has gone back up to where it should be, and the GST was just cut.....

Exactly wtf were the Liberals doing to turn our military into a clown college, stack up a deficit like they did and do nothing for taxes or funding things such as our health care system? In some areas of the country, such as where I live, they jacked up the taxes (but by scamming us into thinking we'd have less taxes)

Not to mention the whole sponsorship scandal which was one of the main factors why the Liberals lost power in the first place.

Do I even have to mention that Dion did jack-crap-de-poopoo during his time as environment minister?

Vote Dion in, and we'll be getting more of this:

"Soo'ree, Eye Dunno E'Whare De Moneys Gone. Eye Geess Ou Arr Sheet Oot O Luck, eh."

Oh dear.....

The cons gutted military spending under Mulroney, the Libs were increasing it in the years prior to there defeat, the Libs brought us to a surplus and were paying down the debt.

When cons get in powere they spend like drunken sailors and get countries into debt, look at the recent history of north america....Reagan=massive debts a deficits....Bush Sr.=massive debts and deficits.....Mulroney=massive debt and deficits.....Bush Jr.=massive debts and deficits.....Clinton=reduction of debt and surpluses....Cretien=debt reduction and year after year of massive surpluses....Martin=debt reduction and massive surpluses.

As Harper gets closer to using red ink I often wonder if they will be typical cons in steering us back to poor credit ratings or if the proven success of liberals is something I would prefer.

I'd personally bet on the Libs given there recent track record ad scan or not.

 

[Lester]

If Harper takes us down that deficit road again I would probably vote for him again because I can't bring myself to vote for Dion. probably anybody else, but not Dion. He's not right in the head.

 

[Tonington]

I'm not a huge fan of Harper, but what he just said follows exactly what I have been saying all along. Everybody here on the Atlantic Coast has already gone through this scam with the Liberals over their HST..... now he want's to go a step further.... the Liberals never change.

Right...the opposition parties tried regulations with the Clean Air Act. Remember that? Now Harper seems all for them, when he has to scramble for alternative policy.

 

[L Gilbert]

I kinda like this plan better than anyone else's so far. Sure as crap stinks it seems more acceptable than carbon taxes and whatnot.

http://www.environmentyukon.gov.yk.ca/pdf/draftactionplan_web.pdf

Remember it is a draft not the final product. So I am thinking they are still hashing out improvements to it.

 

[Praxius]

Oh dear.....

The cons gutted military spending under Mulroney, the Libs were increasing it in the years prior to there defeat, the Libs brought us to a surplus and were paying down the debt.

If you want to blame the snake, go for the head, as it all started with Pierre Trudeau - AKA: Liberals.

And go for the middle while you're at it too.... as Paul Martin sent us off to Afghanistan in the first place.... all the while not increasing the funding to any decent level and sending our troops with peacekeeping equipment.... old equipment at that.

When cons get in powere they spend like drunken sailors and get countries into debt, look at the recent history of north america....Reagan=massive debts a deficits....Bush Sr.=massive debts and deficits.....Mulroney=massive debt and deficits.....Bush Jr.=massive debts and deficits.....Clinton=reduction of debt and surpluses....Cretien=debt reduction and year after year of massive surpluses....Martin=debt reduction and massive surpluses.

As Harper gets closer to using red ink I often wonder if they will be typical cons in steering us back to poor credit ratings or if the proven success of liberals is something I would prefer.

I'd personally bet on the Libs given there recent track record ad scan or not.

All of our governments, no matter who, screw us over.... either by spending our surplus, or taxing our asses to death to get the surplus they want to spend. I just prefer to reduce the amount of times I will be obviously screwed over, and this is one of those times.

When the Conservatives outright screw us over, then I'll be more then willing to vote them out of power. I'm willing to vote them out now, but certainly not to flip flop over to the Liberals..... they're both scum in my books.

 

[Ron in Regina]

It's truly refreshing to read a Blog about the "Green Shift" where Mr. Dion isn't portrayed
as an environmental savior, and this "Green Shift" is actually recognized as a wealth transfer
that has little to do with the environment at all.

 

[Risus]

It's truly refreshing to read a Blog about the "Green Shift" where Mr. Dion isn't portrayed
as an environmental savior, and this "Green Shift" is actually recognized as a wealth transfer
that has little to do with the environment at all.

Yep, its just another cash grab.

 

[Ron in Regina]

Is anyone able to find any reference anywhere with respect to just what
percentage of the money collected by this "Green Shift" (if it ever comes into
existence) will be utilized to administer this thing??? I've looked and just can't
find this answer.

I'm also trying to find a list as to who these "700 worst polluters" are that
are mentioned with respect to this "Green Shift" wealth distribution plan. Has
anyone been able to find the answer to either of these questions???