Brad Wall's still blowing smoke on climate change
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
How did you infer from my post that it's not revenue neutral?
They balance it out so that the costs are equal to the revenues.
From all climate science studies that determined causality.
Your post shows that you understand it is not revenue neutral. Again, thanks for at least publicly admitting that. Its a great first step
Which is what % of total climate science studies that make claims or no claims of causality but agree climate is changing?
33%?
Powell examined nearly 14,000 abstracts, searching for explicit rejections of human-caused global warming, finding only 24. We took this approach further, also looking at implicit rejections, no opinions, and implicit/explicit endorsements.
The 97% consensus on global warming
He's not and you're much dumber than any of us.
Not at all. A higher gas tax encourages suburbanites to move closer to work and shopping and businesses to move closer to the workers and consumers to reduce transportation costs due to the higehr gas tax, no? So in fact a higher gas tax affects the free market independently of how the government then spends the money.
Of course the government could further improve the situation by building more walking and cycling paths, but even without that, people will still want to move closer to work and shops natrually.
1. I do not deny climate change. I just think peak oil is an even more serious concern.
2. I do not deny oil subsidies exist and ought to be cut altogether.
3. I do not deny that carbon pricing reduces emissions. In fact, I support carbon pricing.
You do have a point there. In that sense, I would prefer that the carbon tax apply directly to the extraction company's profits ratehr than at the consumer end. That way, the tax applies to all carbon extracted in Canada before it even reaches market, domestic or otherwise.
Of course a tax that applies directly to the extraction company and no consumer end tax would create a reverse problem in that Canadian-extracted gas would be expensive but imported gas cheap.
I wouldn't see much of a problem with that though since though I consider climate change to be harmful, I don't consider it to be that harmful. My main concern is with peak oil. So if we leave our own gas in the ground and import others' instead, then I don't mind that.
That would mean a negative balance of trade though, but that's not all bad either. That would push the dollar down and so increase exports of finished products rather than raw materials. In a sense, it would serve as a kind of export tariff on non-renewable resourcs, which could be a good thing.
That's because of exorbitant real estate costs. I'm sure it would be even worse without the gas tax. The gas tax creates a pressure on workers to move closer to work or, if they can't afford it, for companies to move out to the suburbs or pay higher wages to make travel costs worthwhile.
There is a problem with that. Less than 50% of a barrel of oil will be used as fuel and a large portion of it is recyclable.