Socialist Saskatchewan

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
22,041
6,160
113
Twin Moose Creek
I appreciate the answers to my question "is signing on to the plan a prerequite to getting the funding?"

From the answers, and assuring everybody that I am most certainly not a Canadian lawyer, and unqualified to comment except on general grounds, it sounds to me like the definitive answer won't come out until the courts rule.

Pretty much unless someone flinches first

"is signing on to the plan a prerequite to getting the funding?"

What the Feds proposed was that each jurisdiction had to develop their own (provincial) carbon tax (could be an outright tax or carbon trading, etc) and have it in place by a certain time.

The revenues generated from the individual programs would stay in the province where they were charged/collected and not be sent to Ottawa for redistribution.

In effect, it is a de facto sales tax to be administered by each province with no restrictions on how those monies were to be spent.

In the event that a province did not develop and implement a program, the Feds would impose one on the offending jurisdiction by virtue of clawing-back transfer payments from the Equalization Program

That said, there is no set Fed program that has to be adopted, but the funding you refer to is the Fed monies (Fed taxes payable) that are later redistributed back to each province

I thought the $62 Million was for green projects to be built in the Province.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
The article only says that the province wants back what the residents of the province paid in Whatever that means :)

The Sask Minister of Environment is saying that the $62 million that the Feds are holding for an emissions reduction program should not be withheld because that money was already paid through their taxes to Ottawa by the people of Sask.

I'm really pleased that Sask is taking a strong position on this as the Feds are using the transfer payment system to blackmail every province to their whim.

If you look back over time, a number of Fed gvts have taken steps in reducing the actual Fed responsibilities and downloading that cost to the provinces, so this national carbon tax scheme is, in my eyes, little more than a forced program of taxing their respective populations in order to eliminate more Fed transfers
 

Jinentonix

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 6, 2015
11,619
6,262
113
Olympus Mons
Did you catch the Ontario cap and trade "success" that I shredded into composte?
The simple fact that this trade partnership, or whatever the f*ck it's called, consists of the two most heavily indebted sub-sovereign jurisdictions on the planet and one sub-sovereign jurisdiction that's regarded as the most corrupt province/state in the US and Canada is enough to let me know that we are well and truly screwed.
And ironically, this ties us to a state that has over 40 active oil fields, several of which produce the same thick, gooey bitumen as Alberta sans the sand.

Typical hypocrisy from the neo-Liberal rectum rangers too. Hitch a carbon cap and trade cart to an oil producing state that helped to trash Alberta's oil industry.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,634
14,363
113
Low Earth Orbit
Thank goodness for Google.

Thanks for the memorial page and go fund me link for a fallen brother.

It shows you care.

We appreciate that kind of proactive behavior
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
You want gubmint money.

It is NOT government money. It is money that was stolen from working people, some of whom reside in Saskabrush and they rightfully want some of it back for worthy programs.

We should use the $62M to make the highways even flatter.

That would give electric cars a better chance of getting from one end of the driveway to the other.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,380
9,538
113
Washington DC
It is NOT government money. It is money that was stolen from working people, some of whom reside in Saskabrush and they rightfully want some of it back for worthy programs.
If taxation is theft, then taxation for what you consider worthy programs is theft. It matters not what the purpose is, just as a thief who steals your wallet to feed his children is no less a thief than one who steals your wallet to feed his drug habit.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
If taxation is theft, then taxation for what you consider worthy programs is theft. It matters not what the purpose is, just as a thief who steals your wallet to feed his children is no less a thief than one who steals your wallet to feed his drug habit.

That's a fact. Unless it is given voluntarily it is theft. Yes there are some government programs I would consider essential and would freely donate some of my hard earned money to. Just as there are some charities I give to and some I won't have anything to do with.