Sign in to follow this  
Ryan Strome

Liberals win minority government

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Shift-4 said:

^^^^

 

$444 might mean I, personally, have a net financial benefit from this carbon plan. 

Yay me but I still think the rebate system sets up a program that isn't aggressive enough to tackle the problem. Just looks primarily to be a redistribution of wealth.

Of course it is wealth distribution.

 

To determine the net benefit, you need to have an idea of how much gas you need in a year, and what the higher price of gas will do to costs of goods and services.

 

Then consider what people will do with their windfall.  If it comes all in one lump as part of your tax return, that money can disappear quite easily on something more frivolous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Warhippy said:

When you claim stats can is not reliable you are showing yourself to prefer to ignore all relevant information and instead insert your opinion

 

Stats can takes ALL labour data and compiles it.  Period.  if someone is hired or fired they fill out the paperwork, that paperwork goes to statscan as a position gained or lost.  That's it.  To claim that data is not reliable is about as effective or qualified as

 

I dunno...

 

claiming BC pissed away 200 BILLION in LNG dollars without a single shred of evidence

Somewhere on here I listed the LNG projects cancelled and where I got the info. Google it. Enlighten yourself. 

 

My point about labor numbers is that they are adjusted by both Canada and the USA. They are a snap shot. Canada lost 70,000 jobs last mnth but that could be reduced. The trend is more relevant. Stats are a snapshot.   

 

Isn't expressing an opinion legit on here? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Ronaldoescobar said:

If they lower the interest rates it will result in an overheated economy and potential runaway inflation. Canada is on the right path from and interest rate standpoint as is the US. Hopefully in the US' case they dont bow to Trumps non stop attacks on he FED to lower rates (he argues for lower rates mainly because it would save him as well as other ultra rich persons/companies, including a lot of dems, multi millions on debt payments). The US also has many many more people working multiple part time jobs that can skew the numbers a bit. 

Traditionally lowering interest rates accelerates economic growth which can cause inflation. IMO the real issue has been deflation for over a decade. Automation and demographics have worked against job growth and improved wages. So not only is there less job growth but the buying power of labor has been decreasing. At some point Canada will have to reduce rates or face a uncompetitive market place. No? Isn't that what Trump is doing? Global currencies have been dropping against the USD. The USA and CDN have not gone to negative rates but the rest of the world pretty much has. What does that say about the Euros who have led this charge. Are Euro countries dominated by Trump wannabees who need to save their ubber rich friends/companies? More likely they are desperatly trying to stimulate growth which is not happening. 

 

Finger pointing aside aren't you a tad nervous about how this global debt will be refinanced? Quant easing and outright money printing has thrown markets into hyper valuations on hard assets or companies that can show revenue growth. If your concerns focus on the 'workers' of our society I would be very concerned. What politicians have done is devalued the productive side of the economy and put social support systems at risk. This debt cannot be paid off even if every dollar held by the rich were ceased. We or our children will face an era of massive inflation. Monetized debt will sink so many.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

Somewhere on here I listed the LNG projects cancelled and where I got the info. Google it. Enlighten yourself. 

 

My point about labor numbers is that they are adjusted by both Canada and the USA. They are a snap shot. Canada lost 70,000 jobs last mnth but that could be reduced. The trend is more relevant. Stats are a snapshot.   

 

Isn't expressing an opinion legit on here? 

I'm VERY familiar with the LNG portfolio in Canada and BC explicitly.  

 

"Somewhere I posted them". "Google it"

 

Is not a credible answer of any sort.  Opinion is also not fact.

 

Simply typing in BC loses $200 billion in LNG shows literally nothing over 10 pages about BC losing or "pissing away" $200 billion in LNG

 

I checked.  You're a liar.  You're doubling down.  You're asking me to fact check you for something you never actually linked or posted.  You're then asking "Isn't expressing an opinion legit on here? "

 

Anyone can have an opinion.  But when you state an absolute in numbers, do not back it up and instead tell someone to look for themselves and they find literally zero supporting information to said claim, you're a liar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

the minority seems to be working already. Trudeau is accepting Alberta's carbon plan for 2020. It happens to be Notley's, minimally modified by Kenney, but lets not quibble, this looks like progress.

 

Ottawa accepts Alberta's new $30-per-tonne carbon plan for large emitters in 2020

The federal government will accept the Alberta government's latest plan to tax the greenhouse gas emissions of large industrial facilities at a rate of $30 per tonne in 2020.

Federal Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson said Friday his department agrees that Alberta's system will meet federal requirements for large emitters like oilsands operations, natural gas producers, chemical manufacturers and fertilizer plants.

All told, the province estimates these types of heavy-emitting facilities account for 55 to 60 per cent of Alberta's greenhouse gas emissions.

 

This system runs in parallel to the federal fuel charge — commonly known as the carbon tax — that applies to individual consumers and smaller-emitting companies.

Alberta already has a carbon-pricing system that charges large emitters at a rate of $30 per tonne. It was brought in by the previous NDP government. The new United Conservative Party government plans to modify that system, however, starting on Jan. 1.

While the carbon price will remain at $30 per tonne, that price only effectively applies to emissions above a target level.

Change in emissions targets

The new plan, known as the Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction (TIER) regulation, will make it easier for some of the most carbon-intensive facilities to hit their emissions targets, thereby avoiding the tax and potentially earning credits for coming in below target.

That's because the current targets are set at an industry-wide level — meaning all oilsands facilities, for example, are held to the same emissions standard — while TIER will create individual targets for each facility based on its emissions levels from the recent past.

The province estimates that switching to the new system will save industry more than $330 million in avoided compliance costs in 2020.

 

The change in targets will apply to all industrial categories except electricity generation.

Alberta Environment Minister Jason Nixon said Friday he was pleased by Ottawa's decision to accept the "made-in-Alberta" carbon-pricing system.

"When we engaged with industry on TIER in summer 2019, we heard loud and clear that they want to be regulated by the province, not by Ottawa," Nixon said in a release.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) issued a statement that also praised the "made-in-Alberta" plan.

"This program has the components to ensure both Alberta's large and small oil and natural gas operations remain competitive, while clearly satisfying the requirements set by the federal government," said Terry Abel, CAPP's executive vice-president of operations and climate.

Alberta will 'oppose' $40 price in 2021

Current federal rules will require the price on carbon to rise to $40 per tonne in 2021 and $50 per tonne in 2022.

Premier Jason Kenney said Friday his government would "oppose that measure" but won't necessarily flout it.

"We'll have to make a prudent judgment when we get closer to that date," Kenney told reporters. "Because one thing we don't want is the federal government bigfooting into Alberta and enforcing their own, separate regulatory regime."

The federal government plans to impose its carbon tax on the consumer-level sale of fossil fuels starting in 2020.

Carbon tax — and rebates — coming Jan. 1

Under its previous NDP goverment, Alberta had a consumer-level carbon tax that met federal requirements, but Kenney's UCP government killed that carbon tax as one of its first acts after being elected in April.

The federal "backstop" on carbon pricing, however, means Ottawa's carbon tax will apply to the purchase of fuels like gasoline, natural gas and propane in Alberta as of Jan 1.

Albertans will also start receiving carbon-tax rebates in the new year, which the federal government says will offset the increased cost for most households in the province.

Those rebates will be calculated as follows:

  • $444 for a single adult or the first adult in a couple.
  • $222 for the second adult in a couple. Single parents will receive this amount for their first child.
  • $111 for each child in the family (starting with the second child for single parents).

The rebate amounts are fixed. You get the same amount regardless of how much carbon tax you pay.

Economists say this helps alleviate the burden of the tax while also maintaining the incentive to consume less fossil fuel, since the less you burn, the less you pay.

That will also be applied at a rate of $30 per tonne in 2020, which works out to 6.63 cents per litre of gasoline.

So.

 

Notleys actual carbon plan with some tweaks but the money still leaves Alberta.

 

I mean, you couldn't write something better for comedy

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, langlands said:

I don't think so. Trudeau is the perfect representative for our country. His morals and values are in sync with the people, and when they aren't, the people will change.  We are, as he says, the worlds first post nation state.  I think he has done a good job in doing just enough to keep the country together while at the same time keeping himself in the conversation for world leadership.

King of the E, is that you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

So.

 

Notleys actual carbon plan with some tweaks but the money still leaves Alberta.

 

I mean, you couldn't write something better for comedy

its got some humour to it, thats for sure. But its the UCP doing it so its all good. But if it was the NDP, then were talking Trudeau-Notley alliance secretly seeking to destroy the patch.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

King of the E, is that you?

 Kings get their heads chopped off. I always wanted to be a deep state type. Nice and safe in my cubicle.

Edited by langlands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

its got some humour to it, thats for sure. But its the UCP doing it so its all good. But if it was the NDP, then were talking Trudeau-Notley alliance secretly seeking to destroy the patch.....

I cannot wrap my head around the galling idiocy of this.

 

Aside from 2 very small points of contention, this is literally Notley's provincial carbon plan.  but none of the cash is going to stay in Alberta...and Kenney is calling this a win?

 

Just mind boggling

  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada opposition leader Andrew Scheer quits as Conservative leader

Thu 12 Dec 2019 16:46:11 GMT

 

This is a bit of a surprise

Scheer
Scheer tried to stay on a leader but he was pressured for losing an election that many in his party thought was winnable.
 
This is good news in the short-term for Prime Minister Trudeau because he's governing with a minority government. The Conservatives won't defeat him and trigger an election without a leader.
 
At the same time, they might be more likely to try and find a way to bring down his government once a new leader is selected. That said, any time they want to defeat the government, they will need the help of opposition parties and it's tough to find any common ground between the Conservatives and the left-wing and separatist parties.
 
In terms of the Conservatives, Scheer won by the narrowest of margins in a tight race to become leader ahead of multiple rivals. The runner-up was Maxime Bernier who went onto start his own fledgling anti-immigration party. He will likely be barred from the race. The big question is if whether the party picks a leader further to the right or more of a centrist. Ultimately Scheer was undone by his social conservative views on abortion so I suspect the party will veer away from that -- but you never know with voters. If I had to bet, I'd expect former Progressive Conservative leader Peter McKay will win out.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

Scheer is going to resign.

 

Good call little buddy.

Lol.  Like Dough-boy finally got the hint he’s better suited for making the coffee.  Cons now have a chance to beat pretty boy.  Up to them whether they screw it up by nominating another Ralph Wiggum v2.0.

Edited by NewbieCanuckFan
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh shoot,

 

Little Howdy Doody was using Con money to put his kids in private School?

Edited by bishopshodan
  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching his statement.  So disengenuous

 

I'm stepping down for family reasons.

 

Give me a break

 

Just say I lost to the only guy who could beat me I was that ineffective as a leader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Warhippy said:

Watching his statement.  So disengenuous

 

I'm stepping down for family reasons.

 

Give me a break

 

Just say I lost to the only guy who could beat me I was that ineffective as a leader

No ,

Family reasons could be right. He was stealing money to help his fam.?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best comment: "I guess now he can finish getting his Insurance License"...:lol:

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

but you never know with voters. If I had to bet, I'd expect former Progressive Conservative leader Peter McKay will win out.

Would show they've learned about as much from the previous elections as the Dems have in the US :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.