The DumbBrexit / #Wexit thread

[Shift-4]

18 minutes ago, Violator said:

Shift-4 needs new truck nuts

For my Corolla!  

[Dazzle]

1 minute ago, Ryan Strome said:

Thanks. 

It's my understanding cap and trade is a no go for non francophone provinces. 

I think the reason it's popular in these places is the amount of pollution they (Cali, Ontario, Quebec) can legally exceed. I don't know if this is factually correct but it's possible that the other places don't pollute as much to use the cap system.

Still, Ford removed the cap system (damn the government for TAXING US! WE NEED MONEY IN OUR POCKETS) without a solution to the climate change problem. It's clear that none of the Conservatives (Provincially and Federally, though they are not really related on the political scale so far) take the issue seriously. Maybe Mackay will address it because Scheer certainly didn't.

Edited February 24, 2020 by Dazzle

[Ryan Strome]

2 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

I think the reason it's popular in these places is the amount of pollution they (Cali, Ontario, Quebec) can legally exceed. I don't know if this is factually correct but it's possible that the other places don't pollute as much to use the cap system.

Still, Ford removed the cap system (damn the government for TAXING US! WE NEED MONEY IN OUR POCKETS) without a solution to the climate change problem. It's clear that none of the Conservatives (Provincially and Federally, though they are not really related on the political scale so far) take the issue seriously. Maybe Mackay will address it because Scheer certainly didn't.

Taxing people doesn't address the problem. 

 

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, Ryan Strome said:

@Warhippy what did you say?

to be fair you weren't the only one who attacked me over it..

jimmy..

 

 

In a 4-1 majority decision, the Alberta Court of Appeal has deemed the federal Liberals’ carbon tax to be unconstitutional.

The federal backstop came into effect in Alberta on Jan. 1, and applies to gasoline, diesel and home heating fuels.

 

In its findings, three of the justices, including Chief Justice Catherine Fraser, agreed with Alberta’s argument that the carbon tax interferes with the province’s exclusive jurisdiction to manage its natural resources, as laid out in section 92(a) of the Constitution.

 

 

“The federal government is not the parent; and the provincial governments are not its children.”

Justice Thomas Wakeling wrote a separate decision in favour of Alberta’s position.

 

https://globalnews.ca/news/6587652/alberta-court-of-appeal-carbon-tax/

Alberta has a specific out based on 92a.  Look up why

[Violator]

3 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

Taxing people doesn't address the problem. 

 

I have no real problem with the carbon tax.But the money needs to be used dollar for dollar in the place its taxed as well as only on post carbon projects.

[Violator]

Im guessing this is 92a

 

https://ablawg.ca/2012/09/27/peter-lougheeds-section-92a/

[Ryan Strome]

12 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Alberta has a specific out based on 92a.  Look up why

And I specifically told you that numerous of times so I don't have to look up anything. Nice try "champ."

[RUPERTKBD]

For once I have to agree with @Ryan Strome....

 

....things are getting so bad in Alberta, they have to use paper license plates:

 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/rcmp-looking-for-couple-who-crashed-in-bc-with-alberta-licence-plate-made-of-paper/ar-BB10kMVF?li=AA521o

 

Quote

 

RCMP in Port Coquitlam, B.C. are looking for a man and woman who fled the scene of a single-vehicle collision in January.

While fleeing the scene of a collision is an offence on its own, police also want to speak to the pair after discovering their Alberta licence plate was printed on paper.

 

The collision happened around 8 p.m. on Jan. 8, on the Mary Hill Bypass near Shaughnessy Street in Port Coquitlam.

RCMP said the crash happened because the couple's car, a 2005 Grey Nissan Altima, had lost a wheel.

When police arrived on scene, they found "one of the worst licence plate forgeries they had ever seen," a Monday news release said.

The printed-off licence was obscured under a plate cover, which is illegal to use both in B.C. and Alberta.

 

The couple were undoubtedly in BC in an attempt to escape the 10 month long Alberta winter....

[Ryan Strome]

11 minutes ago, Violator said:

Im guessing this is 92a

 

https://ablawg.ca/2012/09/27/peter-lougheeds-section-92a/

Yup and I told him and Jim that numerous of times.

[Ryan Strome]

24 minutes ago, Shift-4 said:

don't agree with the merge

Neither do I..nothing to do with wexit. But they always be suppressing us in Alberta. 

[Warhippy]

6 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

And I specifically told you that numerous of times so I don't have to look up anything. Nice try "champ."

 

4 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

Yup and I told him and Jim that numerous of times.

You never once cited 92a.

 

If you had, Jim, myself and many others would point out WHY 92a exists then rightfully point out that Alberta was gifted something then effectively went back and created the exact problems they're whining about.

 

We'd also point out that 92a was cited during the GST fight buying the end the GST was deemed justifiable.

 

For a guy who feels his team won some sort of victory today.  You're quite pissy

 

Champ

[Ryan Strome]

1 hour ago, kingofsurrey said:

Heh, if you don't like paying federal taxes...  I have a solution for you.

 

Move to a part of Canada that has next to no natural resources... no employers... no jobs...  no way of making any liveable income....

Go LIVe there.   Raise your family there...   Then you won't to support any other provinces...

 

Problem solved for you. 

How about canceling equalization altogether?

18 minutes ago, Violator said:

I have no real problem with the carbon tax.But the money needs to be used dollar for dollar in the place its taxed as well as only on post carbon projects.

[Ryan Strome]

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

 

You never once cited 92a.

 

If you had, Jim, myself and many others would point out WHY 92a exists then rightfully point out that Alberta was gifted something then effectively went back and created the exact problems they're whining about.

 

We'd also point out that 92a was cited during the GST fight buying the end the GST was deemed justifiable.

 

For a guy who feels his team won some sort of victory today.  You're quite pissy

 

Champ

In This Very thread I pointed out multiple times how Alberta had exclusive rights over its resources or Lougheed would not sign the Constitution go back and read champ.

Not pissy at all just love how you point it out we had no chance of winning this now you're saying we had an out why not admit you were wrong?

[Warhippy]

9 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

How about canceling equalization altogether?

"Informed voice"

[Warhippy]

8 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

In This Very thread I pointed out multiple times how Alberta had exclusive rights over its resources or Lougheed would not sign the Constitution go back and read champ.

Not pissy at all just love how you point it out we had no chance of winning this now you're saying we had an out why not admit you were wrong?

You may have made that statement.

 

But

 

You've never cited 92a or brought it up in discussion.  That level of qualified and informed discussion is outside your abilities.  Instead you whined, complained and printed your fingers at everyone

 

Go back to hating Canada and decrying your lot in life.  You're far better at that then claiming something that didn't happen.

[Ryan Strome]

7 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

You may have made that statement.

 

But

 

You've never cited 92a or brought it up in discussion.  That level of qualified and informed discussion is outside your abilities.  Instead you whined, complained and printed your fingers at everyone

 

Go back to hating Canada and decrying your lot in life.  You're far better at that then claiming something that didn't happen.

You are a sad little boy that's exactly what 92a is you had no clue what it was until you read this ruling LOL so yeah I did pointed out multiple times but again you don't have the capacity to understand that

[RUPERTKBD]

I know the Carbon Tax is unpopular in certain areas of the country, but the idea that it isn't (or wouldn't) be effective doesn't seem to be supported:

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/10/carbon-tax-most-powerful-way-to-combat-climate-change-imf.html

 

Quote

 

Increasing the price of carbon is the most efficient and powerful method of combating global warming and reducing air pollution, according to a new report from the International Monetary Fund.

While the idea of carbon taxes on fossil fuel corporations has been spreading across the globe in the past couple decades, increasing prices on carbon emissions has received widespread backlash from those who argue the tax would raise energy bills.

But economists have long contended that raising the cost of burning fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas is the best way to mitigate climate change, and that revenue raised from the tax can be returned to consumers through rebates and dividends.

 

https://www.thebalance.com/carbon-tax-definition-how-it-works-4158043

 

 

Quote

 

The tax reduces emissions in two ways. First, increasing the cost of carbon-based fuels will motivate companies to switch to clean energy. These include solar energy, wind energy, and hydro-powered sources. 

The carbon tax will also increase the price of gasoline and electricity. Consumers will then become more energy-efficient, further reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Taxes allow industries to find the most cost-effective ways to reduce carbon emissions. That's a better alternative to free-market economies than government regulation. 

For that reason, even oil companies support the tax. ExxonMobil, Shell, and BP have all called for the tax. Exxon even donated $1 million to the nonprofit that supports its preferred plan. BP’s chief executive has promised to cut emissions.

A carbon tax also boosts economic growth. For example, Sweden's carbon tax has reduced its emissions by 23% in the past 25 years. During that same period, its economy grew 55%.

A carbon tax raises substantial revenue. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that a carbon tax starting at $20 per ton and increasing to $34.40 per ton in 10 years could have raised $1.2 trillion. That's on par with the amount raised by all other excise taxes. 

 

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/07/22/opinion/six-places-where-carbon-pricing-working

[Toews]

9 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

You may have made that statement.

 

But

 

You've never cited 92a or brought it up in discussion.  That level of qualified and informed discussion is outside your abilities.  Instead you whined, complained and printed your fingers at everyone

 

Go back to hating Canada and decrying your lot in life.  You're far better at that then claiming something that didn't happen.

Strome is at his best when he is talking about Trudeau being a supporter of terrorists, liberals wearing skinny jeans and Quebec being full of freeloaders. Its a waste of time discussing anything with depth or nuance, you will have to dumb it down sufficiently enough to have a discussion and even then you will likely only get ad hominem in return.

[Shift-4]

4 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

I know the Carbon Tax is unpopular in certain areas of the country, but the idea that it isn't (or wouldn't) be effective doesn't seem to be supported:

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/10/carbon-tax-most-powerful-way-to-combat-climate-change-imf.html

 

https://www.thebalance.com/carbon-tax-definition-how-it-works-4158043

 

 

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/07/22/opinion/six-places-where-carbon-pricing-working

The problem I have with the Canadian plan is we don't use the $ collected to support further iniatives for reducing GHG emissions.

Better than nothing? Yes

Good enough? No

[Warhippy]

52 minutes ago, Shift-4 said:

The problem I have with the Canadian plan is we don't use the $ collected to support further iniatives for reducing GHG emissions.

Better than nothing? Yes

Good enough? No

I like Alberta's previous plan.  Almost all the money went in to projects that created jobs in Alberta and allowed Albertans to access grant and rebate money to retrofit their homes.

 

Now....