JB

If people have no way of reducing their carbon footprint, a carbon tax will just piss them off. They need to have options.

Wilson, why not junk recycling efforts all together and take on the rational economic argument? Support garbage incineration, full stop. I look forward to you presenting some evidence below to demonstrate us and John Baird that there are environmentally friendly technologies available that makes garbage incineration clean, effective, and a clear benefit to Canadian tax payers.

“‘family incomes have mostly risen because, with far more women working than in 1980, families now typically have two incomes.’

So let’s get this straight: Even as neo-conservative policies have helped the ultra-rich increase their incomes by an average of $3 million, the Post thinks Canadian families should be content with earning a little more than they did 25 years ago – by working twice as much.

Luckily Canadians have the Post to help them see how really well they’re doing in this neo-conservative age.

http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/421681

That would create an administration NIGHTMARE, and would cost a fortune in time and money, which taxpayers would have to pick up!!
Why not just increase the enviro fee on bags/bottles/cans/computers/etcetcetc that is already in place?
Are these fees not working to encourage recycling?
Are there not already fees on gas guzzlers vehicles?

”* Modify personal income tax rates so that the wealthy contribute their fair share and the gap between rich and poor stops growing and starts narrowing. ”

Did you not read the StatsCan report YESTERDAY that stated the rich have not gotten richer, but the poor have!

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/business/story.html?id=4f71cfc6-26d5-4ea3-bc99-e2dd1e4af911

Not sure about this, Koby. University students will get to offset the carbon tax by receiving grant cheques from the government. This is why a Guaranteed Annual Income would be needed in case grocery costs skyrocket (and that is a big if). I didn’t own a car when I was in grad school, so not all students do drive. The only disappointment are the excise taxes on smokes and drink and we can debate about whether socializing in bars and restaurants is a fundamental right.

Note also that there is a possibility a Dion-May coalition government will demand changes in the global trade system. This means that we will be eating healthier locally produced organic food rather than depending on imports. I guess I will have to grow more organic mushrooms in my garden patch (even though I live in a condo) so poor students will be well fed.

A carbon tax is also redundant. Fuel prices are only going to go up and that provides people with all the incentive they need to change their behavior. Adding a carbon tax on top only makes such shock therapy all the more painful.

JB,

Since the Greens support income splitting, this means that the chance of a family of four earning less than $35,000 will probably pay no income taxes!!!

“Introduce a high tax bracket on incomes over $150,000. Work with the provinces to increase taxes on tobacco and alcohol.”

This means that the Greens are supportive of a Solidarity Tax on Wealth. The Cons will love to counter this by calling Dion a tax and spender. So revenue neutral does not mean moving from income to consumption taxes, but moving into a European progressive tax system. Sadly tobacco and alcohol taxes hurt lower income Canadians, because only unhappy people engage in these vices ;(

Not really interested in NETFIL and rebates etc. If you suggest that the Grits and the Greens should move towards a more progressive economic and tax policy, that’s fine with me. There is nothing revenue neutral about this. So calling this a carbon tax has the notion of Dion and May driving a Trojan horse at the Cons.

Increased tax breaks for Canadians donating to charities. I presume there is a commitment for Lizzie May to increase the foreign aid budget to 0.7 per cent of GDP in two years and 1.0 per cent in five.

Ti-guy, hope you are happy with this exercise. We have highlighted the pitfalls which a simple carbon tax may cause.

I think you may not be clear on what was meant by “later.” That means later in the same document I was quoting from. It doesn’t mean that we’ll deal with the issue later on. There’s only so much I feel comfortable copying and pasting from the GPC 150+ page policy statement, Vision Green.

A carbon tax works not on fear, as you contend, but as an incentive to conserve in order to avoid paying tax. That means doping things like insulating and replacing drafty windows in order to make the house more environmentally friendly and less fossil fuel reliant. The shift allows us to proportionately tax consumers based on how much carbon they output. As an example of ostentatious consumption, soccer star David Beckham has a carbon footprint that is 17x the size of the average American. And, the average American’s carbon footprint is about double most G8 nations, except Canada.

The extremely wealthy are big CO2 emitters. Jet-set travel, expensive fleets of luxury vehicles, super-sized mansions and yachts are the reasons why.

Here’s a little more from the GPC on economy, tax shifting and poverty reduction:

***********************

Green Party MPs will:

* Institute a full range of “polluter pays” taxes, including a carbon tax designed to reduce the use of fossil fuels by making them more expensive to produce and burn. All these taxes will be largely revenue neutral. The revenues generated will be offset by reduced taxes on personal income, payrolls and on green products and technologies. The new taxes will also be non-regressive (e.g., the carbon tax will include a rebate program for low-income Canadians living in rural areas).
* Eliminate personal taxes on incomes below the low-income cut-off ($17,219 for single person living in a city).
* Modify personal income tax rates so that the wealthy contribute their fair share and the gap between rich and poor stops growing and starts narrowing. Introduce a high tax bracket on incomes over $150,000. (Canada’s rate flattens out at 29 percent for incomes above $121,000. The US rate flattens out for incomes above US$336,000 at 35 percent).
* Work with the provinces to increase taxes on tobacco and alcohol.
* Encourage people to use Revenue Canada’s online NETFIL tax filing system, which saves Revenue Canada money, by giving users an automatic $10 tax credit.
* Develop a specific tax-shifting schedule to provide tax incentives and direct rebates to businesses and individuals investing in the low carbon economy (e.g. installing solar hot water systems, refitting homes and businesses to conserve energy).
* Provide increased tax breaks for Canadians who donate to charitable societies.
********************

Most of the Greens’ policy wrt poverty are addressed in the section on People:
http://www.greenparty.ca/en/policy/visiongreen/partfour

JB