this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2023
295 points (98.0% liked)

Canada

7187 readers
438 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Basilisk@mtgzone.com -5 points 11 months ago (5 children)

If that's the case, then the whole process is as wrong-headed as can be. You can only choose an alternative if a viable alternative exists. Transit isn't supported enough to be a universally practical option while electric vehicles are too expensive and have infrastructure requirements that can't necessarily be met by everyone. And speaking as someone who's tried cycling, well, Edmonton is making some big moves, but In Calgary? Maybe I'll give it a shot again when I get tired of living.

And none of that covers the fact that what is being paid at the pump as a surcharge to cover carbon taxes holds no relationship at all with what the oil companies are paying. It's being used as an excuse to bilk the consumer even further and to line the pockets of investors.

[–] blindsight@beehaw.org 13 points 11 months ago

80% of Canadians get more back than they pay. It's not a tax, it's a redistribution.

On the margin, it adds small incentives to shift consumer behaviour. Lots of people in warmer climates in Canada are shifting to e-bikes, for instance, and heat pumps are becoming increasingly common.

Sure, some Canadians are paying more than they get in rebates... like my old neighbour who commutes to work in an F-350, but that's the point. He shouldn't be driving to an office job in an industrial truck!

[–] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

You tax what you want less of. Its pretty simple.

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 8 points 11 months ago

That's why the rebate.

People below a certain income and have less options get that tax money spent back.

Those who are wealthier and can afford other options like Electric vehicles and heat pumps don't get the money back. That money goes ideally towards developing green infrastructure like charging stations (no idea if they actually do, but that's the idea)

[–] joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca 7 points 11 months ago

It's not wrong headed at all. There is always an alternative.

In some cases that alternative is transit. In some cases that alternative is cycling. In some cases that alternative is carpooling. In some cases that alternative is driving an existing car more efficiently. In some cases that alternative is choosing to buy a ICE smaller car. In some cases that alternative is buying a BEV.

In all those cases, even a small step will reward someone for making that choise.

[–] Grabthar@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think the idea is that you will not necessarily choose near zero carbon alternatives such as cycling to work or buying an electric car. Those simply won't work for most for a variety of reasons. But by bumping the price of gas, it makes people who can't or won't choose an alternative very aware of the cost of going anywhere, and causes many to drive more sparingly by carpooling, waiting until they have multiple reasons for trips or choosing not to go out every weekend. For those with deep pockets it is probably little more than an annoyance that won't change their behaviour, but increasing fuel prices works very well to curb overall demand.