this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
15 points (67.4% liked)

Canada

7273 readers
423 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

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


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 5 points 6 months ago

The problem with the carbon tax is the same problem with the US's Obamacare. It's the conservative solution that liberals picked because they thought it would be the easiest way to get the right on board with a plan of action.

In reality, the easiest way to get the right on board with a plan of action is if you either bribe them or threaten them with an overwhelming show of force. They can't be worked with, only steamrolled.

[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca -4 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Trudeau and his government are moving us backwards in climate change action. Thing are already worse in terms of weather with extreme heat already hitting us in May and June.

Climate scientists everywhere are simply giving up any hope lately with how not a single government cares about climate change and how bad we're fucking up out planet.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 12 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

moving us backwards in climate change action. Thing are already worse in terms of weather

The entire rest of the world is destroying the environment too. Carbon tax is a good step we can take in the right direction, but don't expect to see any change to the climate disasters affecting us just because our country enacts a good climate policy.

[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca -2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

It's not good enough. It's basically allowing companies to share their pollution output.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

No, it's not. Any economist will tell you that the best way of making companies care about the environment is to make them have to pay for every bit of pollution they generate. It's called taxing an externality, and it's basically the best solution we have to the tragedy of the commons.

[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca -3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think there's better options. Like creating strict laws to control pollution and revoking companies their right to run their business if they don't comply and have the people in charge face potential jail time if it has adverse health on local residents or destroys the local ecology.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 5 points 6 months ago

Yeah but none of that is realistically possible. The cost of enforcing those rules and ensuring that companies aren't finding loopholes to skirt the law is untenable. A carbon tax is simple, easy to track, and if companies try to get around it, then it's tax evasion (and not the kind that can be mitigated by moving to Panama or Ireland), which the government usually takes pretty seriously.

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It’s not good enough.

This is a bit subjective, but not unfair.

Trudeau and his government are moving us backwards in climate change action.

Hmm, well, small steps forward is still forward movement.

[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago

We're among the top world carbon emitters and the Alberta oil plays a big part of it.

We really need to curb oil producing in Canada and turn to green energies ASAP.

Fuck Alberta's feeling. This needs to happen NOW.

[–] Max_P@lemmy.max-p.me 12 points 6 months ago

And PP's campaign is half about undoing everything that's been done so gas guzzling F350 drivers in Alberta are happy and vote for him.

There's no winning this without economic impact and mass anger from the population.