54 Replies to “A Perpetual Motion Engine For Canada’s New Economy®”

  1. Considering that Chong is a Liberal CINO, I’m not surprised. Next, swine actually can fly…..

  2. One time that I agree with Andrew. The carbon tax is a consumption tax, simple, easy to implement.

  3. The TrudoTax is increasing the GST, but on everything with no exemptions. This is SOP for a LIBgvt. Spend the gvt into debt granting election promises, then use that debt as justification to raise all taxes.

  4. No taxes – supposedly neutral or not – with respect to carbon. Or more precisely, carbon dioxide (just expelled a bunch).
    Carbon dioxide emission = climate change is nonsense. Climate change is really ‘global warming’ – any article about change will lead to warming.
    It has all happened before without the aid of industry. Write your MP or MPP (Ontario) and tell them to F-OFF if they include this nightmare in their CV or platform.
    Patrick Brown is not going to win here because he can’t get that simple concept through his head. Well, that and retarded LIVs.

  5. Oil and gas are a massive part of the Canadian economy and therefore a massive part of government revenues. Taxing carbon indisputably reduces the size of that sector and at the very best would replace it with a different source of energy that is less profitable and that in practice requires massive subsidy. Therefore government revenues are reduced and thus it is not revenue neutral.

  6. There is no such thing as a “revenue neutral tax”. Why do people buy this shit?
    “Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” ~Ronald Reagan
    Taxes are destructive and are meant to be destructive. Taxes are what the empowered do to the powerless to keep them powerless.
    Since money is a form of universal economic interchange, then taxes is a halt or shackle on the ability to engage in economic interchange.
    The above doesn’t even deal with the issue of whether carbon is something to be reduced at all.
    WE ARE CARBON. The elites mean to reduce us.

  7. A revenue neutral carbon tax is pointless. ANyway, who gives a toss about Coyne? Even a Coyne Toss? CO2 IS OUR FRIEND AND A WARM PLANET IS A HAPPY PLANET.

  8. If you view government as the benevolent organized crime syndicate then its easy to figure this out.
    All activity is subject to the syndicate recieving their cut.
    Now rather than call it a “carbon tax” think of it the same way a small business owner does when a well dressed individual arrives one day to tell you that you need to buy protection because its a nice ting youse gots and idda be shame if sumptin wer t appin to it.
    Thats all you need to know about a carbon tax.

  9. There is no such thing as a revenue neutral tax.
    What would be the point of leveling a tax and pissing people off if it’s revenue neutral?
    More than that, if the government wasn’t receiving the tax monies before, how can receiving a new source of revenue possibly be neutral?
    Has everyone become insane? Do words mean nothing? Damn, I can’t even believe I have to explain this.
    I’ll say this again louder: WE ARE CARBON.
    Human beings are a carbon based life form.

  10. The US energy sector thanks you for sending buisness our way. Stay warm, if you can afford it.

  11. “”Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” ~Ronald Reagan. Taxes are destructive and are meant to be destructive. Taxes are what the empowered do to the powerless to keep them powerless.””
    Reagan also came to understand the importance of taxes in maintaining a functioning nation. Which is why he re-raised taxes after he first lowered them.

  12. When will these people give up this scam? There is no such thing as a sensible carbon tax. End of story. Coyne’s just trying to provide cover for the usual CINOs.

  13. Yeah. Thanks so much.
    It isn’t that the US energy sector or the US has kept Canadians from developing our resources.
    Oh wait, scratch that, the US has prevented Canada from developing our resources.
    In fact, the US is the source of the modern environmental movement. Thanks so much.
    It almost makes me happy to know the US has destroyed itself with debt. Almost.
    And NO your new President will not be able to fix that. You just keep being the Ugly American.
    Your point of no return was reached before 2012. Keep yourself warm with that thought, and you can keep your national racial psychopathy which got Obama elected. That isn’t going to get any better …or any easier.
    Keep your powder dry, your going to need it for your 3rd Civil War.

  14. “Reagan also came to understand the importance of taxes in maintaining a functioning nation. Which is why he re-raised taxes after he first lowered them.”
    Yeah. He had to pay for all those Mexicans he amnestied somehow.

  16. I stopped reading Coyne some time ago.
    There is only so much Ottawa-politicking white noise you can take in a day.
    Gotta go walk the dog!

  17. Cherish your dog. I took one of mine to the vet last week to have a possibly cancerous cyst removed and it was devastating for me. He cried for hours after I got him after the surgery.

  18. Revenue neutral makes it sound more appealing. It also meas they can use the revenue for whatever the hell they want. Only fools would fall for it. Conservatives are starting to look a bit too neutral all around, they better smaren up or the Liberals will have power for life.

  19. “It also means they can use the revenue for whatever the hell they want.”
    Don’t they always? That gas tax the Liberals were getting was supposed to be spent on roads, but it took the election of the Stephen Harper regime to actually spend it on roads.
    What is it that the Zoolander regime is supposed to spend the new carbon tax on?
    Wait, I remember, Climate Change isn’t it. Well that money is gone because climate isn’t something they can change. More taxes won’t lower the latitude of Canada, no doubt some Americans will be happy to know.

  20. Once all the clutter is removed we discover:
    The Carbon Tax is favoured by lefty vote whores and other assorted fraudsters.

  21. Reagan did not raise income taxes and take them into the govt spending stream. He raised contribution rates to social security in an effort to make that entitlement more sustainable. He took money from workers to return it back to them at retirement.
    And he reduced/eliminated loopholes. Those are key differences that you omit or were not aware of.

  22. A Conservative revenue-neutral carbon tax is NOT possible, no matter what Coyne says.
    I don’t care about the smoke and mirrors of bullsh*t terms like “revenue neutral”. For me, the words “Conservative” and “carbon tax” should simply never be used in the same sentence.

  23. Coyne would not know what is or is not conservative. Coyne is a Progressive, maybe worse.
    He wrote a column telling Canadians to vote against the Conservative government in the 2015 election for the National Post which was not published. As a result, Coyne resigned from the National Post’s editorial board.
    Today he is merely a columnist with the Post. Whatever they are paying Coyne, it is too much.
    JMO

  24. The elephant in the room that nobody talks about is the fact that reducing Canada’s emissions would do diddly to avert global warming.
    If climate scientists have it right (a HUUUUGE if!)bringing Canada’s emissions to ZERO would reduce warming by 0.001 degrees C per year, or about one degree per thousand years.

  25. Michael Chong might want to study a bit about Hong Kong, where his Dad was from. He would discover what low tax/no tax can do for your economic prospects.
    OT but Chong must be popular in his riding; he wins with over 50% of the vote, even in 2015.
    His Mom and his Dad were killed in car crashes at the same intersection in 2 separate accidents.

  26. The only way Canadian emissions could be zero is if there were no Canadians living in Canada.
    We have this thing called winter. Some of Canada experiences winter most of the year round.
    Oh, and we’d have to kill all of the wild life too. Apparently animals fart. Who knew?

  28. e-mailed my PC MPP and told it that I would campaign against it if they did not get rid of Brown…CRICKETS

  29. Oz, must disagree with your suggestion that Canada can’t reduce emissions to zero and still retain its population.
    All we need to do is to get off the grid, move everyone to the boreal forest to recapture a glamorous and desirable Stone Age hunter-gatherer lifestyle and yet somehow manage to buy carbon offsets to compensate for polluting the atmosphere by breathing. Bringing life expectancy below thirty will solve a lot of other problems.
    Why does this seem so tough to you – think BIG, man!

  30. There are two outcomes the purveyors of the “revenue neutral” myth are ignoring or are ignorant of. The first is capital flight and the second is a growth in the undocumented industry sector.
    Putting the lipstick on this porcine revenue stream doesn’t make it better or achieve anything other than growing government and feebly attempting legitimizing it under the mantle of saving the planet from environmental degradation. If you oppose then per the environmental lobby talking points you must be one of those deplorable phobic extremists protecting some big secretive financial organization.
    Revenue neutral comes with the caveat of the cost of administration which is roughly what it costs for any federally mandated program.
    The government is now trying to legitimize racketeering under the guise of “revenue neutral”.

  31. Yeah. Go BIG or go home.
    Problem is, even before Whitey came to Canada the Stone Age Indians still had emissions.
    In fact, they burned down whole forests to create meadows so that they could hunt game animals in open spaces.

  32. Oz,we are not carbon. Carbon is our fuel. Glucose, aka blood sugar, is C6H12O6. Humans and every other animal, oxidize the carbon in glucose, creating energy, CO2 and H20. The CO2 is then returned to the atmosphere via our respiratory system. Plants then take the CO2 from the atmosphere,strip away the carbon to build their cells and create sugars and starches, and release the O2 back into the atmosphere for us. We then eat the sugars and starches to convert them into glucose and the cycle begins anew.
    Memo to Mr Chong
    If you’re proposing a new tax, you’re probably not a conservative to begin with.

  33. Thing to remember is that “revenue neutral” is meant in the same slight of hand as “free trade” which it is not.
    Those slogans are created by high pay socialist lawyers to impress the plebeians of the lawyers own superior intelligence.
    Make no mistake, the plebeians will swallow the spiel with enthusiasm.
    Ask yourself a question, yourself, tell me what is the point to shift one tax and impose another.
    No doubt there will be those that will insist that it isn’t so.
    You can spin it any which way you can, it comes to the same thing.
    It will mean more taxes, work creation for the bureaucracy and hiring more deadwood by the government.
    That way they will kill more flies with one stroke.
    Cyone will be impressed.

  34. Dehydrated we are carbon:
    Oxygen 65.0
    Carbon 18.5
    Hydrogen 9.5
    Nitrogen 3.2
    Calcium 1.5
    Phosphorus 1.0
    Other 1.3

  35. Excellent comment Oz. Keep it coming.
    “WE ARE CARBON. The elites mean to reduce us.”
    Very true. Let me add something. The totalitarians want to reduce 20% of the population and control 80%. See USSR from 1917 onwards.
    On the extreme left lie 100 million dead people.

  36. What we normally think of as ‘life’ is based on chains of carbon atoms, with a few other atoms, such as nitrogen or phosphorus”, per Stephen Hawking in a 2008 lecture.
    Sorry Al to hurt you widdle feelings but I’m going to take Mr. Hawking’s word for it.
    WE ARE CARBON
    You’re just an Ottawanker and although I don’t know you personally, I think Stephen has it right and you have it wrong.
    Plus Hawking agrees with me so there is that too.

  37. He really does a great service in pointing out exactly who not to vote for. Mad max is the only choice and chong shouldn’t even be on the ballot.

  38. Andrew Coyne was OK, a long long time ago…Now he is a Liberal shill through and through. Watching him regurgitate platitudes with beauty queen Chantal Hebert on CBC’s National “At Issue” makes me want to switch to FOX news pronto…
    I can’t watch Canadian news providers, they all make me puke. Oh Canad’uh, I am ashamed of what you have become = A lefty sesspoll; a giant frozen California.

  39. I used to watch or listen to the CBC quite often. I thought it was a good idea to keep an eye on the MSM in Canada in order to get a balance. Also, I didn’t want to fall into the echo chamber of repeated talking points that occurs on both sides.
    Now, when I turn on Power & Politics (for example) I see a lefty host surrounded by another lefty, a communist, a socialist and a token conservative who generally agrees with everything that they’re saying. Nobody represents my views or asks the questions I’m asking in my head on any given topic.
    Time to tune out.

  40. Wealth redistribution promotes a lazy country full of perpetual losers, kills prosperity, eliminates entitlements and grows poverty that will inflict everyone. Carbon tax is the path to the socialist dream of group equality but the cost is individual freedom. Any one purporting to be a conservative that supports wealth redistribution is a wolf in sheep’s clothing and deserves to be shown the door. Any of the other money for nuth’n parties will be more than happy to take ’em in to suck ’em dry.

  41. A Carbon tax is a means of the state attempting to change behavior of its serfs from sourcing reliable low-cost carbon intensive energy to high-cost unreliable sources backed up necessarily with artificially high-cost (and often, carbon-intensive) energy. Who gives a flying f… about whether the state claims to offset the revenue or not somewhere else in its leviathan accounts book. Income redistribution has been accurately described as having a blood transfusion from one arm to the other while spilling half of it between them.
    The CAGW following is virtually green theocracy and can’t be argued against using reason.
    Coyne endorsed the Spawn, enough said.

  42. Good plan. I tuned out long ago. Can’t be bothered to watch and listen to the progressive trash.
    There is no such thing as a revenue neutral tax. Never has been and never will be.

  43. I propose that ALL nations officially declare a state of EMERGENCY because of Global warming. We are perpetually told that we are in the grips of a Climate DISASTER!!!!!!
    Then … all the laws and protections against “Price Gouging” during a disaster will kick in … like during this “disaster” of a snow storm in Pennsylvania.
    http://www.wfmz.com/news/pennsylvania/pennsylvania-ag-warns-about-price-gouging-after-storm/395558181
    Leftist eco-frauds in government would then be prevented from “Tax Gouging” the poor, innocent, middle class tax and rate payers. Where are OUR Consumer Protections ??? … during this Climate Disaster ?

  44. John Chittick said, “Coyne endorsed the Spawn, enough said.”
    Actually Coyne endorsed the NDP. He didn’t want the Liberals to have a majority.

  45. “There is no such thing as a revenue neutral tax.”
    With creative accounting anything is possible.
    Let’s say the (mis)government takes $100 from you to help you with childcare. $30 goes to politicians, $30 to bureaucrats and $30 to unions. The Misgovernment gives all the rest — a whopping $10 — to you as free money.
    There you have it. From the Misgovernment’s perspective it is revenue neutral.

  46. “Figueres also blatantly stated earlier this year that the true purpose of the entire global warming scare is to kill off capitalism. Now, even after this admission, she’s claiming we need to get rid of a large percentage of the world’s population due to climate change.” July 31, 2016
    “I warned of this and quoted Maurice Strong, who was head of the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio. I’ll repeat his words to point out that what is happening in America is a long-planned transformation of America into a socialist nation: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”[3] 1995
    Maurice Strong: born in China, died in China. “Uncle Mo” to the Trudeau family. CEO of Ontario Hydro, PetroCanada, Canada’s “representative” along with Elizabeth May & Suzuki’s wife at the Rio 1972 shindig on climate/Agenda 21.
    Google it.

  47. The only way Andrew Coyne gets noticed anymore is by how wrong he is,
    I quit reading him.

  48. Andrew Coyne? Isn’t he that chinless “progressive” dipshit that uses the pages of the NP to campaign on behalf of Liberals Ignatieff and Stephan (the rocket) Dijon for PM, and advocated for the NDP during the last election? Oh yeah, that chinless asshole, now I remember him. Is someone who advocates for far left Liberals and even further left NDPers really someone Conservatives should be taking punitive “tax advice” from? Maybe Coyne left his chin at the last Bilderburger meeting he attended.

  50. Anything and everything that Coyne the ultimate lefty trying to pretend he is ‘middle-of-the-road” says is suspect. Anything the privileged anus says is wrong. Coyne, who’s father was Governor of the Bank of Canada knows no want. Affluent, connected, privileged, patronizing he is a pox on the face of Canada.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation