Thank you for this point. This is important to highlight in the age of carbon pricing misinformation.
AlolanVulpix
joined 2 years ago
Do you have evidence indicating that corporations and the wealthy do not pay their fair share of the carbon emissions they generate?
I am not denying that the upper class may pay a lesser percentage of their wealth. What I am saying is that even if it is true, this is not relevant to the discussion on carbon pricing because that is not the objective in the first place.
The point of the carbon pricing is to mitigate the effects of the climate crisis.
Wealth redistribution is well deserving of its own discussion. However, on its own wouldn't be a very effective tool to address the climate crisis as it does not hit the core of the issue, which is greenhouse gas emissions.
Under the current carbon pricing scheme, there is no such thing as purchasing of carbon credits. This might be the case under a cap and trade system, which currently only exist in places like Quebec and California (and formerly Ontario). Additionally, if corporations were exempt, there would be no need to buy carbon credits.
There are special areas such as home heating where there is a temporary hiatus on the carbon pricing.
The carbon tax rebates apply uniformly. But remember that carbon pricing punishes those who heavily rely on carbon based fuels (e.g. people with multiple vehicles, homes, etc).
Carbon pricing is not intended to redistribute wealth. So the point about the upper class paying a lesser percentage of their wealth is not relevant and we also don't have evidence of this.
Do you have evidence that the carbon pricing scheme as implemented disproportionately affects the middle/lower class? I would legitimately like to know. Keep in mind that while it's often referred to as the carbon tax, there is also the carbon tax rebate that goes hand in hand with the implementation. The Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) did an analysis and found the following:
Relative to disposable income, our estimates of household net carbon costs continue to show a progressive impact that is, larger net costs for higher income households.
As for the wealth of the economists that signed the letter, unless there is evidence of such, please don't make claims you have not substantiated. I look forward to healthy, civil discussion.
Saw the Premier's press conference this morning and felt disappointed.
I, on principle, am against donating to political parties. So I decided to take some action by donating to charities (and at the same time sending an eCard to my MPP).
Hi Mr.Anand, I would like to thank Premier Ford and the Ontario PCs for bringing the carbon tax to Ontario by cancelling the Cap and Trade program in 2018. The carbon tax that was held as constitutional by the Supreme Court of Canada. I am donating to Gen Squeeze (832390199RR0001) and the Greenbelt Foundation (822521878RR0001) as a result of the maligned press conference hosted by the Premier on April 2, 2024. Sincerely, *****, an active constituent from Mississauga-Malton.
On March 26th, 2024, 300+ leading Canadian Economists signed an open letter on carbon pricing.
the most vocal opponents of carbon pricing are not offering alternative policies to reduce emissions and meet our climate goals. And they certainly aren’t offering any alternatives that would reduce emissions at the same low cost as carbon pricing.
Nobody is disputing that the wealthy consume more than the poor.
We are disputing your claim that the wealthy do not pay their fair share of greenhouse gas emissions. Please provide evidence to substantiate your claims.