Carbon tax whining??

[Alexis Bwenge]

First and foremost, Jason, there is no need in an intelligent conversation-especially those made public-to include adjectives such as "crackpot and charlatans" to describe otherwise respected public figures. Putting together a few grievances in an opinion piece does not provide a license to insult at will.

Global warming is not a theory; its a noticeable occurence. The theorizing takes place in the CONSEQUENCES of artificially created, human induced global warming, on top of natural global warming.

But the issue is not only global warming...the issue is Pollution. I think we all saw the impact of CO2 in Beijing this summer. Global warming or not, I think we all agree that air quality is a good thing. We know that second hand smoke from tobacco-a plant- is toxic and cause cancer. Do you think that the smoke from oil-a mineral- is good for you? Yesterday, I inadvertenly rub a beige jacket on the fence separating BC Place from expo avenue, where the infrastructure creates a purrfect laboratory to witness the effects of driving: theres is a compact tar-like mollasses one or two millimeters thick covering the whole fence. Conversely, white walls exposed to tobacco fumes for decades "merely" become brown-yellow. With all we know about tobacco, this contrast is alarming. This by-product of driving, when not accumulated on fences, doesnt dissappear: it goes in our lakes and rivers, agricultural fields, in the animals we eat, in our lungs, and finally in our flesh and blood.

From a public health stand point this is unacceptable and the long term effects on the human race and the planet are yet unknown. Although I beleive in the planet's resilient power of rejunivication when we could potentially stumble on a magical "save all" solutions in the future, I would much rather embrace sustainability now. I imagine a return to the sustainability of yesterday's with today's modern telecommunication and tomorrow's clean and sustainable transportation and energy. Although I do admit that there may be better policies to accomplish the goals set for the carbon tax, it is nevertheless the first significant step offered to voters.

The Solution to a sustianable world is combinations of many measures, some yet unavailable. The carbon tax should be view like a piece of the puzzle. It should be view as today's reality, just like higher taxes for health care became necessary when the population started aging. Yes, there are major problems that are here and now, but solutions like building more roads and bridges is patch work because it has no built in rational to end the problem. Too lazy to google the exact number, but the population of the lower mainland is expected to increase tremendously. For example, the population of Surrey/White Rock is expected to grow by 50% in the next 20 years. A bridge built today wont be paid by then, and its impact at that point will be irrelevant. Passing debt to people that are yet to be born for such an inneffective solution is socially irresponsable.

A solution ends the problem, patchwork delays the problem. Will we keep building roads and bridges exponentially as the population of the world grows exponentially? 10 billion people by 2050! We might as well just pave the water! Whenever such a crisis occurs, there is a period of suffering and then there is bettering. The Oil crisis of the 70s created suffering, but it brought more efficient cars and today we're better for it.

Polls suggest that Canadians have higher expectation from their national environmental policy as they become aware of the damages and the possible solutions. The Liberal party is simply trying to position itself in the middle of the electorate with the carbon tax as their mandate. Jason, to suggest that a minority party, whose chances of winning majority is very slim, is using as a strategy to win an election a platform which apparently aims at "Global governance" by buying ads in the paper, is flirting with conspiracy theory and inconsistent to a spectacular degree with existing political theory.

You also wrote, "Its a person's prerogative to chose to live the way they want": no it is not. Thats advocating anarchy, which is considered by most people as an undesirable and extreme political system, not likely to be conducive to the "pursuit of happiness". We live in a society and we make rules for ourselves through the democratic process. We say "you cannot kill, you cannot commit fraud...and you cannot dump your toxic waste in the river", and if passed, the Carbon Tax says "you must pay for you pollution".

An example: in a metrpolis like New York City, higher transportation costs and longer commuting time makes public transit and alternative modes of transportation more desirable economically than in small town USA. But families of four in the NYC area have not yet go instincts, they've adjusted to local conditions. A carbon tax is aimed at creating the same phenomenon at a national level. Alternatives are not likely to arise when there are no shocks to the status-quo. If everyone agrees that a certain process is as efficient and desirable as it can be, not alternatives will be created. Humans are reactionary by nature, and by increasing the cost of using energy, alternatives will(have) emerge(d).

We are not "being punished for using resources", Jason, we are forced to pay the real price of our decisions by taking into account the negative consequences of these decisions. Burning fossil fuel has collateral damage. If a factory expels toxic chemicals in a river and neighbors get sick, these people can sue the factory. The courts then makes the factory pay the real price of their actions to the prosecutors. By burning fossil fuel-which is our right-an individual is affecting a planet that belongs to all, and should therefore pay for the damage created.

The first tax dollar collected in history made it harder for someone to make ends meet. Of course some will suffer from the rising cost of living cause by a carbon tax. But based on this logic we would have never levied any taxes to build that first road, school, church, merchant marine, etc. We would still find ourselves at the infancy of civilization. People are always afraid of taxes but they fail to understand that taxes are the basis of civilization. Through time leaders have leived taxes for all sorts of purposes, some less honorable than others; surely attempting improve the planet is not the most evil of them. We are financing a war, culture, tourism; lets finance the enviroment as well!

A comprehensive solution does include building more bridges and roads; it would include a plan to extend the Skytrain into the lower mainland all the way to Abbotsford, add more bicycle lockers and parking at major transit hubs, more buses, perhaps a tramway system, building more roundabouts to reduce iddling-which is the kind of projects the Carbon tax will contribute to. There are no 6 lanes highways going through European Metropolis, and people get around just fine.

An electorate that demands immediate patch work solution and politicians that gives it to them is one of the main problems with modern western political systems.

[Gerry]

Excellent first post, AB. Thanks for a rational interjection to what what becoming a rather ridiculous thread.

[Soundy]

I wouldn't say it's entirely rational... for starters (without frying my brain reading the whole thing), smog like we saw in Beijing is generally comprised of ozone (O3), not carbon dioxide (CO2). Using Beijing smog as an example of global warming is is about as rational as those BC Liberal/love-the-carbon-tax ads blaming the Prince George ice-jam flooding on "carbon emissions" (another ridiculously vague, meaningless buzz-phrase).

Second, global warming may be a noticeable occurrence, but that doesn't make it a BAD occurrence. Climate change has always been happening and always will be happening - in fact, the term "climate change" is largely redundant, as "climate" (in this context) by definition is a variable thing, and is certainly NOT a bad thing. In fact, if anyone ever does figure out how to stop climate change, THEN you should be worried.

That's all I got for now, time to chill a little while before heading down to the game!