Carbon tax whining??

[pennw]

As for China overtaking the US, that was predicted to occur in the 1970s...but so far it is 38 years late.

Maybe some one forecast that and so far the USA is still there , but that means nothing regarding the future. China was nothing in the 70's compared to what they are now. They now are almost the #1 economic power and their growth is exploding while the the USA is seriously floundering with the collapse of their housing market.
That China will become #1 is not a question of if but when . They are projected ,according to their growth rate, in 10 years to require the amount of oil that is currently produced by the entire world today.
Canada and the USA both have a declining population if you don't count immigration , as does pretty much all western society . We use immigration to bolster our population because a declining population is one that will go down economically . Just who is going to pay for your retirement years when retirees out number workers? Our at least have such a large number of retirees that the working class can no longer support them .

As for China , what can you buy these days that's not manufactured in China? Very little , was that the case in the 70's ? NO . And that trend will continue to grow in that direction . This did not start in the 70's . What got the ball rolling was Bill Clinton making a new trade deal with China back in the mid 90's . It was supposed to be a win-win deal for both countries , but it sure hasn't turned out that way . Almost all manufacture has moved to China and in return what do they import? Raw materials. Things like cardboard , coal and oil .That's about it. This relationship weakens one while strengthening the other and it goes for who ever deals with them the same way .
Nothing the USA or Canada can do about it now either , we are far to dependent on this relationship now to cut it off even though it erodes away our economic well being . And this only after a little more than a decade of the situation going on . What will it be like in 10 years ? 25? 50 years?

While they are building up their economy to superpower status , what are they doing with their military ability ? Sitting on their hands? I doubt it. They are happy to do business with us but don't mistake that for being a nice guy country . They show their true colors when confronted with things like, say Tibet or Taiwan . Western leaders are reluctant to see the situation , no they don't like China's way of handling Tibet or the threats against Taiwan but the way they( our leaders) seem to see it , no ones purrfect . No big deal.
So in the future when we have weaken our selves through political correctness , they've grown much stronger and need way more of our resources what will we do about it?
Do I want to be right about this ? NO , I'd like nothing more than to be wrong on this one.

[Gerry]

You sound extremely naive Gerry .

And you sound like you don't think we should do anything at all because you'd rather make up excuses and stick your head in the sand.

I don't want to deny the rest of the world anything . I just don't believe in bankrupting our country to go along with a huge propaganda scheme .

You presuppose that we'd have to bankrupt the country to reduce emissions and pollution. If we go about it properly it doesn't have to be that way. There are people who use much less than we do and pollute way less and who still live a very satisfactory lifestyle.

In David Suzuki's own words ; "What ever you do , it will never be enough"
That says it all .

So you'd dismiss everything he says because you choose to read too much into one quote?

The mayor of Delta was in the Province recently talking about how we need to start getting with it planning for the rising sea levels , Delta being below sea level and all . In the same article the sea level allegedly rose 3cm from 1993-2003 . That's a ten year period . Project that to 100 years and you got a whopping 30cm , that's one foot for the worst case scenario.

You assume that the rate of progression will remain the same. If it increases, your extrapolations are toast.

Ya real panic time there mayor of Delta . that means you may have to increase the height of your dikes 6 inches every 50 years.
I could go on for pages Gerry about all the BS surrounding this mass hysteria if you want .

You call it mass hysteria. I call it a credible warning from the scientific community.

The world is not going to end in 50 years from now if we don't heed all the IPCC's dire warnings .

I don't think anyone said that the world would end. Don't exaggerate
.

The climate has always been changing , and nothing we can do about that.

But if we are doing something to change climate, then we can do something about that.

Antarctica is not melting and it's ice pack is in fact still growing larger every year . So we really won't have to worry about the sea levels any time soon . Certainly not in our great-great grand children's lives.

I don't have the latest on Antarctica so I won't comment on that, but there are other examples of global warming and many credible people take that seriously.

I'd really like the people on your side of the debate to stick to a story though. On one hand you deny that climate change is occurring. Then you say that if it is occurring that climate has always been changing and there is noting we can do about it. Then, if evidence is presented that we are changing our environment, the argument is that the Chinese contribute so much that nothing we do will make any difference.

[pennw]

Like I said Gerry you are very naive , you choose to believe everything one political side says just because they say so . As for Suzuki , he advocates the incarceration( Yes , imprisonment of political rivals) of those politically opposed to his views . He has repeatedly called for such laws as well as saying what ever we do it will never be enough . So much as for dialogue with him . And he's one of the more moderates . That movement is about them getting very wealthy , it's a business . But not only about money . Political power is their motivation also.
As for the world is going to end in 50 years , I meant it somewhat figuratively . That is in reference of dire warnings of mass extinctions and other such scare stories coming out of the IPCC almost every second day .
Yes other people have long since adapted to using less energy then we , namely the Europeans . But like I've already said we will never be competitive with them on that footing . They have a huge population living in a relatively small space . Large cities all over so they can feasibly run train lines all over their continent . Are you suggesting we could realistically do the same ? They got the numbers to pay for much shorter train lines than what we would require. Do you realistically think we could run trains to all our interior cities and put in transit for them all with the small population we have??
Oh ya they use lots of nuclear power too .
We can't even get the Sky train past Surrey , let alone Abby , Chilliwack or beyond. Now You are telling me , a resident of Chilliwack area to stop driving my car ( Gordo is) and do something alternatively?
Tell me what it is Gerry , ride a bike?? walk ?? It would take me 12 hours to get to my job on a bike , if I could make it at all . Or should I quit my job and go on welfare? Should all rural residents do this??
Tell what the alternatives are for rural people . Should all of us abandon our home and move to join you in Vancouver ? Perhaps we could start bulldozing all single family dwellings and put up big apartment blocks so we could all fit into the urban areas . Would that make you happy?
Don't forget to shut down tourism as well as that to requires transportation .
The fact is , nothing was thought out by our government when they came up with the carbon tax other them Campbell thinking it was the ticket to re-election ala Arnold . Remember the photo-op?
When he proposed the carbon tax the fuel prices were nowhere near what they are now . The increased prices already got people (other then the very well off) changing their habits before the carbon tax , just adding more now only hurts those people who have no alternative . And to continually increase the price will only keep hurting them more until they go under . And that will happen on a large scale when it goes to far . Campbell being to stubborn to admit he was wrong , will drive it that far .
Already Ontario is in recession , high fuel prices being a factor there . Just ask them about how it's effected them . Our own tourism is starting to see the pressure too as foreigners see us as to costly to visit . Certainly our small towns are all in trouble. The only thing that is keeping B.C. in the black now is the building boom that is the result of all the mega projects because of the 2010 Olympics . When that is finished the building boom will be finished . Then our province will have it's recession . Alberta is doing well because of it's energy sector( and far superior government ) , there is no such hope for us.
Take away all our means of transport and we will go down.

[pennw]

You call it mass hysteria. I call it a credible warning from the scientific community.

These same people declared all debate surrounding this issue closed . So all scientist's who oppose it (yes there are many) are shut out .
That is not the scientific method , that is censorship of debate . That is what has happened , hence everything coming out of the IPCC I consider propaganda . Nothing more , they killed their creditability when they killed the debate . You believe them , that is why I think of you as naive.

And to follow in their guidance will bankrupt our country.

[KnowItAll]

pennw, remember the horse and buggy

If we could live without fossil fuel burning vehicles before, we can do it again

Horse
bicycle
walk
solor power

if we had to, if all of a sudden, every source of fossil fuel dried up instantly, we would survive, adapt, move on. Sure, there would be problems, but there are always problems. In the end, the world would be better for it, even those in the sticks. Think of it, reduction in drunk driving. Reduction in traffic induced stress, road rage, etc. No more gas prices and gas tax to complain about.

[nelson95]

I hardly think many have attempted to adapt.

Count all the single passengers in cars on the #1

People mAke choices

Choice differently next May if you're pissed

[MacNews]

1. That China will become #1 is not a question of if but when .

2. Just who is going to pay for your retirement years when retirees out number workers?

3. It was supposed to be a win-win deal for both countries , but it sure hasn't turned out that way .

4. what are they doing with their military ability ? Sitting on their hands? I doubt it.

1. Again, China was proclaimed to be the '#1' in the 1970s but it has not happened yet..please call me when it does. When China's per-capita GDP actually overtakes the US, call me. I guarantee you it is not happening anytime soon, as it has not happened in the past 38 years.

2. You hit a very good point, our birth rate is below replacement-level and we are setting ourselves up to be the next Japan. Say goodbye to pensions and our expensive health-care. The US will be ok because of the high Hispanic birth-rate.

3. I would disagree and say that the off-shoring of manufacturing has been of great benefit to North America. The existence of Wal-Mart and the scores of in-expensive products inside are a testament to the benefit of China's low manufacturing costs. When Wal-Mart (With Chinese products) lowers the Consumer Price Index...you know you are doing something right! Some would say that the laid-off workers at home destroys the benefit of low prices, I simply view it as the continuing shift to a service-based economy. Another example is the auto-plants in Ontario. They are an example of a now by-gone era, IMO.

4. You're right on, China has been beefing up their military for decades now. I heard the US might not be able to defend Taiwan if China decides to invade, because China's military is now so large (Though un-trained and ill-equipped) and the US is tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan. No one would've said that 20-30 years ago.

[pennw]

pennw, remember the horse and buggy

If we could live without fossil fuel burning vehicles before, we can do it again

Horse
bicycle
walk
solor power

if we had to, if all of a sudden, every source of fossil fuel dried up instantly, we would survive, adapt, move on. Sure, there would be problems, but there are always problems. In the end, the world would be better for it, even those in the sticks. Think of it, reduction in drunk driving. Reduction in traffic induced stress, road rage, etc. No more gas prices and gas tax to complain about.

I'm sure we'd all do well going back to the horse and buggy. I was kinda hoping we'd make it to the next stage of development( along with the rest of the world) before we go bankrupt . Ya know ,maybe being able to afford to make the switch to , say , hydrogen if that does work out. With the current stupidity being shown by our governments ( with re-election being the only thing they think about , judging by their knee-jerk reactions ) that could very well be only wishful thinking.
BTW K-I-A , solar power is extremely inefficient , that is why it's hardly used. Cover your entire roof with solar panels at an extremely high price and it will only supply a fraction of your needs.

[pennw]

1. Again, China was proclaimed to be the '#1' in the 1970s but it has not happened yet..please call me when it does. When China's per-capita GDP actually overtakes the US, call me. I guarantee you it is not happening anytime soon, as it has not happened in the past 38 years.


3. I would disagree and say that the off-shoring of manufacturing has been of great benefit to North America.

4. (Though un-trained and ill-equipped)

1. same point you made before - things have dramatically changed since the 70's , the trend seems obvious . USA is way over committed and no longer has support from many other nations( namely Europe) like they used to. They have a dramatic trade deficit . China is the opposite in these regards ( well not in support from other nations though , but they don't care about that).
3. For the USA it is a great source of their trade deficit , which erodes their economy . And they are hurting now.
4.I'm willing to bet this part is where the biggest changes are happening . They are learning all about technology and have improved dramatically in their production of high tech goods . They are biding their time before invading Taiwan because they know time is on their side. They're only getting stronger with the current arrangement unlike their opposition ( whose resources are steadily being drained with their overcommitments)
Besides the USA who else would defend Taiwan should China invade ? The European Union ? Now there is a real joke.

[Jason Jiménez]

Read my lips: No more taxes!!! :no:

For the entire lot of crackpot ‘experts’ that weigh in on global warming, there are opinions on both sides that believe in it, and those that do not. Sure, the planet may have warmed in the past 100 years, but it’s a scientific fact that planet goes through heating and cooling periods. All of the numbers crunched have only covered the last century. What is 100 years in relative terms? Nothing! It’s a blink of an eye. Global warming is only a theory. Unfortunately, this theory is being put into practice by the BC government in the form of yet another tax – another hand in our pocket. This theory is being inculcated ad nauseaum to the masses by bleeding heart liberal propagandists who have abstruse agendas to get people to change their behavior. Groupthink, in this case, could prove to be disastrous.

Green and sustainable living is a great way to reduce waste and conserve resources. I go along with it because of the economic benefits, not because I believe the world is in peril. It’s a person’s prerogative whether they choose to live that way. The government is pushing this socially responsible lifestyle on us. They believe they’re being pragmatic. Not so. If there was irrefutable evidence that humans were the cause of global warming, then more people would get on board. Since the world leaders at the recent G8 Summit can’t even agree on the five W’s with relation to global warming, why should you and I be taxed on what essentially boils down to a hunch?

The idea behind this carbon tax is asinine. In today’s 24 hours, the provincial government took out two, full-page ads to describe how this is a good thing. (Let the inculcation commence) The ad alleges that 36% of all greenhouse gas emissions in BC comes from transportation. We’re being punished for using resources and the government hopes that prices will get so high, we’ll not consume as much. As an incentive, tax breaks will be offered. Tax breaks are wonderful, but it doesn’t help out the family of four struggling to make ends meet that have to commute long distances when gas continues to go up - by market fluctuation, or by carbon taxes.

The ad in 24 hours highlights that “If you drive 5% less a year, you can typically save twice what you will pay in carbon tax over the next two years.” What if you can’t drive 5% less a year? What if you have to move further out because housing is so outrageously high, you have to drive longer distances where there isn’t public transit? Does the government plan on putting in a provincial Skytrain system?

This is what happens when environmentalist activists such as David Suzuki get involved in politics. This is the same individual who is against the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge – the man who thinks highways are a bad thing. Unfortunately, this narrow minded, elitist thinking doesn’t answer the problems of the here and now. These delusions are easy to conjure up while sitting on a posh balcony in Point Grey where everything is viewed through rosy tinted lenses. It’s sort of when the city of Vancouver was laid out. The planner lived in the West End and never really thought out the possibility of expansion, and population increases. It’s out of touch with reality.

Vancouver is arguably one of the worst cities in the world in terms of infrastructure. We have one highway that connects us to the rest of Canada. If idling is such a hazard to the global warming theory, why not build more highways to allow people to get where they need to get, more quickly? Do we really need to spend 17 out of 24 hours bottlenecked on the Port Mann because there are a few people out there that believe cars are evil? What about from Hwy 1 to downtown through East Van? I'm sure ICBC could help out by lengthening the traffic light system so that we have 3 seconds instead of 2 seconds to pass through yellow lights.

Call me American…but I was always taught and firmly believe “NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENATION.” Did we vote on this? I didn’t. This tax is non-representative of my views on this issue and non-representative of concrete, irrefutable facts. The theories of Henry Hazlitt are sure to be proven with this ill-conceived tax and the behavioral changes that will ensue.

[No Ordinary Joe]

Vancouver is arguably one of the worst cities in the world in terms of infrastructure. We have one highway that connects us to the rest of Canada. If idling is such a hazard to the global warming theory, why not build more highways to allow people to get where they need to get, more quickly? Do we really need to spend 17 out of 24 hours bottlenecked on the Port Mann because there are a few people out there that believe cars are evil? What about from Hwy 1 to downtown through East Van? I'm sure ICBC could help out by lengthening the traffic light system so that we have 3 seconds instead of 2 seconds to pass through yellow lights.

It's funny that you mention that because that's the same conclusion I came to once I traveled to Texas. I was amazed at how easy it is to navigate through cities just as big, if not bigger than Vancouver in Dallas and Houston in your car. The way the highway system is constructed down there is amazing and the thing that worries me is that if we're having so many problems already what it's going to be like in 2010. You would think that with the world coming, some sort of planning should have been taken into consideration, and not just the Sea-To-Sky. We're going to end up looking like a joke because our traffic problems are an absolute disaster.

[MacNews]

Read my lips: No more taxes!!! :no:

What if you have to move further out because housing is so outrageously high, you have to drive longer distances where there isn’t public transit? Does the government plan on putting in a provincial Skytrain system?

Great post Jason, I did not know you were so well-read on the issues.

I agree the infrastructure is lacking in the Lower Mainland, the first place I'd look to reduce housing prices are the 70% of the Lower Mainland that are protected green-spaces and prohibited from development.

[pennw]

Infrastructure is very sadly lacking . Twinning the Port Mann is one of the few good ideas that the Campbell government has . Although this is not their idea , it's been called for as far back as I can remember . All the opposition to it is so predictable , same old tired claims keep coming up . I'd bet those in opposition are also those that don't need it either .
Their claim that it will only increase traffic remains to be proven . I personally don't commute over the Port Mann but I have in the past and know what it is like. It is a bad bottle neck and the very fact that it has traffic at a crawl , dramatically increases emissions . I do commute up to the Langley area and I see the commuters every day . The vast majority are there because they are going to work , they're not sightseers or tourists. The number of people who use highway # 1 are the number for the most part who have to , in order to get to work . That is the determining factor for how many use it , not how nice is the road . Improve the highway , the number using it will still be the number who have to in order to get to work . This is so because there are no alternatives . This number is independent of what the highway is like .
There may be a few who drive the highway at first after it is expanded just to see the highway , but the novelty will wear off just like it did for the Alex Fraser. And we will be just back to the same people who already used it prior . If the number of jobs created on one side of the Port Mann increases then the number of commuters increases .It's that simple .
If Vancouver City wants less people coming into their city , then stop promoting the creation of jobs in Vancouver. Encourage the development of industry and business elsewhere so more people can work in their own communities . Vancouver wants to keep growth of business , but they want the people that come along with the growth. Trouble is they can't have it both ways . They're hypocritical in their thinking . Keeping the Port Mann behind the times is not going to stop people from coming in , it will only make it less efficient and cause more exhaust emissions.

[pennw]

For those interested in reading some more about the where the environmentalist movement has gone wrong , you can check out what one of the founders of Greenpeace has to say. Just why did he leave Greenpeace to become a major thorn in their side ? Find the answers here:
http://www.greenspirit.com/home.cfm

[Lion Guy]

I plan on leaving the world a better place for my little daughter.

I don't need enviromentalists or policticians to tell me this.

I will do what I can when I can and I will try not to be lazy about it.

my 2 cents