Montreal Escorts

Climate change

Womaniser

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2017
1,729
3,200
113
Good article.


Another 2 years old article. We're in 2023.
Climate change has acccelerated since then.
I watch 2023 infos, not 2021 !
You don't have to look hard for proof of climate change.
Look what happens in Amazonia !
 

Don Julio

Active Member
Jul 15, 2023
238
238
43
32
Another 2 years old article.
Does it matter how old the article is if true?
This is my prediction. In 10-20 years nothing will happen, no doom and gloom and the climate fanatics will claim victory for the trillions spent. But if we continued on a normal path and not caused financial harm to millions we would of had the same results.
Will point this out again, nothing Canada does or can do will alter climate change.
Any reasonable person who knows a bit about numbers should he able to figure that out.
 

Jazzman1218

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2021
888
2,364
93
76
Good article.

One of the advantages of being 'long of tooth' is having lived during what is now history. This opinion piece in this right-wing tabloid is misleading. The environmental issues in the 1970's was planet pollution (chemical, nuclear, industrial, etc) not planet warming. It was Nixon who started the Environmental Protection Agency in the US in 1970. Yes, environmental catastrophe was averted because significant actions were taken to address pollution.
 

Don Julio

Active Member
Jul 15, 2023
238
238
43
32
Environmental pollution was a real issue in the mid to late 20th century. A burgeoning ice age not so much to put it charitably.
Again I will say this, yes the climate is changing it is expected with the population increase. And no, there is no emergency to stop it now. Things like a carbon tax or requiring people to go EV will not alter what the climate is doing. Common sense should tell you that.
PS, I am talking about Canada with Trudeau and his agenda to accomplish nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CLOUD 500

Jazzman1218

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2021
888
2,364
93
76
Again I will say this, yes the climate is changing it is expected with the population increase. And no, there is no emergency to stop it now. Things like a carbon tax or requiring people to go EV will not alter what the climate is doing. Common sense should tell you that.
PS, I am talking about Canada with Trudeau and his agenda to accomplish nothing.
Agree to disagree. Strongly disagree. There is a planet warming emergency that requires immediate actions today. We can mitigate this crisis if we take steps to do so and not ignore this climate reality.
 

Don Julio

Active Member
Jul 15, 2023
238
238
43
32
We can mitigate this crisis if we take steps to do so and not ignore this climate reality.
Again things are being done but a 3 - 7 year delay will not cause a catastrophic doom to the world but it will most likely assist in saving our economy.
My guess is you do not understand the financial hardships of millions of Canadians living paycheck to paycheck only to see another cost of living increase in the name of climate change that will do nothing to alter climate change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CLOUD 500

Jazzman1218

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2021
888
2,364
93
76
Again things are being done but a 3 - 7 year delay will not cause a catastrophic doom to the world but it will most likely assist in saving our economy.
My guess is you do not understand the financial hardships of millions of Canadians living paycheck to paycheck only to see another cost of living increase in the name of climate change that will do nothing to alter climate change.
Nobody likes the word 'tax', but it was my understanding that 90% of the money collected was being returned to households and 10% to businesses. So there's that.

But you give yourself, and your real motives, away by stating that climate change actions - like the carbon tax, electric vehicles, and moving away from fuels that increase greenhouse gases, etc - "will do nothing to alter climate change". You don't accept that mitigation actions are necessary today and you won't accept it in 3 to 7 years either.
 

Don Julio

Active Member
Jul 15, 2023
238
238
43
32
Nobody likes the word 'tax', but it was my understanding that 90% of the money collected was being returned to households and 10% to businesses. .
You actually believe that?
Just to add the administration costs which is very high comes directly from the tax collected. I did mention that the carbon tax is a compound tax, it increases every time a different business touched the product. You could have 4 to 7 carbon taxes on one product you purchase, one of the reasons for our high inflation rate and cost of groceries.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CLOUD 500

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,110
4,058
113
Nobody likes the word 'tax', but it was my understanding that 90% of the money collected was being returned to households and 10% to businesses. So there's that.

But you give yourself, and your real motives, away by stating that climate change actions - like the carbon tax, electric vehicles, and moving away from fuels that increase greenhouse gases, etc - "will do nothing to alter climate change". You don't accept that mitigation actions are necessary today and you won't accept it in 3 to 7 years either.
You really do believe everything the government tells including about covid mandates and vaccines. Use some critical thinking here please. If 90% of taxes collected are really returned then why collect in the first place? Does not make any sense. The reality is the money is being used by politicians like Trudeau to live a life of luxury while he makes everything for ppl living paycheck to paycheck even more expensive. Also every April the carbon tax goes up, all MPs in parliament get a big pay raise while ppl struggling to pay bills got to pay more for everything. That is a big slap in the face. See the scam here.

 
  • Haha
Reactions: purplem

Jazzman1218

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2021
888
2,364
93
76
You really do believe everything the government tells including about covid mandates and vaccines. Use some critical thinking here please. If 90% of taxes collected are really returned then why collect in the first place? Does not make any sense. The reality is the money is being used by politicians like Trudeau to live a life of luxury while he makes everything for ppl living paycheck to paycheck even more expensive. Also every April the carbon tax goes up, all MPs in parliament get a big pay raise while ppl struggling to pay bills got to pay more for everything. That is a big slap in the face. See the scam here.

What I post is what I believe so please refrain from opining about what you think I believe. The carbon tax was created to encourage energy producers and users to move away from carbon-based fuels. There is no evidence to support your outrageous allegations about the PM and MPs. Please stick to facts and evidence and not your wild, unfounded imagination.
 

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,110
4,058
113
What I post is what I believe so please refrain from opining about what you think I believe. The carbon tax was created to encourage energy producers and users to move away from carbon-based fuels. There is no evidence to support your outrageous allegations about the PM and MPs. Please stick to facts and evidence and not your wild, unfounded imagination.
You are dodging. I stated facts. So I ask again if households get 90% of the carbon taxes back then why collect in the first place? And I posted many times data from the Canadian Federal government website and facts prove the carbon tax had no affect on reducing carbon emissions.


You say energy producers move away from carbon fuel but that is also false. They just pass on the cost to the customer as we seen how everything is costing more including heating your home. Why does Volkswagen need a $13 billion subsidy to build a battery factory if carbon taxes are so effective?


Volkswagen is cutting EV production as demand craters. Demand stays up so long as taxpayers money is being funnelled. Green tech is on life support. You cannot tax a nation to prosperity. How much more facts do you need?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Don Julio

Jazzman1218

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2021
888
2,364
93
76
You are dodging. I stated facts. So I ask again if households get 90% of the carbon taxes back then why collect in the first place? And I posted many times data from the Canadian Federal government website and facts prove the carbon tax had no affect on reducing carbon emissions.


You say energy producers move away from carbon fuel but that is also false. They just pass on the cost to the customer as we seen how everything is costing more including heating your home. Why does Volkswagen need a $13 billion subsidy to build a battery factory if carbon taxes are so effective?


Volkswagen is cutting EV production as demand craters. Demand stays up so long as taxpayers money is being funnelled. Green tech is on life support. You cannot tax a nation to prosperity. How much more facts do you

This exchange has become pointless and boring. Nothing either one of us posts will change the mind of the other or make this any less inane. I'll continue to post truths and facts about climate change, and you can do whatever it is that you are doing. Have a nice day.
 

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,110
4,058
113
This exchange has become pointless and boring. Nothing either one of us posts will change the mind of the other or make this any less inane. I'll continue to post truths and facts about climate change, and you can do whatever it is that you are doing. Have a nice day.
For once I agree with you. I too will continue to post facts and challenge far-left propaganda about the climate change hoax.
 

Attachments

  • you-have-to-povyve.jpg
    you-have-to-povyve.jpg
    63.3 KB · Views: 59
Last edited:

Jazzman1218

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2021
888
2,364
93
76
There are many effort and initiatives underway to help decarbonize the atmosphere. One is the generation of 'green' hydrogen gas through a chemical process known as electrolysis. This extraction method using ordinary water does not emit CO2 rather the only byproduct is pure oxygen. Many global companies and investors are pumping billions into companies that are developing this technology.
 

Albacor

Well-Known Member
Nov 30, 2016
2,196
1,435
113
Skip to Content

Joe Oliver: Canada will soon be alone and ignored in its climate obsession​

Ottawa is increasingly isolated internationally in its fervour to achieve net zero emissions
Author of the article:
Joe Oliver
Published Oct 04, 2023
https://financialpost.com/opinion/canada-alone-ignored-climate-obsession#comments-area
Britain's Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.
Britain's Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. PHOTO BY CARL COURT/POOL/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

Article content​

In its fervour to achieve net zero emissions the federal government is increasingly isolated internationally, while its influence on other countries has vanished as, through incompetence and worse, it has tarnished Canada’s brand as a country to emulate.





As Mike Tyson once said, “Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face.” The European Union had a plan to reach net zero by 2050 but its member states have now been hit by a severe energy crisis and are backing off in response to popular discontent.

In a “brave new approach to politics” designed to stave off electoral defeat next year, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak reversed course and approved development of a giant offshore oil and gas field. And he delayed signing off on green policies that would have imposed “unacceptable costs” — calculated to be five times their economic benefits — borne disproportionately by blue-collar workers.

In support of Sunak’s belated awakening to economic and political reality, the Telegraph queried, “If the consequences are prohibitively expensive and involve saddling millions of households with additional expenditure for unknowable benefits in an unfair way, why would anyone make the transition?” Why, indeed, Mr. Trudeau, when according to a Leger poll only 15 per cent of Canadians think net zero is realistic? The question has added poignancy since the green policies of both countries can have only a negligible influence on global emissions and none on temperatures.

According to the EU’s top energy official, with renewables unable to make up for the disappearance of Russian natural gas, Europe will need U.S. fossil fuels for several more decades. No mention of Canada, the world’s sixth largest gas producer, since we literally cannot deliver either to Europe or to the vast Asian market. So much for Justin Trudeau’s inane comment that there is no business case for exporting Canadian natural gas. Strong global demand for oil will now be supplied by less environmentally conscious petro-states, rather than from our proven reserves, the fourth largest in the world.

Germany’s finance minister — Germany’s — recently criticized the EU for its “enormously dangerous” green plans that threaten social peace. He is busy trying to reverse the de-industrializing effect of the high green energy prices that now have people calling his country “the sick man of Europe.” In France, President Emmanuel Macron has given no date for banning fossil fuels. India’s Narendra Modi warns Western countries not to impose “restrictive” climate-change policies on the developing world, while for its part, China has six times more coal plants under construction than the rest of the world combined. Its emissions have tripled since 1990.

In the U.S., moving entirely to EVs could cut union employment by half in electorally crucial Rust Belt states. If Republicans score a 2024 trifecta of presidency, Senate and House, that likely would lead to dramatic reversals in green policies, including increased drilling for oil and gas. Then Canada would be virtually alone in its fixation on climate apocalypse.

The progressive conceit that Canada can serve as a moral leader on climate change was always egotistical nonsense. The world is bemused by our self-harm and irritated by our hectoring, especially since we have missed our Paris Accord commitments and every other target we ever set. Canadians are very tolerant and fair-minded, with much to be proud of. But our prime minister has talked down our brand by decrying our supposedly “genocidal” past and systemically racist present.

Our reputation was sullied when a member of the Waffen-SS Galicia Division was honoured in the House Commons. That shameful blunder evoked a dark period in Canadian history when a “none is too many” immigration policy that turned away Jews trying to escape the Holocaust was changed to “many are welcome” when applied to Nazi collaborators. We lurched from bigotry to indifference to incompetence, a moral progression of sorts, but hardly one inspiring admiration. It also handed a propaganda gift to Russia and undercut Ukraine in its quest for military and diplomatic support to help it defend its sovereignty.

Because the rush to net zero is a) unattainable, b) colossally expensive and c) without appreciable environmental benefit, it should be a political loser. But true believers, rent-seekers, socialist ideologues, mainstream media devotees and compromised academics inundate the public with hyperbolic fear-mongering, while alternative voices, including reputable scientists who don’t self-censor, are banned or ignored. Without determined political leadership to fundamentally change direction, we will fall even further behind a world that is increasingly indifferent to Canada’s climate jeremiads.
It is past time to stop our indulgent moralizing about climate change. We need to reverse policies that are causing severe economic and social damage and start acting rationally in our national self-interest.

Joe Oliver was minister of natural resources and then minister of finance in the Harper government.





 

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,110
4,058
113
I said it many times that the carbon tax is a hoax. Far-left politicians are using climate change to scam people just to add more taxes. Here is an example at how your tax dollars are being spent:


Trudeau's Montana holiday costed much more then reported to Parliament: $228, 839. This is enough to make most sane people heads explode. So while Trudeau makes life more expensive under the false guise of climate change by adding carbon taxes, facts proves that he needs it to fund his spending spree and live in a life of luxury at the expense of taxpayers. How much more evidence do you need?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Don Julio

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,110
4,058
113
There are many effort and initiatives underway to help decarbonize the atmosphere. One is the generation of 'green' hydrogen gas through a chemical process known as electrolysis. This extraction method using ordinary water does not emit CO2 rather the only byproduct is pure oxygen. Many global companies and investors are pumping billions into companies that are developing this technology.
Making hydrogen via electrolysis is one of the worst energy intensive ways to produce fuel. It takes a lot of electrical energy to produce hydrogen via electrolysis, like 3 times more electrical energy to produce then the amount you would get by burning hydrogen. Each time you convert energy from one source to another there is energy lost, you never get 100% out (Laws of Thermodynamics). It can be greenhouse neutral if non carbon sources are used to produce it (like solar panels). It costs more then other energy to produce. It is still at least a decade away before this can be viable at a low cost (without any government subsidies) to make it viable. This is the kinds of things I am talking about, technology is the way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, not more taxes.

 

Jazzman1218

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2021
888
2,364
93
76
Making hydrogen via electrolysis is one of the worst energy intensive ways to produce fuel. It takes a lot of electrical energy to produce hydrogen via electrolysis, like 3 times more electrical energy to produce then the amount you would get by burning hydrogen. Each time you convert energy from one source to another there is energy lost, you never get 100% out (Laws of Thermodynamics). It can be greenhouse neutral if non carbon sources are used to produce it (like solar panels). It costs more then other energy to produce. It is still at least a decade away before this can be viable at a low cost (without any government subsidies) to make it viable. This is the kinds of things I am talking about, technology is the way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, not more taxes.

'Green' clean hydrogen, produced by way of electrolysis, is being studied to determine if it can be produced efficiently and cost effectively. There's billions being invested into the technology by private companies and investors. Yet there are those who are against any efforts to even study improving the technology through innovation and advancement.
 
Last edited:
Toronto Escorts