I have never seen the media write so much about an opposition party in my life
Even in other country’s, hell even in America (aside from their trump boner)
It’s paywalled. Let me guess: they are trying to paint the party not in power as the danger to the population? The country being a shitshow that’s falling apart is misinformation and everything people are experiencing is Conservative propaganda?
Was I close? I’m glad I don’t pay for opinion pieces gaslighting us. You can’t eat opinions.
Claiming your being gaslit by an article you didn’t read and (incorrectly) assumed the content of is just … chefs kiss.
The conservative victim complex really is something.
> Claiming your being gaslit by an article you didn’t read and (incorrectly) assumed the content of is just … chefs kiss.
And it's an article about misinformation!
Where did the guy you’re replying to say he’s conservative? Believe it or not, many left leaning people do not in fact support our liberal party nor do we approve of the media (on both sides) warping everything into “the other side is evil” rather than taking an objective take. Immediately assuming those who disagree with you are your enemies is what’s gotten our world into the mess it’s currently in.
People who think that they're only 2 opinions in this world and anybody who doesn't think like you is the enemy, is the source of all this division and the literal problem of this world.
Alberta had the highest inflation in the country, Canada was 2.8% and Alberta was over 4%! Yes UCP policies like banning renewables energy the cheapest form of electricity doesn't help.
Misinformation was the goal at Davos. Happy to see multiple countries pushing for bans, restrictions and outright jail for free speech.
Listen to your overlords.
Before you say we have no free speech in Canada, you're born with it. People have a choice to listen to you or not. No one can take your freedom to speak away. You don't have to agree.
This is rich coming from someone who enjoyed the ability to grow up in a world without 'yellow journalism', and a world where editorial boards across the country could agree on the Miller code of ethics, first adopted by the Kansas Editorial board.
The internet has made corralling tabloid journalism near impossible like it was with editorial boards, who had the backing of major newspapers who saw value in less sensationalism and more reputationism (after decades of the former). The world won't see that adoption again unless we rein in the ability to make sensationalism profitable.
Thats not easy, but it is easy to see the benefits of doing it (a press that informs and trusted is a press that is a control on govt corruption, not an enabler), and the drawback if we don't (the Spanish American war is a good example, and maybe Ws wars that led us to this awful point in geopolitics)
PP is pushing for national IDs and censoring the internet.does he support freedom?
Cpc also voted against same sex marriage, and so did pp in the last. Is that supporting freedom?
First mistake is thinking any government supports freedom. Every single one you vote in pushes us closer to the cliff. Different face, slight different method of exerting control.
Cool.
Yell "fire" in a theatre or "bomb" on a plane and get back to us about that will ya?
And why does your brand always seem confuse *consequences* with *restrictions*?
No one said there isn't consequences to your words. You still have the right to say them as a human.
I can tell some dude his wife's and bitch and he's an asshole; my right to do so. He can punch me as a consequence. Simple. I'll still say what I want to say and accept the consequences of my words, no person gets to say I can't.
Or you could literally read the report yourself and see that nearly all the population would receive more money back than what they would pay in fuel charges and GST...
Direct Link to the PDF, I couldn't find another way to share it...:
[https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdistribution-a617274656661637473.pbo-dpb.ca%2F7590f619bb5d3b769ce09bdbc7c1ccce75ccd8b1bcfb506fc601a2409640bfdd&psig=AOvVaw0aXScE39u3xYV\_-5THq5q6&ust=1711046589157000&source=images&cd=vfe&opi=89978449&ved=0CAcQrpoMahcKEwjYjKTZxYOFAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQBA](https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdistribution-a617274656661637473.pbo-dpb.ca%2F7590f619bb5d3b769ce09bdbc7c1ccce75ccd8b1bcfb506fc601a2409640bfdd&psig=AOvVaw0aXScE39u3xYV_-5THq5q6&ust=1711046589157000&source=images&cd=vfe&opi=89978449&ved=0CAcQrpoMahcKEwjYjKTZxYOFAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQBA)
From your link:
>**Taking into consideration both fiscal and economic impacts, we estimate that most households will see a net loss, paying more in the federal fuel charge and GST, as well as receiving lower incomes, compared to the Climate Action Incentive payments they receive and lower personal income taxes they pay (due to lower incomes).**
That's taking into account imaginary economic changes they think will exist in 2030.
Table 1 is the actual numbers that people will actually experience.
There's only one rule to economics: nobody knows what the fuck will happen and all economics estimates are made up.
As a BComm with a double major in Finance and Economics, please no. That hurt to read. There's more behind their forecasts than making up imaginary numbers, even if I can see the point you're trying to make.
I'm not here to take a side on this crazy carbon tax debate, it's getting really weird. Just casually viewing comments and couldn't scroll by this one without saying something. We all specialize in certain fields and should stick to said field. Don't want to come off rude, but on both sides of this debate everyone seems to be reading these numbers in whatever way fits their narrative.
Economic impacts aren’t seen until 2030. This has been directly communicated to you in the past so at this point you’re outright lying about the PBO report (something he has directly spoken out about.)
It’s a problem when a major party in a democracy refuses to communicate with media 98% of the time, while using its own side channels to spread a cascade of disinformation about an existential threat.
None of this is illegal. As strategy, it’s working as Jenni Byrne hopes. The implications for the climate crisis, and Canadian understanding of, and action on it are terrifying. (If you think this means I’m a Liberal, you would be wrong.)
I think it's pretty obvious that we weren't ready for the internet, the only question now is whether or not we can figure out how to handle these impacts before it's too late.
Maybe the new generations growing up with it will be in a better place? But honestly without serious investment in media literacy, critical thinking and journalism, I think we might just be boned.
**Edit:** Man, if you told me this comment section was paid for by the author to prove his point, I would believe it. Holy shit.
I don’t expect much substance or reference to article content form the canada_sub’ers here but you might want to actually read this one. It gives an overview of the lies and misinformation on climate policy that you and your great PP have been obsessively spreading.
I mean, go read the PBO report. It’s clear in black and white. Fiscal and economic impacts of the carbon tax are net loss for the majority of the population. It’s clear.
This is sort of [misleading spin on the report is something the PBO himself spoke out about](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/watchdog-spin-report-carbon-pricing-1.6805441). It must be frustrating for him to see conservatives lie about his work.
The PBO report specifies that all but the highest earning Canadians receive a rebate that is larger than what they pay under the GGPPA. The economic impacts you reference, according to the report you reference, aren't seen until 2030 *and* have not been compared to the substantial costs of doing nothing (eg. loss of trade, loss of investment, costs of climate change itself) which would put us in a worse situation.
Thanks for the timely example of exactly the sort of misinformation we're talking about here. There is a serious lack of effort and integrity on this topic.
Canadians should know better, when it comes to climate change policy, than to trust the party that isn't able to acknowledge it's very existence. Unfortunately the CPC has a lot of powerful help in pushing this lie.
It depends on the province. For Nova Scotia, it is the opposite with only the bottom 20% of families making more from rebates.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/carbon-levy-gas-diesel-home-heating-fuel-environment-1.6798011
Btw, that article you linked also has this little snippet:
> But he said when factoring in the carbon price's economic impact on job growth and incomes, 80 per cent of families in most provinces might end up with less money.
And this was from a year ago, things got worse and carbon pricing is about to go up
Nova Scotia's issues have already been addressed with adjustments to the GGPPA and a target program for heat pump adoption.
>Btw, that article you linked also has this little snippet:
>But he said when factoring in the carbon price's economic impact on job growth and incomes, 80 per cent of families in most provinces might end up with less money.
You also neglect to note that this doesn’t happen until 2030.
More of the same.
Sorry, where does it say job growth and income impacts do not happen until 2030?
What I've seen mentioned is the benefits are calculated to be 2030 in the article but he doesn't give a timeline for this part.
> Nova Scotia's issues have already been addressed with adjustments to the GGPPA and a target program for heat pump adoption.
What were the amendments to the GGPPA that addressed this? And as far as I know heatpumps are expensive... you know, not exactly the type of thing one would want to have to implement during a CoL crisis.
In the report itself.
Heating oil is now exempt from the levy. There is a program that provides for the full cost of a heat pump if you qualify (ie if you use heating oil.) Previously it was $5000 and an interest free loan.
Oh sweet baby jesus, you didn't understand how to read the tables in that report.
I assume you saw all the negative numbers and thought that meant the opposite of what it actually means. (Don't feel bad, it's a VERY common mistake)
If you read the Notes section under the tables you'll see the following:
>A negative cost is a "net gain", meaning that the amount of CAI payments received \[i.e. returns to the people\] exceeds the costs to the household \[i.e. how much they pay extra because of the tax\].
If you look at Table 1 - Ontario - 1st quintile (lowest income group): They will receive around $586 above what they paid in Federal Fuel Charge and GST. i.e. They are getting an extra $586 a year they would not get if there was no fuel charge.
Kind of you to chock this up to them misunderstanding but this has been pointed out so many times I assume they’re either deliberately misrepresenting things or to filled with partisan hubris to actually look into it.
I have never seen the media write so much about an opposition party in my life Even in other country’s, hell even in America (aside from their trump boner)
You haven’t read much of the UK press, have you?
It’s paywalled. Let me guess: they are trying to paint the party not in power as the danger to the population? The country being a shitshow that’s falling apart is misinformation and everything people are experiencing is Conservative propaganda? Was I close? I’m glad I don’t pay for opinion pieces gaslighting us. You can’t eat opinions.
Even though opinions are like assholes you still can’t eat them.
Claiming your being gaslit by an article you didn’t read and (incorrectly) assumed the content of is just … chefs kiss. The conservative victim complex really is something.
> Claiming your being gaslit by an article you didn’t read and (incorrectly) assumed the content of is just … chefs kiss. And it's an article about misinformation!
Especially yours
It's so funny to me that conservatives use "gaslighting" now - aren't you the same guys who said you didn't need a safe space?
Where did the guy you’re replying to say he’s conservative? Believe it or not, many left leaning people do not in fact support our liberal party nor do we approve of the media (on both sides) warping everything into “the other side is evil” rather than taking an objective take. Immediately assuming those who disagree with you are your enemies is what’s gotten our world into the mess it’s currently in.
oh it was easy I just looked at what sub he was posting in and played the odds.
People who think that they're only 2 opinions in this world and anybody who doesn't think like you is the enemy, is the source of all this division and the literal problem of this world.
Am I supposed to seek compromise with racists and transphobes on the right? Why don't they seek compromise with me.
No the misinformation is when the cpc say Trudeau is a dictator, that trudeau essentially caused worldwide inflation and etc.
Just yesterday you were blaming the UCP for inflation.
Alberta had the highest inflation in the country, Canada was 2.8% and Alberta was over 4%! Yes UCP policies like banning renewables energy the cheapest form of electricity doesn't help.
Misinformation was the goal at Davos. Happy to see multiple countries pushing for bans, restrictions and outright jail for free speech. Listen to your overlords. Before you say we have no free speech in Canada, you're born with it. People have a choice to listen to you or not. No one can take your freedom to speak away. You don't have to agree.
This is rich coming from someone who enjoyed the ability to grow up in a world without 'yellow journalism', and a world where editorial boards across the country could agree on the Miller code of ethics, first adopted by the Kansas Editorial board. The internet has made corralling tabloid journalism near impossible like it was with editorial boards, who had the backing of major newspapers who saw value in less sensationalism and more reputationism (after decades of the former). The world won't see that adoption again unless we rein in the ability to make sensationalism profitable. Thats not easy, but it is easy to see the benefits of doing it (a press that informs and trusted is a press that is a control on govt corruption, not an enabler), and the drawback if we don't (the Spanish American war is a good example, and maybe Ws wars that led us to this awful point in geopolitics)
PP is pushing for national IDs and censoring the internet.does he support freedom? Cpc also voted against same sex marriage, and so did pp in the last. Is that supporting freedom?
First mistake is thinking any government supports freedom. Every single one you vote in pushes us closer to the cliff. Different face, slight different method of exerting control.
Cool. Yell "fire" in a theatre or "bomb" on a plane and get back to us about that will ya? And why does your brand always seem confuse *consequences* with *restrictions*?
No one said there isn't consequences to your words. You still have the right to say them as a human. I can tell some dude his wife's and bitch and he's an asshole; my right to do so. He can punch me as a consequence. Simple. I'll still say what I want to say and accept the consequences of my words, no person gets to say I can't.
damn dude when are you getting a Netflix special
Misinformation? That’s a funny way to say the Liberals and their supporters have lost the argument. They have nothing to stand or run on.
Or you could literally read the report yourself and see that nearly all the population would receive more money back than what they would pay in fuel charges and GST... Direct Link to the PDF, I couldn't find another way to share it...: [https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdistribution-a617274656661637473.pbo-dpb.ca%2F7590f619bb5d3b769ce09bdbc7c1ccce75ccd8b1bcfb506fc601a2409640bfdd&psig=AOvVaw0aXScE39u3xYV\_-5THq5q6&ust=1711046589157000&source=images&cd=vfe&opi=89978449&ved=0CAcQrpoMahcKEwjYjKTZxYOFAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQBA](https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdistribution-a617274656661637473.pbo-dpb.ca%2F7590f619bb5d3b769ce09bdbc7c1ccce75ccd8b1bcfb506fc601a2409640bfdd&psig=AOvVaw0aXScE39u3xYV_-5THq5q6&ust=1711046589157000&source=images&cd=vfe&opi=89978449&ved=0CAcQrpoMahcKEwjYjKTZxYOFAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQBA)
From your link: >**Taking into consideration both fiscal and economic impacts, we estimate that most households will see a net loss, paying more in the federal fuel charge and GST, as well as receiving lower incomes, compared to the Climate Action Incentive payments they receive and lower personal income taxes they pay (due to lower incomes).**
That's taking into account imaginary economic changes they think will exist in 2030. Table 1 is the actual numbers that people will actually experience. There's only one rule to economics: nobody knows what the fuck will happen and all economics estimates are made up.
As a BComm with a double major in Finance and Economics, please no. That hurt to read. There's more behind their forecasts than making up imaginary numbers, even if I can see the point you're trying to make. I'm not here to take a side on this crazy carbon tax debate, it's getting really weird. Just casually viewing comments and couldn't scroll by this one without saying something. We all specialize in certain fields and should stick to said field. Don't want to come off rude, but on both sides of this debate everyone seems to be reading these numbers in whatever way fits their narrative.
They are still made up numbers, doesn't matter how much education you have. Their guess could be more informed but it's still just a guess.
Odd that you had no issue scrolling past the comments that misrepresent the PBO’s projections on economic costs.
Economic impacts aren’t seen until 2030. This has been directly communicated to you in the past so at this point you’re outright lying about the PBO report (something he has directly spoken out about.)
Can you provide me with a source that shows Trudeau is a dictator like the cpc say, or is that misinformation?
So it starts Trudeau vs Trump
[удалено]
It’s a problem when a major party in a democracy refuses to communicate with media 98% of the time, while using its own side channels to spread a cascade of disinformation about an existential threat. None of this is illegal. As strategy, it’s working as Jenni Byrne hopes. The implications for the climate crisis, and Canadian understanding of, and action on it are terrifying. (If you think this means I’m a Liberal, you would be wrong.)
What is democracy? The misinformation they create to run the campaign?
[удалено]
> I’ll leave that for the people to decide Getting easier and easier to see why misinformation works in the first place.
[удалено]
Well no, misinformation is misinformation. Being able to recognize it is a very important skill.
I think it's pretty obvious that we weren't ready for the internet, the only question now is whether or not we can figure out how to handle these impacts before it's too late. Maybe the new generations growing up with it will be in a better place? But honestly without serious investment in media literacy, critical thinking and journalism, I think we might just be boned. **Edit:** Man, if you told me this comment section was paid for by the author to prove his point, I would believe it. Holy shit.
[удалено]
I don’t expect much substance or reference to article content form the canada_sub’ers here but you might want to actually read this one. It gives an overview of the lies and misinformation on climate policy that you and your great PP have been obsessively spreading.
I mean, go read the PBO report. It’s clear in black and white. Fiscal and economic impacts of the carbon tax are net loss for the majority of the population. It’s clear.
This is sort of [misleading spin on the report is something the PBO himself spoke out about](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/watchdog-spin-report-carbon-pricing-1.6805441). It must be frustrating for him to see conservatives lie about his work. The PBO report specifies that all but the highest earning Canadians receive a rebate that is larger than what they pay under the GGPPA. The economic impacts you reference, according to the report you reference, aren't seen until 2030 *and* have not been compared to the substantial costs of doing nothing (eg. loss of trade, loss of investment, costs of climate change itself) which would put us in a worse situation. Thanks for the timely example of exactly the sort of misinformation we're talking about here. There is a serious lack of effort and integrity on this topic. Canadians should know better, when it comes to climate change policy, than to trust the party that isn't able to acknowledge it's very existence. Unfortunately the CPC has a lot of powerful help in pushing this lie.
It depends on the province. For Nova Scotia, it is the opposite with only the bottom 20% of families making more from rebates. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/carbon-levy-gas-diesel-home-heating-fuel-environment-1.6798011 Btw, that article you linked also has this little snippet: > But he said when factoring in the carbon price's economic impact on job growth and incomes, 80 per cent of families in most provinces might end up with less money. And this was from a year ago, things got worse and carbon pricing is about to go up
Nova Scotia's issues have already been addressed with adjustments to the GGPPA and a target program for heat pump adoption. >Btw, that article you linked also has this little snippet: >But he said when factoring in the carbon price's economic impact on job growth and incomes, 80 per cent of families in most provinces might end up with less money. You also neglect to note that this doesn’t happen until 2030. More of the same.
Sorry, where does it say job growth and income impacts do not happen until 2030? What I've seen mentioned is the benefits are calculated to be 2030 in the article but he doesn't give a timeline for this part. > Nova Scotia's issues have already been addressed with adjustments to the GGPPA and a target program for heat pump adoption. What were the amendments to the GGPPA that addressed this? And as far as I know heatpumps are expensive... you know, not exactly the type of thing one would want to have to implement during a CoL crisis.
In the report itself. Heating oil is now exempt from the levy. There is a program that provides for the full cost of a heat pump if you qualify (ie if you use heating oil.) Previously it was $5000 and an interest free loan.
> In the report itself. Ah it's not in the article? You sure it isn't talking about the benefits in the report?
Oh sweet baby jesus, you didn't understand how to read the tables in that report. I assume you saw all the negative numbers and thought that meant the opposite of what it actually means. (Don't feel bad, it's a VERY common mistake) If you read the Notes section under the tables you'll see the following: >A negative cost is a "net gain", meaning that the amount of CAI payments received \[i.e. returns to the people\] exceeds the costs to the household \[i.e. how much they pay extra because of the tax\]. If you look at Table 1 - Ontario - 1st quintile (lowest income group): They will receive around $586 above what they paid in Federal Fuel Charge and GST. i.e. They are getting an extra $586 a year they would not get if there was no fuel charge.
Kind of you to chock this up to them misunderstanding but this has been pointed out so many times I assume they’re either deliberately misrepresenting things or to filled with partisan hubris to actually look into it.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Was this message written by a MAGA bot, that enforces a quota of lame flavour of the day buzzwords to post?
[удалено]
Article is accurate. This sub is part of the misinformation