04.14.2015 07:33 AM

Ontario PCs oppose cap and trade!

…and warn that it will lead to the apocalypse, or worse.

No word, at this writing, what they intend to say to those communists up in Ottawa who also have supported cap and trade:

Screen Shot 2015-04-14 at 8.29.20 AM


  1. Matt says:

    But didn’t Finance Minister Oliver say yesterday cap and trade was not the way to go?

  2. Joe says:

    A corollary is the the Ontario Liberals are for a tax grab. Having spent all the other streams of revenue – why not create a new one. The voters who get their information from Huffington Post will support the idea. After all the HuffPo has been trumpeting ‘This has been the Warmest…. despite all the unadulterated data showing a global cooling trend. But I suppose it comes down to who do you believe, a fruit fly expert with a CBC gig and a failed politician turned weather evangelist or hard data taken in real time at real locations.

    Sometimes I wonder what our ancestors must have thought when the glacier that created the eskers near Red Deer started to recede. Do you suppose they gave the chief a few mammoth tusks to keep the glacier in place?

    Folly thy name is Ontario Liberal. Hubris thy name is weather control through taxation.

    • doconnor says:

      “despite all the unadulterated data showing a global cooling trend.” Source?

      You know your claims are so dubious that even the Ontario Conservatives don’t publicly agree.

      • Howard Moon says:

        Watch it. Joe has several advanced degrees from the most renowned universities

      • Joe says:

        Do your own research – don’t take my word for it. You can recognize raw data by its sheer mass and randomness of numbers. If it is a smooth progression of numbers the numbers have been smoothed by progressives. Raw data whether from ground station or satellite or ocean buoy takes a lot of processing to give you any information at all but should you choose to persevere you will be rewarded by a trend line that is almost imperceptibly showing cooling.

        • Howard Moon says:

          Do your own research, the lazy way out of backing up your statement

          • Joe says:

            And refusing to do your own research is a handy way of never challenging your preconceptions. Yawn. Sorry old chum but the “please wipe my butt because I’m too lazy doesn’t cut it with me. If you want to know the truth go find it because relying on others to feed you the info you need is ‘unscientific’.

        • doconnor says:

          Your claims are not constant with the scientific consensus, so it should be up to you to provide the evidence.

          There is the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project which was lead by a climate skeptic and used unadjusted data. It concluded human activity was causing global warming.

          • Joe says:

            Here’s a hint – consensus is not scientific. Never was never will be. Humans believe all kinds of nonsense and the prevailing consensus may be – but that does not make it scientific or true. One final thing that consensus you keep blathering on about exists only in the minds of the AGW crowd. Survey after survey after survey has shown that those who know something about climate science increasing don’t hold the consensus view that is so trumpeted to the scientifically illiterate by the AGW bullies.

          • Joe says:

            Can’t you do any research on your own? How many weeks did you last in college? I’ll bet you blamed the profs when you dropped out because they failed to give you all the answers! Now if you were half as smart as you seem to think you are you could recite from memory numerous occasions where ‘scientific consensus’ was proven wrong. What’s more government encouraged ‘scientific consensus is even more prone to being wrong. Need proof examine the ‘fat causes heart attacks’ consensus of 30 years ago and where it is today. But please do your own research – you will be a better human being for your effort.

          • doconnor says:

            I have done some research and I have come to different conclusions. I don’t see to point of Googling random websites looking for random opinions until I find one that fits my preconceived notions.

            While the scientific consensus is sometimes wrong, most of the time it isn’t. The Large Hadron Collider is showing that the scientific consensus around the Standard Model was correct.

          • Joe says:

            At last we agree on something. I don’t google random sites looking for agreeable opinion either. I look for the raw data and do my own calculations. However I don’t agree with you regarding consensus science. I don’t care how often the consensus is right or how often it is wrong the point of fact is that consensus is indicative of group think not science. If every scientist has looked at the data and done his/her own analysis and come to the same conclusion the consensus is more likely to be valid. If as so often happens scientists read the same journals and papers but do no analysis of their own then the consensus is less likely to be valid. When the consensus is merely a bunch of credential individuals who have no expertise in the subject but form a consensus anyway the consensus is highly unlikely to be true. Then when you have clowns like Al Gore running around becoming fabulously wealthy by promoting and trying to cause what amounts to little more than a public panic then the consensus is almost certainly invalid.

    • Ron W. says:

      A Cap & Trade carbon scheme is okay as long as it’s revenue neutral and the provinces provide compensating tax breaks, as the BC C&T does.

      The Wynne Liberal and Couillard Quebec C&T scheme is intended to raise tax money for the provinces and that means the taxpayer will get dinged.

      Can’t blame Wynne and Couillard for using the ‘global climate change’ bogeyman to raise taxes but there will be a political price to pay.

  3. Ron W. says:

    A tax is a tax is a tax!

    Liberal Premier Wynne’s ‘Cap & Trade’ scheme is a tax because it’s NOT revenue neutral, like the BC ‘C&T’. Now we will watch Wynne & Justin nosediving into political purgatory for this major snafu, and he will not recover by October.

    Of course we all know that Wynne needs to fill the Ontario Treasury with more moolah because the debt and deficit are spiraling out of control and a crypto-carbon tax will just do that.

    So, will Morontarians accept Wynne’s explanation of saving the planet or will Justin bear the brunt of another Liberal tax grab in Ontario, and Quebec too, come October?

    California, Quebec, Ontario all going to C&T taxation because all of them have monstrous deficits because of their past ‘liberal’ bent. Only BC’s C&T is revenue neutral and the taxpayers are not dinged.

    Now let’s have another ‘poll’ post-Wynne’s C&T Liberal carbon tax to determine Justin’s popularity in Ontario and.

  4. Kelly says:

    I don’t know why the PCs don’t support it? It won’t work. And that’s what they want. They don’t want oil consumption to fall. They want it to go up.

    What does work is a carbon tax at the pumps like they have in BC. A big one. With a concurrent cut in income tax. That way if you decide to cut back on fuel consumption you will save money AND get a tax cut… If you want to continue to spew carbon pollution and ruin my children’s future you can pay (and frankly be a chump).

    It may all be moot anyway. In 5 years nano-tech will have improved batteries to the point of 500km trips and 2 minute recharges are possible with affordable cars (the Tesla already gets 480 km and a joint venture between Phinergy and Alcoa pushes electric range of existing electric battery tech to around 2,000 km. Our economy will take a large hit as the patents will be held outside of this country and oil prices will eventually stay low … permanently killing the tar sands. Of course here we have no plan. None.

    • Michael says:

      The brain trust now leading the Ontario PCs, Patrick Brown and Monte McNaugton, have figured out that Cap & Trade doesn’t work? They couldn’t figure out how to organize a two car funeral.

  5. Michael says:

    The Ontario PCs would do themselves a huge favour by coming up with some concrete policy alternatives instead of screaming that everything is a tax.

  6. Elisabeth Lindsay says:

    It was said on Power and Politics yesterday that Quebec has taken oil and gas out of the equation.

    Here in B.C. we have a carbon tax at the pump of, I think, 7 cents a litre.

    As a senior I receive a rebate cheque quarterly.

    • Ron W. says:

      Elisabeth, how much is your quarterly cheque and is that money intended to make B.C. carbon tax neutral? Thanks for sharing.

      I have serious doubt that Liberal premiers Wynne and Couillard will make their C&T scheme revenue neutral and it will only be a tax grab to mitigate their monstrous deficits.

      • Elisabeth Lindsay says:

        It varies from year to year, based on income, but has never been less than $100.00 or over $125.00. I think it also includes PST/GST rebate as well.

        • Ron W. says:

          Elizabeth…. is that $100 to $125 quarterly, which would add up to $400 to $500 annually?! Is it taxable income?

          • Elisabeth Lindsay says:

            I dug out last year`s statement and yes, it was direct deposited, Total was $524.50. BUT $409.00 of it was the Annual GST/HST credit, and $115.50 was the B.C. Climate Action Tax Credit.

            I don`t know if it is taxable, but do know that it is calculated every year after taxes have been paid.

            I get the notification of the next year`s deposits around the first of July.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *