Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

FELDSTED -- Governments must never be allowed to tax us for more than an adequate amount to provide us with the services they are responsible for; we have lost sight of that axiom


Here's what everyone seems to be missing in the PBO's climate policy math. Arguments over the carbon tax overlook the fact that every alternative comes with its own costs
Aaron Wherry ~~ CBC News ~~ Jun 15, 2019

The simple math of climate policy rarely makes for straightforward politics.

Consider this week's analysis by the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO), and the respective responses of the Liberals and Conservatives.

Canada's greenhouse gas emissions are projected to decline to 592 megatonnes by 2030 — a significant reduction, but still 79 megatonnes above the target to which this country has committed. In the interests of framing future policy actions, the PBO estimated the sort of additional carbon levy that might be needed to eliminate those remaining megatonnes.

According to the PBO, that new carbon tax, applied broadly, could start at $6 per tonne in 2023 and rise to $52 per tonne by 2030.

The Conservatives were, perhaps predictably, aghast at the suggestion. But that puts Andrew Scheer's Conservative opposition in the odd position of complaining about the cost of meeting an international target that was first established by Stephen Harper's Conservative government — a government in which several of Scheer's frontbenchers were cabinet ministers.



Carbon taxes are an experiment in socialist social engineering. Calculating carbon tax amounts hides something far more sinister. The federal government has no power to impose a carbon tax. 

If this government can force us into accepting carbon taxes as a valid means of reducing oil and gas consumption, it has won an important psychological war.

The next step could be to tax electrical power bills to reduce consumption. That avoids the costs of building new generating facilities to meet increasing demands. A few people will expire from cold in the winter and heat in the summer, but it worked with petroleum; it can work with electricity.

Once the precedent is set, the government has unlimited powers to tax us into submission to its will. If you find that consistent with participatory democracy and governments elected to serve our collective needs, you are more broad-
minded than I.

Governments must never be allowed to tax us for more than an adequate amount to provide us with the services they are responsible for. We have lost sight of that axiom.

We have allowed governments to tax far in excess of what is needed to provide services.

That is the equivalent of handing a minor $1,000 in cash, a bottle of whiskey, keys to a car and wishing him or her a happy evening on the town.

Our electoral system should produce a parliament of sober, responsible people to govern on our behalf. I will repeat; to govern on our behalf, not to govern us. That does not seem to happen. There is too much money sloshing around Ottawa not to tempt governments into spending extravagantly, foolishly and irresponsibly.

The thought of our government taxing us to infringe on our freedom of choice should have us rioting in the streets. Global warming is a trojan horse that make subjecting us to government decree and encroachment on our rights and freedoms look palatable.

It is not ... it is the root of totalitarianism that will replace our democracy if we are not careful.  


John Feldsted
Political Consultant & Strategist
Winnipeg, Manitoba

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FORSETH -- Focus on the nine things I mentioned. That’s what will allow the Conservative Party to win the next election

IMAGE CREDIT:   Darryl Dyck, the Canadian Press. I thought I had already made up my mind who I would be ranking on my ballot, in the Conservative Party of BC leadership race; now I am not so sure.  That means that, at least for me, and perhaps many others, it’s a good thing voting hasn’t already taken place. There were initially only one or two of the candidates that I thought might be a little too right of centre for my liking, now it seems that list is growing. I consider myself more closely aligned with what used to be called a Progressive Conservative, regardless, I feel more than comfortable within the Conservative Party of BC.  Some, however, in messages to me on my political Facebook page, have been rather, shall we say, a bit mean-spirited in comments they’ve made about my ‘purity’ as a conservative. To tell you the truth, I really don’t care! Some leadership candidates, in comments made online, have also been raising the issue of who is a pure enough conservati...

WARD STAMER -- Those are REAL forestry numbers, not just made-up numbers

The following is a condensed version of remarks Kamloops – North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer’s made, regarding Forestry, in the BC Legislature, on Tuesday afternoon (02/24/2026)   Let’s talk a little bit, when we talk about Budget 2026, about the forest industry, which is near and dear to my heart. Forestry remains one of British Columbia’s foundational industries. It’s a pillar that built this province. Entire communities depend upon it. Interior towns, northern communities, Vancouver Island regions, the Kootenays, the Lower Mainland, with manufacturing facilities in Surrey and Maple Ridge, just to name a few — everywhere in BC is touched by forestry. One word that was not mentioned in Budget 2026 was forestry. That’s a shame, an incredible shame. It wasn’t an oversight – it was intentional. This government has driven forestry into the ground .... INTO THE GROUND! We can talk a little bit about some of the initiatives that this government has brought forth, to try to resurrect ...

Your government has a gambling problem (Troy Media)

Provinces call it “revenue,” but it looks a lot like exploitation of the marginalized The odds of winning Lotto Max are about 1 in 33 million. You’re statistically more likely to be struck by lightning than to win it. But your government is betting that statistics won’t hold you back; they’re counting on it. Across Canada, provincial governments not only regulate gambling, they also maintain a monopoly on lottery and gaming by owning and operating the entire legal market. That means every scratch card is government-issued, gambling odds are government-set, casino ads are government-funded and lottery billboards are government-paid. And these are not incidental government activities. They generate significant revenues that governments have powerful incentives to expand, not constrain. It would be one thing for our governments to encourage us to engage in healthy activities. We can quibble about whether the government should be trying to convince us to be more active or eat more vegetabl...

Labels

Show more