Steven Guilbeault starts talking about $247 per tonne “social cost on carbon”

Climate Cult 59 Comments

Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault announces “social cost on carbon.” Could this mean a $247/tonne carbon tax? Could it even hit $294/tonne?

Some more details in this Canadian Press story.

This is a big deal, and a huge threat to Saskatchewan and Alberta. In this Twitter video, Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault first provides the justification for why the carbon tax was originally $50, noting the government calculated the cost to be $54/tonne. Now he says they are implementing a “social cost of carbon,” and says it’s $247 per tonne. “ He calls it a “new tool the federal government is going to use on the fight against climate change.”

Is this the next threshold for the carbon tax? Sure sounds like it. Also sounds like justification for the proposed Clean Electricity Standard, to rid Canada of all coal and natural gas power generation. That’s a driving factor behind the Saskatchewan First Act. It also sounds like after the nine federal initiatives listed in the Drawing the Line White Paper, Clean Electricity Standard being No. 10, this is likely No. 11.

And have the provinces been consulted?

59 Replies to “Steven Guilbeault starts talking about $247 per tonne “social cost on carbon””

    1. The term “social cost of carbon” means nothing. It’s propaganda. The purpose of all this is simply to increase taxation and government’s share of the economy. The greater government’s size, the greater control it has over every one and every thing. This is what global warming has always been about; increasing the size and power of the state against the rights and freedoms of the individual. This is not insane, there’s very much a real purpose to this.

    2. It means they’re in charge of society, so are responsible for setting the cost. And you can suck it.

      As to the harm it’s causing…well…none, but they’re still in charge of society. Gotta keep those government jets in the air!

      1. I think the thing I object to most about the carbon tax is it’s lack of revenue neutrality. While I don’t agree with it, taxing carbon is a policy choice. Tax it to the stratosphere if you want, just cut back somewhere else. Eliminate the HST, cut income tax rates in half, something. That way, people can voluntarily choose to take the bus rather than pay $5 per liter for gas. It’s not that they don’t have the money, just that they can make personal choices with their own best interests in mind. The current situation is analagous to when municipalities decided in the 90’s that they could charge homeowners by the bag for garbage without any offsetting cut to property taxes. Bonus!

        1. You miss the whole point Stevo. They want your money. All of it. All the rest is just window dressing.

  3. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. The Liberal government is insane. Doubling down on carbon taxes when emissions have risen despite an increase in the carbon tax is insanity. It does fit with another agenda – killing the economy and by extension, as many Canadians as possible to bring about some Malthusian reduction in population (Gaia good, mankind bad).

    2. Doubling down on carbon taxes when emissions have risen despite an increase in the carbon tax is insanity.

      They are not seeking or expecting certain results with the exception of revenue boosting and increasing state power. Period. None of the “climate change” talk is about climate or the environment. “The issue is never the issue.”.

      I ended my fascination and enthusiasm for Austrian Economics many years ago after reading a single sentence by the great Ludwig von Mises. That sentence bears a striking similarity to yours.

  4. Every single cent the government get’s it’s hands on is spent, and then some. Every invented tax so far has not been enough to sate their desires for the revenue; sin taxes, import taxes, sales taxes, incomes taxes, death taxes. The Carbon Tax is yet another invented tax, invented in response to a spending problem. And it won’t stop going higher.

  5. If Pierre wants my vote he’ll have to get off his affordable housing wagon and forget the Toronto Island airport nonsense to start a conversation about repealing all of Trudeau’s carbon tax idiocies which are singlehandedly sinking this country.
    And I don’t want to hear any B.S. about “commitments” or how “it’s complicated”.

    1. There is a great risk to Poislievre that if the CPC adopts reasonable policies such as you suggest, the media brainwashed hordes will spurn Conservative candidates and elect the “approved” leftists again. A few rational, informed people in our town are bulk mailing Druthers into mailboxes – the negative reactions are stunning and highly ironical considering that the MSM (TV, CBC radio, and daily papers) feed opinion-shaping “news” directly into homes. The power of the MSM is not to be dismissed; we should look to Donald Trump’s pre-politics celebrity and huge presence on social media as an example of what it takes to break through the left’s dominance of messaging. Sure, we wonks know what’s going on but the MSM are very good at making sure that average voters are resistant to being better informed.

      1. Entirely correct. burton’s approach would trigger an immediate media onslaught. They are entirely in the tank for the supposed perils of global warming. Promising to back off completely will indeed trigger an enormous media assault during an election.

        1. Hence the need to lay low for now, and completely defund the mediot enemies.

          The Media, The ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE

        2. Conveniently, thanks to Shiny Pony, the government now controls the media. One call from the PMO and they’ll all magically shut up. PMPP says he wants to shut off the government tap that keeps the media alive, if he just trickles out a little money they’ll say any damn thing he wants them to.

          That particular sword cuts both ways. I do not view this as a -good- thing, but it is certainly a thing.

      2. If the media are able to sway Canadian voters to vote for the climate change religious zealots then we’ll get the economic and physical disaster we deserve.

        There is no curing stupid without pain and it’s becoming increasingly clear that too many Canadians are stupid, especially the dimwit urbanites of the Toronto to Quebec corridor.

        The pain of being a very poor country, or one that is severed into regions after civil conflict seem inevitable. People will be hungry, cold, frightened and in the worst case, fighting a brutal civil war.

      3. This is the sort of gutless cowardly garbage I’ve come to expect from the CPC and it’s supporters. Never, ever take a stand, that’s you.

        You’re all so frightened of pissing off “the Media” who were always going to trash you anyway.

        Actual conservatives find you embarrassing.

        NEVER again will I vote CPC.

    4. government is the biggest reason that there is an “affordable housing problem” going all the way down to the municipal level.

      At least 2 of the many Toronto Mayoral candidates to replace Tory are proposing to increase property taxes to make housing more affordable

    5. burton, you could not be more on the money.

      Nothing tires me more at SDA than the idealists’s whining about PP’s failure to mount his soapbox and wax eloquent on conservative principles with zero sales appeal to the vast majority of voters. Similarly the Harper bashing here has astounded me. In my view his governance was about as good as it gets in this deranged socialist dominion.

      1. He’s tied with Justine. They both earned that title.

        You could throw Jughead and the Little Perogie in there too. That’s a foursome that can all take a good hard knock in the teeth.

  7. Hans Gruber needs to talk to his boss about flying all over the place for photo ops.

  8. What did you expect from an Eco-Terrorist Environment Minister a hug ? He’s more like an extortionist mugging you for your last dollar.

    1. Actually, Italy had the way 80 years ago, but I doubt the newer led street light poles are strong enough anymore.

  10. I may be slow but could someone please explain in a rational way which carbon is being targeted? Is it the naturally occurring element or the CO2 also natural plant food gas.
    After years of people throwing around the blanket terms, there seems to be some blurring of definitions.

    1. You’re not slow, there’s not rationality anymore to it all.

      When reason seems to have gone, the desire for control becomes way more evident.

      1. Frightening to watch people parrot the parlance du jour which is a dead giveaway for lack of original thought. Suppose it makes them sound like the cool kids.
        Somewhat reminiscent of junior high.

    1. Good let them try it.
      The faster it all burns down the better for our own Great Reset and the first thing to do in that reset is have a hemp tie party for our Overlords.

  13. Guilbeault is the face a a psychopathic societal destroyer, drunk on ignorant pseudo-environmental zeal and emblematic of an equivalent deranged and mindless electorate. Canadians have no cause to question how Adolf Hitler came to power. They only need turn on the CBC, attend a humanities lecture at any university, read the Toronto Star, listen to the Centre for Policy Alternatives, or pay attention to virtually anything the vast majority of politicians say and do.

  16. Where is the calculation for the “social benefits of carbon?”

    The degree or so of warming experienced to date has clearly been a net benefit to mankind. Agricultural production in temperate zones has benefitted from longer growing seasons. Higher CO2 levels have caused a measurable and important “greening” of the globe – the Sahara desert, for instance, has shrunk considerably.

    There is even a direct benefit to mortality rates – cold typically kills about seven times as many people as excess temperatures. There has been a large decline in deaths due to extreme climate events.

  17. The smug arrogance of these people telling you what it is and shall be even though theyre clearly lying, thieving bastards would-be impressive if it weren’t ultimately deadly.
    They hate us and will make us subservient and wanting, cold and frightened.

  18. If we are going to look at the “social cost” of carbon, then let’s balance it off with the “social BENEFIT” of carbon….the benefits are infinitely higher than the “costs” given that fossil fuels keep the world population fed, clothed and sheltered.

  19. Oil is less than 80 bucks a barrel. Gasoline is 1.60 a liter. When oil was 140 a barrel we were paying less than this for fuel. Our own government is trying to destroy our civilization. We might want to do something about this.

  21. Guilbeault or anyone swallowing the AGW cool aid needs to look at this succession of 6 slides and comment on how terrified we should all be of warming given the reality of the last half million years starting with the last 600. The last slide should actually suggest that the threat of the next glaciation is of more concern: http://www.jpattitude.com/IceCore/graph1.htm

  22. Perhaps the lpc is playing that 4-D chess we hear about; evil white western countries need to pay more for all of their sins but especially carbon release, so the solution is to import the southern 3rd world (exclusively non-white people) so we can shed the demon of being a white majority, and our collective social costs will come down.
    You white people that can afford it, stop having children. We’ll bring in people that have 5-8 kids so we can be a less oppressive nation.

  24. When your enemies proudly self identify and specify the doom they desire for you..
    Believe them.
    I believe Gang Green.
    I hear yah Steven!

    I believe you.
    Banishment to C.A.G.E on Coats Island Nunavut,is the reward I prefer for “help” such as this.

  27. I agree with John Chittick. Guilbeault is a psychopath ( or maybe just an idiot). He needs to be removed ftom office. What will he do when Canadians are bankrupt and there is no impact on the climate. . . which is where we are headed.

  30. I have periodically mentioned a phrase I encountered a few years ago that describes bureaucratic calculation, the rule of eschewing rounded numbers: COMICAL PRECISION.

    This is a perfect text book example: not $250 per tonne of social cost but $247 per tonne. Clearly 1000s of hours, including evening and weekends without additional pay, were expended in arriving at this precise figure. And we should appreciate this thankless herculean effort.

    1. It adds a veneer of what appears to be logic to the illogical. Neglecting this caused them all sorts of grief with SNC-Lavalin back when Jody Wilson-Expense-Account was the Minister of Just Us.

  32. Let’s pretend that humans contribute to changing the climate lol. In Saskatchewan, we are mainly an agricultural province which means we suck more CO2 from the atmosphere than the majority of provinces. And with our small population and large area including the forests up north even more CO2 sucking organisms show we are carbon negative. Federal government should be paying us.
    But anyone who has researched the climate change scam knows the climate models are joke. Ask any person to provide the mathematical equation that describes their model. They will look at you like a deer in headlights. Saskatchewan needs to truly be Saskatchewan First and drop the carbon tax.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation