Canada's next Prime Minister?

[Prometheus The Supremo]

Are times so tough? The economy isn't growing, but outside of a couple of sectors, it seems the economy is doing ok. My company has been on a hiring binge for months--we're having difficulty filling positions.

The way people are talking, you'd think it was 1992.

did you see the price of gas today? i doubt that the average person gave a shit about the environment while get raped at the pump. factor that with the news of factories closing down almost every day, as seen on television and suddenly the greenshift isn't the number 1 priority on peoples' minds.

come election day, we'll just see how much the average voter cares about the environment (more specifically the liberals' green shift).

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

don't get me wrong, the welfare of the environment is a noble cause to support but i don't think it will be strong enough of an issue to get the liberals elected because of all the other distractions.

 

[Admiral Beez]

As much as I dislike him, I have to admit that Harper seems to be an excellent political strategist. He knows how to play to the masses and seems good at controlling the direction of the debate, always keeping the opposition on the defensive.

It will be interesting to see who will succeed Harper in the CPC leader's role. Eventually, even if it's ten years from now, the guy's going to want to quit. The Liberals self destructed over the succession in their party with Martin and Chreiten fighting for a decade, and leaving the rump of the carcass for Dion. The CPCs would be wise to plan for succession, though Harper's Stalinist tendancy of crushing those who may oppose him will not make succession planning easy.

 

[kEiThZ]

Harper's 2 cents/liter diesel tax cut proposal just shows how dumb he is. If your paying $1.20+/ liter, 2 cents will not impact your budget in any meaningful way... He should be passing that $600 million to cash strapped municipalities like Toronto for public transit, schools, etc.

This is an interesting tax cut. I am a bit torn on this. I am a big fan of diesel. Encouraging a change in the fleet mix towards diesel would go a long way towards reducing GHGs, arguably even more so than that same money being distributed over the entire country for transit projects.

The federal government should get out of transit, that should be between the cities and the provinces. The more levels of government we have in projects, the more demands there are and the more compromises they make. Multi governmental involvement is a big factor in many of the mediocre programs and services we have. Local services should be delivered by the local government. Only in Canada do we demand that our highest level of government deliver our most local of services.....the bus coming to your house. You would not tolerate Ottawa dictating the school curriculum in BC. So why would you ask for their involvement in local bus service?

did you see the price of gas today? i doubt that the average person gave a shit about the environment while get raped at the pump. factor that with the news of factories closing down almost every day, as seen on television and suddenly the greenshift isn't the number 1 priority on peoples' minds.

come election day, we'll just see how much the average voter cares about the environment (more specifically the liberals' green shift).

That's the problem right there. I hope the Liberals have more of a platform than the Green Shift. Increasingly, this election they appear focused on the environment. I know they have more policies than that. But with so much focus on the green shift, they seem like a one-issue party. And sadly its the wrong issue for the times....

 

[afransen]

Whoever immediately succeeds Harper will probably never be Prime Minister. Not exactly a coveted position.

did you see the price of gas today? i doubt that the average person gave a shit about the environment while get raped at the pump. factor that with the news of factories closing down almost every day, as seen on television and suddenly the greenshift isn't the number 1 priority on peoples' minds.

If we're setting fiscal policy on the basis of the price of gasoline on one day, we deserve the kind of mess me make for ourselves.

come election day, we'll just see how much the average voter cares about the environment (more specifically the liberals' green shift)."

I thought that it wouldn't be the ballot question? You're saying that it would be, by saying the Liberals would be defeated on that basis.

This is an interesting tax cut. I am a bit torn on this. I am a big fan of diesel. Encouraging a change in the fleet mix towards diesel would go a long way towards reducing GHGs, arguably even more so than that same money being distributed over the entire country for transit projects.

There isn't much extra diesel to be had, with much of it being used for home heating. Cutting two cents isn't going to magically make diesels a winning proposition for many Canadians.

The federal government should get out of transit,[...]Only in Canada do we demand that our highest level of government deliver our most local of services.....the bus coming to your house.

Only in Canada would the feds pay for transit infrastructure, except just about every other OECD country, including the famously car-dependent US of A. I'm not advocating anything in specific, I just disagree with this premise.

 

[kEiThZ]

There isn't much extra diesel to be had, with much of it being used for home heating. Cutting two cents isn't going to magically make diesels a winning proposition for many Canadians.

This does not make the policy bad. If you can argue that adding 10 cents will decrease the consumption of diesel through a carbon tax, wouldn't the reduction of 2 cents have some effect as well. I predict that the higher prices of diesel and increasing demand will draw in investment for diesel producing refineries in the next few years.

Only in Canada would the feds pay for transit infrastructure, except just about every other OECD country, including the famously car-dependent US of A. I'm not advocating anything in specific, I just disagree with this premise.

I would not dispute this. These countries do this in the framework of national transit strategies, etc. However, only in Canada, do our municipalities refuse to launch transit programs and build new infrastructure without federal cash. Would New York or London or Paris or Hong Kong, etc. not build a subway line if there were no federal funds coming? Here in Canada, we insist on federal involvement in everything regardless of whether that level of government is suitable or has the requisite knowledge to participate. And then we b---h about political interference when higher levels of government do get involved.... Case in point....subway to Vaughan.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

If we're setting fiscal policy on the basis of the price of gasoline on one day, we deserve the kind of mess me make for ourselves.


I thought that it wouldn't be the ballot question? You're saying that it would be, by saying the Liberals would be defeated on that basis.

1) that's what's on alot of peoples' minds right now.

2) the conservatives have spun the greenshift agenda to look like a fuel tax increase and damaging to businesses and consumers. the liberals need to focus on economic benefits of their greenshift policy which i am not seeing on the cable news networks.

 

[afransen]

This does not make the policy bad. If you can argue that adding 10 cents will decrease the consumption of diesel through a carbon tax, wouldn't the reduction of 2 cents have some effect as well. I predict that the higher prices of diesel and increasing demand will draw in investment for diesel producing refineries in the next few years.

But is increasing (through 'subsidy'/tax credit) consumption of diesel really desirable? Especially when we seem to be on the verge of practical electric cars.

I would not dispute this. These countries do this in the framework of national transit strategies, etc. However, only in Canada, do our municipalities refuse to launch transit programs and build new infrastructure without federal cash. Would New York or London or Paris or Hong Kong, etc. not build a subway line if there were no federal funds coming? Here in Canada, we insist on federal involvement in everything regardless of whether that level of government is suitable or has the requisite knowledge to participate. And then we b---h about political interference when higher levels of government do get involved.... Case in point....subway to Vaughan.

Well, I think we can blame that on stingy provinces. Municipalities can't afford much infrastructure spending. No municipality is going to turn down a province's offer to pay the rest of the bill in favour of waiting for the feds to kick some in.

I would also be more comfortable with a less ad-hoc federal infrastructure program. It leaves something of strategic national interest open to pork barrel politics and vast regional inequity.

 

[MisterF]

"No country other than Denmark has seen large declines in emissions," said Monica Prasad, a sociology professor at Northwestern University and an expert on taxation as a regulatory tool. "Norway has seen a 43% increase."

What kind of emissions is she talking about? What source does she have? As far as I can tell 43% isn't even close to accurate. According to State of Environment Norway (Norwegian government), GHG emissions rose only 11% between 1990 and 2007. By comparison, Canada's GHG emissions have risen 22% in roughly the same period. So oil-rich Norway, with its version of a green shift, has seen GHG emissions rise at half the rate of Canada. Maybe carbon taxes had something to do with it.

To look at it from another angle, I don't see how anyone can oppose shifting some of the tax burden from income to consumption. With the former, you're penalized for making money. Seems kind of counterproductive in a capitalist economy. With the latter, you're penalized for making environmentally damaging choices and rewarded for environmentally beneficial ones. You have some choice over how much tax you pay.

 

[kEiThZ]

But is increasing (through 'subsidy'/tax credit) consumption of diesel really desirable? Especially when we seem to be on the verge of practical electric cars.

As an engineer, I would dispute that we are on the verge of practical electric cars.....I know there are a number of models out. But they won't change the fleet mix for a while. And if they do, grid stability might become a real issue as all those gigajoules are now drawn from the electric grid, occasionally during peak times. We'll get there for sure. But I don't believe that change will be in the next 5-10 years (2 car sales cycles) in any meaningful way.

With that established, why not increase the consumption of diesel in the fleet mix. 2 cents may not seem like much, but like you pointed out we are dealing with relative prices here. Those 2 cents could have major impacts on the switch from gasoline to diesel, thereby lowering our GHGs.

Well, I think we can blame that on stingy provinces. Municipalities can't afford much infrastructure spending. No municipality is going to turn down a province's offer to pay the rest of the bill in favour of waiting for the feds to kick some in.

I agree with you here. My point simply was that in Canada we just seem to have a mentality where the federal government must be involved with everything. Most other places, cities are mature enough to have long term infrastructure plans and work on them a little at a time. All federal or provincial funding does is speed things up.

As I have pointed out in other places, the real fix for Toronto is a reversal of provincial downloading. We should be holding McGuinty to his promise. And we should be demanding more. The city should have no part in delivering social housing, welfare, and public health. In my mind, municipalities should only be responsible for roads, transit, parks and rec, and emergency services. Anything else should be delivered by higher levels of government.

I would also be more comfortable with a less ad-hoc federal infrastructure program. It leaves something of strategic national interest open to pork barrel politics and vast regional inequity.

One thing to keep in mind, is that many of the countries that provide federal funding have no intermediate provincial government to deal with....like the UK or France. I have nothing against the federal government using funds to speed up the attainment of certain strategic goals ie reducing GHG through transit use. As such, I would love to see a transit infrastrucuture fund created out of the gas excise tax. What is ridiculous is that the 2 cents they give now goes towards transit o&m in many places. This simply creates a dependency on federal funding and demands for more.

 

[Redroom Studios]

barely on topic, but regardless of the scientific fact that diesel is less polluting, down at street level my nose and lungs would claim different. Diesel is so stinky and choking. Ive always hated Mercedes and Volkswagen for populating our streets with automobiles that run on that crap. Lets get biodiesel more well used so the streets can smell like french fries or popcorn!

 

[afransen]

Keith, it's interesting that you think a sharp increase in electric cars would destabilize the grid. The only way I could see that happening is if we don't invest a bit in transmission infrastructure. Battery electric cars would offer a large increase in buffering capacity in the grid. The key is that the cars will draw power when its cheap and release it when it is valuable. This will help our utilities avoid paying dollars a kWh during extreme peaks in power use. There is a great deal of unused capacity at night (the smart meters will be set to something like 2.1 c/kWh in the midnight - 6 am time frame).

And beyond that, electric cars won't stress the system during peak times, because electricity will be more expensive than gasoline during those peaks. It wouldn't make any sense to charge them at that point.

You might find this interesting: Rocky Mountain Institute Smart Grid

 

[kEiThZ]

barely on topic, but regardless of the scientific fact that diesel is less polluting, down at street level my nose and lungs would claim different. Diesel is so stinky and choking. Ive always hated Mercedes and Volkswagen for populating our streets with automobiles that run on that crap. Lets get biodiesel more well used so the streets can smell like french fries or popcorn!

Keith, it's interesting that you think a sharp increase in electric cars would destabilize the grid. The only way I could see that happening is if we don't invest a bit in transmission infrastructure. Battery electric cars would offer a large increase in buffering capacity in the grid. The key is that the cars will draw power when its cheap and release it when it is valuable. This will help our utilities avoid paying dollars a kWh during extreme peaks in power use. There is a great deal of unused capacity at night (the smart meters will be set to something like 2.1 c/kWh in the midnight - 6 am time frame).

And beyond that, electric cars won't stress the system during peak times, because electricity will be more expensive than gasoline during those peaks. It wouldn't make any sense to charge them at that point.

We need to change how we look at transportation. Redroom is right that diesel is polluting. But its excellent mileage works wonders out in rural areas where particulate pollution is less of a concern, same goes for the suburbs. These areas should be using diesel vehicles, while gasoline (and eventually electric) cars are more appropriate for inner city use where there are more concerns about particulate and smog forming pollutants.

As to grid stability, again it all depends on use. I am really pleased to see the implementation of time based pricing for power in Ontario. This will go along way towards distributing demand more evenly over time.

The same idea can be applied to other areas of our lives. Out in Halifax, the Navy routinely coordinates its work times with the municipality (HRM) so that the thousands of sailors who commute in don't create traffic and transit demands that impact the rest of the community. I wish more businesses in Toronto cooperated on staggered timings. Other policies can go even further....for example there are only a few hundred spots for the over 10 000 military personnel who commute in Ottawa, and those spots are only given to shift workers who work odd hours where transit can't be relied on. Those posted to Ottawa are simply told to take transit into account when buying a house. I routinely see generals taking the bus here. Personnel visiting from other countries are stunned by this, though its fairly normal for us.

 

[kEiThZ]

Dion better start talking about the economy soon. Trying to sell a carbon tax on a day when gas prices spiked 15 cents is just political suicide. He needs to wake up and start talking about the economy and focus less on the Green Shift. And I haven't even heard him talk about things like health care, education, etc.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Dion better start talking about the economy soon. Trying to sell a carbon tax on a day when gas prices spiked 15 cents is just political suicide. He needs to wake up and start talking about the economy and focus less on the Green Shift. And I haven't even heard him talk about things like health care, education, etc.

I'm beginning to think that Dion's handlers know this well enough, however they also know that the Dion ship has sunk, and know that the only way to really save the Liberal party is for it to take a serious, "Kim Campbell Tories-like" nosedive in the next election, from which it can rise again.