The Liberals were all bitching for months that the huge surplus they relied upon for funding their party was going to disappear.
Most Canadians saw it as proof of over taxation however.

A politician who promised huge tax cuts while crying about smaller budget surpluses is a two faced liar.

Thats not true. The conservative favor less government, and less government spendig. Where as the Liberals like big taxes and big spending.

What we really need is an income tax system that can fit on a post card. All income above a certain amount, from whatever source, taxed at the same amount. No exceptions. No exemptions. No rebates. No complicated forms and accountants and lawyers.

So will Dion's proposal simplify or further complicate our Monty Python tax forms?

The Liberals were all bitching for months that the huge surplus they relied upon for funding their party was going to disappear.
Most Canadians saw it as proof of over taxation however.

A politician who promised huge tax cuts while crying about smaller budget surpluses is a two faced liar.

You can call it what you want but that's the past and it's gone.

Right now the leader of you're party if offering huge tax benefits for Canadians while they were attacking this governments budget over a smaller projected surplus.
If their giving so much money back to Canadians, where's the money going to come from for their huge surplus?

.. please say carbon trading

You can call it what you want but that's the past and it's gone.

Right now the leader of you're party if offering huge tax benefits for Canadians while they were attacking this governments budget over a smaller projected surplus.
If their giving so much money back to Canadians, where's the money going to come from for their huge surplus?

.. please say carbon trading

Revenue neutral???......Fantasy economics. Government itself eats up revenue. Only a small portion of tax revenue is returned to the population as services---the rest is absorbed by the bloated bureaucracy which collects and administers it.

The easiest way to increase the citizens' disposable income is tax cuts.....no administration costs---no bureaucracy.

Estate taxes are revenue negative as the costs of assessing and collection vastly outstip revenue.

K, excuse me if I’m a bit ignorant here but I’m not seeing the point to this proposal. You take the existing gas tax which is currently going into general revenues (so I assume) and rename it the newly dubbed carbon tax. Ok, well now we have a sin tax on gasoline instead of a 10-cent federal excise tax on a litre of fuel at the pumps. So that might be fairly neutral but if the carbon tax in BC shows us anything that’s not entirely true as they have seen increases of about 3 cents.

Now that is just at the pumps. What about natural gas for home heating? How about electricity generated by coal fired plants? What about petro bi-products such as plastics? What about increased shipping costs on all consumer goods and groceries? The price of everything will shoot up will it not?

I know the argument is “well, you will receive personal income tax reduction to off set the increase at the pump" but that’s going to have to be one hell of a sizable tax reduction to off set cost such as those mentioned above.

Now the most important point, were does this money go? Oh and please don’t say that it’s revenue neutral and that we will see it all come back in the form of income tax reductions. My name is Billy Tucker not Silly Fucker. Will any of the proceeds be used to advance research and development of alternative fuel sources or carbon emissions reduction technology? Or will it be pumped into general revenues just like every other sin tax is?

If it does go into general revenues then aren’t we kind of just creating a “feel good” solution here. Sure consumers will be forced to “pay to pollute” which will supposedly deter them from emitting carbon but I can’t see there being any meaningful reductions through this method. If businesses are saddled with this tax you can bet that that too will also be shuffled down to the consumer. So in the end all we’ll be doing is creating a sin tax to discourage carbon emissions which will basically just increase the cost of everything for the consumer with little or no money going towards the real goal of finding alternative energy sources and no meaningful penalties being created for the big polluters such as big businesses. In fact, with the price of everything being higher won’t that discourage research into alternative energies since everyone will be on a much tighter budget? Sounds a little screwy to me, in fact it’s all ready giving me a head ache thinking about it.

I don’t know but I’d have to take a look at the complete proposal before I make a final judgement on it but at first look I’m not to optimistic about this idea. I hope Dion has one hell of a marketing pitch to sell this because he’s going to need it.

K, excuse me if I’m a bit ignorant here but I’m not seeing the point to this proposal. You take the existing gas tax which is currently going into general revenues (so I assume) and rename it the newly dubbed carbon tax. Ok, well now we have a sin tax on gasoline instead of a 10-cent federal excise tax on a litre of fuel at the pumps. So that might be fairly neutral but if the carbon tax in BC shows us anything that’s not entirely true as they have seen increases of about 3 cents.

Now that is just at the pumps. What about natural gas for home heating? How about electricity generated by coal fired plants? What about petro bi-products such as plastics? What about increased shipping costs on all consumer goods and groceries? The price of everything will shoot up will it not?

I know the argument is “well, you will receive personal income tax reduction to off set the increase at the pump" but that’s going to have to be one hell of a sizable tax reduction to off set cost such as those mentioned above.

Now the most important point, were does this money go? Oh and please don’t say that it’s revenue neutral and that we will see it all come back in the form of income tax reductions. My name is Billy Tucker not Silly Fucker. Will any of the proceeds be used to advance research and development of alternative fuel sources or carbon emissions reduction technology? Or will it be pumped into general revenues just like every other sin tax is?

If it does go into general revenues then aren’t we kind of just creating a “feel good” solution here. Sure consumers will be forced to “pay to pollute” which will supposedly deter them from emitting carbon but I can’t see there being any meaningful reductions through this method. If businesses are saddled with this tax you can bet that that too will also be shuffled down to the consumer. So in the end all we’ll be doing is creating a sin tax to discourage carbon emissions which will basically just increase the cost of everything for the consumer with little or no money going towards the real goal of finding alternative energy sources and no meaningful penalties being created for the big polluters such as big businesses. In fact, with the price of everything being higher won’t that discourage research into alternative energies since everyone will be on a much tighter budget? Sounds a little screwy to me, in fact it’s all ready giving me a head ache thinking about it.

I don’t know but I’d have to take a look at the complete proposal before I make a final judgement on it but at first look I’m not to optimistic about this idea. I hope Dion has one hell of a marketing pitch to sell this because he’s going to need it.

The BC government is using a schime like this to buy votes and it's a damned hard selll. That's a strong party that's been in power with a strong economy with a weak and disorganized opposition.
Dion is that weak opposition and this is the only topic he has, as pathetic as it is.
Obviously, there's a deal in the works with the Libs and the greens.
Wonder what elections Canada is going to make of that?