[saturn_656]

andyt andyt:

Why? You're a heavy fuel user for some reason? Anyway, that's the point - carbon taxes are meant to reduce carbon use. And they're coming, one way or another. I rather see carbon taxes than phony cap and trade schemes. I suppose the only thing that would obviate carbon taxes to some degree would be a sharp spike in oil prices with no fall off. Comes to the same thing, except that we would turn to coal use, which is not good.

I'm a Zone B Northern Resident. Fuel costs are higher. No public transit. Work is 70 kilometers away.

I don't even have to do the math, I know I'd lose.

[andyt]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

andyt andyt:

Why? You're a heavy fuel user for some reason? Anyway, that's the point - carbon taxes are meant to reduce carbon use. And they're coming, one way or another. I rather see carbon taxes than phony cap and trade schemes. I suppose the only thing that would obviate carbon taxes to some degree would be a sharp spike in oil prices with no fall off. Comes to the same thing, except that we would turn to coal use, which is not good.

I'm a Zone B Northern Resident. Fuel costs are higher. No public transit. Work is 70 kilometers away.

I don't even have to do the math, I know I'd lose.

Everything the govt does is about winners and losers. But, they could give you a tax credit, the way they already do, for northern residents or something. But we're not talking about some huge increase in gas here - just enough to nude people to be more efficient. People would have to adapt. Maybe buy smaller vehicles or engines.

The other thing would be to switch to natural gas on a continent wide basis. There's tons of it around, and it's a clean fuel.

[Lemmy]

romanP romanP:

I'm saying I don't care if you were there or not. The platform says $0.12.

No, their platform is $2 and a group of hired consultants convinced them that their chances for winning a seat would greatly improve if they took our advice.

romanP romanP:

I'm assuming that some math was done, and that was the number that was calculated. Why should you trust any other politicians' figures and not this one? My point is that it's a lot more reasonable to get upset by a $2/L increase (which is economically unfeasable to anyone with half a brain), but nobody but you is talking about that. The idea of a $0.12 increase perhaps isn't a great deal better, but it's not $2.

Your error is assuming the $0.12 figure came from politicians, which it didn't. The Green Party was unanimously behind $2 before we talked some sense into them. If they were ever elected, it'd be $2 and they don't give a shit who that would upset. BTW, the party platform during the last two elections WAS $2/l.

[romanP]

Well, now it's not $2/L. Now it's $0.12.

[Lemmy]

$2, I says.

[romanP]

I'm going to start buying gas in dubloons. And I don't even drive a car.

[EyeBrock]

Still bussing it IO?

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Seriously though, how does one effectively campaign around the country on a platform of environmentalism and higher gas prices without looking like a total fucking hypocrit?
I'm pretty sure her method of conveyance around Canada isn't a bicycle

[saturn_656]

andyt andyt:

saturn_656 saturn_656:

andyt andyt:

Why? You're a heavy fuel user for some reason? Anyway, that's the point - carbon taxes are meant to reduce carbon use. And they're coming, one way or another. I rather see carbon taxes than phony cap and trade schemes. I suppose the only thing that would obviate carbon taxes to some degree would be a sharp spike in oil prices with no fall off. Comes to the same thing, except that we would turn to coal use, which is not good.

I'm a Zone B Northern Resident. Fuel costs are higher. No public transit. Work is 70 kilometers away.

I don't even have to do the math, I know I'd lose.

Everything the govt does is about winners and losers. But, they could give you a tax credit, the way they already do, for northern residents or something. But we're not talking about some huge increase in gas here - just enough to nude people to be more efficient. People would have to adapt. Maybe buy smaller vehicles or engines.

The other thing would be to switch to natural gas on a continent wide basis. There's tons of it around, and it's a clean fuel.

My problem with it is there is not much more we can cut back.

Tax credits are nice, but they come only once a year. I buy gas once or twice a week.

Winners and losers is right.

Natural gas would be nice though. I'd never have to go to a station, fuel my car up right at home.

[andyt]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Seriously though, how does one effectively campaign around the country on a platform of environmentalism and higher gas prices without looking like a total fucking hypocrit?
I'm pretty sure her method of conveyance around Canada isn't a bicycle

Aw, c'mon, that's not worthy of you. That's the kind of thing the real right wing nuts come up with. You're saying that if your'e an environmentalist you can't use modern modes of transportation? I advocate for higher gas prices, I drive a car. How does that make me a hypocrite? I'm willing to pay my share. (hint, I drive a small car, and not very much).

What the greens have to all live in caves and wear furs? And same with anybody else who gives a shit about the environment? Pretty intellectually puny argument.

[saturn_656]

$1:

I advocate for higher gas prices, I drive a car. How does that make me a hypocrite?

You must have too much money...

[martin14]

andyt andyt:

What the greens have to all live in caves and wear furs? And same with anybody else who gives a shit about the environment? Pretty intellectually puny argument.

No, the Greens want YOU to live in a cave while they fly around first class.

And no furs, killing animals ain't green, its leaves for your ass.

[andyt]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

$1:

I advocate for higher gas prices, I drive a car. How does that make me a hypocrite?

You must have too much money...

No, I just have some sense of the bigger picture. You keep grubbing away at the small stuff, voting for a party that will give you a little relief now, and you'll fuck up the whole country. GHG taxes or similar are coming, no way around it. Better to tax carbon, as I said before, and lower taxes somewhere else. Or, pay more taxes period, since we've been living beyond our means for decades. Can't keep going down that road. We have to accept that our standard of living, economically speaking, will probably decline a bit. (Let;s hope it's a bit) But just racing around in cars isn't much of a standard of living anyway. I know you have no option, but you don't really count - there are so few of you. We're an urban nation, and will become more so. Can't base our policies on what's best for Saturn.

[saturn_656]

andyt andyt:

saturn_656 saturn_656:

$1:

I advocate for higher gas prices, I drive a car. How does that make me a hypocrite?

You must have too much money...

No, I just have some sense of the bigger picture. You keep grubbing away at the small stuff, voting for a party that will give you a little relief now, and you'll fuck up the whole country. GHG taxes or similar are coming, no way around it. Better to tax carbon, as I said before, and lower taxes somewhere else. Or, pay more taxes period, since we've been living beyond our means for decades. Can't keep going down that road. We have to accept that our standard of living, economically speaking, will probably decline a bit. (Let;s hope it's a bit) But just racing around in cars isn't much of a standard of living anyway. I know you have no option, but you don't really count - there are so few of you. We're an urban nation, and will become more so. Can't base our policies on what's best for Saturn.

While my example is a personal one, I know for a fact I'm not the only one in that particular boat.

It'd just be one more example of rural Canadians getting the shaft. Nothing new.

[Dragon-Dancer]

Back to the original topic at hand. My take is that if you're running candidates in a federal election in a large percentage if not all ridings in Canada (the greens are) you should have a chance to get your voice heard and your message out no matter who you are or where your bias is. The current format isn't optimal, while I was quite amused to see the 4 on 1 dog pile on Harper last time it wasn't very conducive to a actual debate.

I've never understood this opposition the greens. They have a point of view just like any other party has a point of view but most people don't even take the time to read about what they really stand for. Instead over and over it spouting wanting people to return the dark ages and live in caves bullshit.