Carbon Pricing is Not Enough

105 posts / 0 new
Last post


Or maybe the NDP really doesn't care enough about the issue to talk about the negative effects of their policy.

What's tiresome is dealing with NDP-bots who don't recognise regressive policies, even when it's explained to them.

The difference is about politics, not policies.

When Tommy Douglas brought up the idea of socialized medicine with the citizens of Saskatchewan do you think as well as talking about the benefits he also, from the beginning, delivered an analysis of all the difficulties that were going to be faced getting there?

Not at all. Not even being in government and with rock solid support.

I don't care what party or politics you have, you don't start out like this is some class lecture with equal time for the downsides.

It's not a question of hiding. Its what you choose to emphasise, where you start the dialogue.

Anytime that Jack is asked in an interview, or he writes a piece where the depth brings it up, he admits straight up that there will be price increases. And then he talks about how that is to be handled, and what are the alternatives.

The more questioning there is- such as the closer you get to an election- the more that this will be said.

There is no benefit to emphasising it from the begining. Thats just a way to guarantee losing support for your policy- irregardless of whether partisan politics is involved.

The Liberals made the political choice to deal with the voter resistance we all know will be faced by waving the 'revenue neutrality' wand. All the carbon tax driven price increases that you pay will supposedly come back to you in tax cuts or credits.

That isn't a policy to 'deal with negative effects', its an attempted end run.

If that's your preference, fine. But its not a policy driven choice. Its a preference for a particular brand of politics.

And you have studiously ignored the effect the Liberal promise of tax cuts will have on government fiscal room for spending- for green initiatives, child poverty, or anything else.

You have ignored that despite your own expressed concern for how the Harper government is steadily making sure that future governments have no fiscal capacity for spending initiatives. But silence when it is pointed out that your choice for the Liberal carbon tax plan will add more fuel to that bonfire.

[ 02 August 2008: Message edited by: KenS ]

George Victor

Bang on!

Stephen Gordon

I've said that I don't see the point of the Liberals' insistence on revenue neutrality; income tax cuts for those making $90k/yr is not a priority for me.

But the Liberals are the *only* party (okay, maybe the Greens also, I haven't checked) to have plans for targeted income transferd to low-income households. The Child Tax Credit, the employment credit and the earned income tax credit (or whatever it's called) are all being improved.

The Liberals are at least trying to protect low-income households from the effects of higher prices. The NDP is cynically pretending that the problem doesn't exist. Worse, it's exploiting the 'anti-tax' sentiment that the Conservatives are trying to tap into.

If the NDP were an honest, progressive party, it would acknowledge the regressive effects of its program, and it would try to correct for them.


Long thread.


Topic locked