RSS
 

Canada’s 2008 Election: Green? Shift?

01 Jan


Ontario lawyer Paul McKeever boils down Stéphane Dion’s Liberal “Green Shift” carbon tax proposal. Either its not green, or it does not involve a shift. In other words: either it will not reduce …

 
10 Comments

Posted in Tax Attorney Long Island

 

Tags: , , , ,

 
 

  1. jkirk1963

    January 1, 2010 at 5:17 pm

    Man those refomatories sure hate paying their taxes !

     

  2. hoomelemele

    January 1, 2010 at 5:20 pm

    I’m so glad I discovered you, I really need things like the ‘dime demonstration’! and thank you for not speed-talking the way most people do. what is up with that? do they think the faster they talk the smarter they look?

     

  3. JaredLangdon

    January 1, 2010 at 6:07 pm

    There’s a flaw in your logic. Under the green shift, the additional tax on fuel would increase its cost, and discourage people from buying it. What you’re saying is true only if people spent all of their income tax cut on fuel, but they would not. They would spend it on other things too. They would be incented to buy things like bikes, bus passes, and running shoes – things that are not subject to the carbon tax.

     

  4. eothernnn

    January 1, 2010 at 6:13 pm

    i my pusssy is wet O

     

  5. Jesusplant

    January 1, 2010 at 7:09 pm

    for a lawyer i’m surprise, you think we should jsut continue to externalize the cost of pollution. have you looked into or at least glanced over other countries/pronvinces that have implemented the carbon tax.

     

  6. Jesusplant

    January 1, 2010 at 7:20 pm

    “In most of the developed countries of the world today, firms are paying the cost of pollution to the global environment, in the form of taxes imposed on coal, oil, and gas. But American firms are being subsidized—and massively so. There is a simple remedy: other countries should prohibit the importation of American goods produced using energy intensive technologies, or, at the very least,

     

  7. Jesusplant

    January 1, 2010 at 8:03 pm

    impose a high tax on them, to offset the subsidy that those goods currently are receiving.” Just a quote from Joseph Stiglitz Professor Economics University Columbia

     

  8. notintheatres

    January 1, 2010 at 8:22 pm

    Not everyone who has read the plan has come to this same conclusion. For a different (and fun) take on The Green Shift and its benefits, please see “The Green Shift in 88 Seconds” on YouTube :)

     

  9. danno1111

    January 1, 2010 at 8:40 pm

    According to the plan, a “significant majority” of the revenue comes from industry, while the majority of the expenses are income tax reductions and “family benefits” – you may have interpreted his sound-byte comments a certain way, but that simply doesn’t make sense if you actually look at the plan.

     

  10. PaulMcKeever

    January 1, 2010 at 9:22 pm

    Dion, as I see it, is literally hoping most voters do not look at the plan.