The Edmonton Journal has a story this morning about the “Very tough road” ahead for Dion according to a recent poll. Subhead on the piece is “Liberal Green plan faces public hostility.”
The federal Liberals have a big sales job ahead of them on their proposed national carbon tax.
A new poll Monday said only one in three Canadians has heard about the “green shift” plan and 60 per cent, who can recall anything about it, say it’s “a bad idea.”
Negative reaction was highest in Alberta at 79 per cent and positive reaction was highest in Quebec at 54 per cent.
Hmmm. There’s something wonky with the numbers here and I’m not sure that it adds up to quite the level of widespread “public hostility” the Journal would have us believe exists.
We know that only about 33% of people have even heard of the Liberals’ so-called “Green Shift” carbon tax plan and are therefore dealing with a minority of the public already. Of this 33%, it seems that 60% of them couldn’t recall anything specific about the plan. So now we’re down 13% of people who might actually know something about the plan, which isn’t much as it turns out. Of that number, only 20% of those people knew that it involved a carbon tax and only 2% appeared to be aware that it had something to do with the environment (I find that figure very hard to believe).
But don’t get distracted with those numbers.
Let’s back up to the 13% of people who know of the “Green Shift” and can name something or other about it (i.e., they’re not altogether clueless) because this rather tiny group of people is what the Journal is focusing in on for their claims of “public hostility.” When looked at this way, the touted figure of 60% saying it’s “a bad idea” turns out in fact to be a rather creative translation of a mere 7.8% of Canadians that were polled in a single survey of questionable origin.
Can you make something out of nothing? Of course you can! Our so-called “liberal media” does it all the time.
Red Tory v.3.0.3 
Why are your posts not on liblogs.ca anymore?
Are you binned?
Too many American posts and not enough praising Dion’s poverty plan?
How come?
I don’t know. I changed my info on the weekend and asked Jason what was happening and he ignored my comment. Maybe they don’t like me over there any more. Oh well.
Red:
I do think any form of consumption taxes – no matter how well intentioned – is going to be an easy sell, and here is why:
A cut in Income Tax appears as a gradual benefit; whereas a new consumption tax appears as an immediate and increasing deduction. This becomes magnified in a stagnant economy.
And you know that the Retailers will place adhesive labels on the pumps indicating just how much the Carbon Tax adds to the cost per litre.
The problem with a carbon tax is it’s going to increase the price of everything , yet will do NOTHING to reduce GHG’s.
I can’t understand why people would want to put their faith in any government, when the government can’t force to make private oil companies do anything.
In other words, for every cent more the oil companies are taxed, they pass that cent on to the consumer.
So, basically, we will pay more for everything including gas, yet GHG’s will not go down, and the oil companies will still pump oil.
If the Canadian government wants to do the right thing, they should build all the laternative energy by themeselves, therfore bankrupting the oil cartel.
Oil companies are going to make more money under Dion’s tax grab, not less. And the poor people Dion pretends he cares about will be gouged even more.
Hardly a good plan and one that will do NOTHING to decrease GHG’s.
Dion’s plan makes no mention on any hard reductions.
I wonder why?
There is a lot of work to be done getting the message out still, and starting with the messaging out West is not the best way to gain positive press.
That being said, starting with the most opposed provinces and working up is a good strategy.
Johnson said: “…not enough praising Dion’s poverty plan?”
I find it amusing some Conservatives think that recasting a credible emissions reduction plan as instead a poverty-reduction plan is somehow to be considered a smear.
Only to the CONS base does that twisted logic make sense.
By the way, the CONS own carbon trading plan, like the NDP’s plan, will also sap money from high emission regions as they will need to purchase emission credits from low emission regions. It will also, according to the government, raise prices without relief for consumers:
From http://tinyurl.com/6r2nog :
“Canadians have every reason to be concerned about climate change and air pollution, and we all need to be part of the solution. Tough and real action on the environment comes at a cost that will be borne, at least in part, by each and every one of us.
The costs are real, but manageable. This can include price increases for consumer products such as vehicles, electricity, natural gas, and household appliances. We must all be prepared to do our part in order to get the job done.”
Of course, if you read that page, it argues all kinds of things will come from reducing GHGs and pollution which this brand of Conservative tends to scoff at: better health, environmental improvements, and even, gosh, economic benefits (“Increased productivity, improved energy efficiency, greater competitiveness, and more opportunity to sell Canadian environmental products and know-how abroad”).
Is it worthwhile to ruin our lives for only 2% of global emissions.
Do we want to increase the cost of everything when we don’t even know if we can control the weather?
Do we want to increase the cost of everything when Dion’s plan doesn’t mention any hard targets?
I would rather keep prices the same as they are or lower, even if our 2 % of global emissions stays the same.
Canadians always think that we play such an important role in the world but really we’re nothing more than 2%.
Hardly worth crying over or paying more for everything.
It’s time Canadians were asked whether our cost of living should go way up so we can save 2% of global emissions.
We can’t control China , India or the USA so 2% is not worth paying more money for every single thing we need to survive.
If the world is going to end because of emissions, then it’s going to end.
Paying 65 dollars for a bag of chips isn’t going to stop the world from ending.
Time to start worrying about today, and not a “theory” that thousands of scientists don’t even believe is true.
The problem with a carbon tax is it’s going to increase the price of everything , yet will do NOTHING to reduce GHG’s.
As can be seen with Denmark (which has a similar carbon tax system), it can work (15% reduction from 1990 is nothing to sneeze at). There needs to be work done to help companies switch to renewable sources of energy. The old carrot and stick.
I love how Frank Johnson speaks for all Canadians, confuses what he knows or doesn’t know with what is generally known or not known, can predict the future, doesn’t care about the end of the world, and thinks money is all that’s important.
10,000 years of civilisation, and this is what we’ve ended up with?
I weep.
I meant to write “I do NOT think …”
Ti-Guy, you point me to the link that proves if Canada shit down the whole economy, the world will be saved.
Also, show me the link where any scientist can say without a doubt that global warming is caused bu humans.
Even your hero Suzuki says its only 90% as a possiblity.Not 100%.
Get the drift?
Global warming is nothing but a left wing socialist scheme to give more money to poor countries.
I find it funny that the leaders of the G8 think the world will still be around in 2050.
I wonder why.
We can’t control China , India or the USA so 2% is not worth paying more money for every single thing we need to survive.
So we wait for them to do something, and they wait for us to do something… and nothing gets done.
As we’ve debated what or if we’ll do anything in North America, other places made strides in renewables. Japan’s the leader when it comes to solar energy. Denmark leads with wind technology. Some European experiments like Samsø, Denmark, which only uses renewable sources of energy (and actually exports it) are visited by people around the world to see how it can be done.
But even if you don’t believe in global warming…. we’re going to run out of fossil fuels. Isn’t the time to start investing in renewable sources of energy right now, while we still have the energy to do something like this?
If the world is going to end because of emissions, then it’s going to end.
Paying 65 dollars for a bag of chips isn’t going to stop the world from ending
You know, if the world ends, I’ll have more on my mind than the price of chips.
Global warming is nothing but a left wing socialist scheme to give more money to poor countries.
If the world’s about to end… why do you care about money potentially going to poorer countries. As they say, you can’t take it with you.
“But a carbon tax isn’t a new idea. Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden have had carbon taxes in place since the 1990s, but the tax has not led to large declines in emissions in most of these countries — in the case of Norway, emissions have actually increased by 43 percent per capita. An economist might say this is fine; as long as the cost of the environmental damage is being internalized, the tax is working — and emissions might have been even higher without the tax. But what environmentalist would be happy with a 43 percent increase in emissions?”
So, the link you gave me proves that a carbon tax doesn’t reduce emissions.
Norawy’s emissions are up 43 percent.
Is that worth taking a gamble over?
is it worth paying more for everything when Norway’s tax grab hasn’t worked at all?
Look at the evidence. If you want to get rid of oil, the government needs to go solo and build alternative energy. The oil companies will not stop pumping oil until there is none left.
Don’t you loons understand that?
If not, you’re living in a “utopian” nightmare.
Something does need to be done. By setting a “Carbon Tax” we may well do something to slow our 2% contribution. This “Carbon Tax” will not very portable to other countries with GHG emission issues, as every economy is different.
We could do something like expand research into “Carbon Negative” or “Carbon Neutral” energy on a federal level. Implementing the technology ourselves and then selling it to the world, thus making an actual difference.
We’re not sure what impact Dion’s pass-the-buck plan will have on Canadian GHG emissions, and it will have no effect on non-Canadian GHG emissions. However, we can have a real impact here.
Dion’s plan is a lame-duck that, as this poll shows, will not engender public support upon education of the details. It will also have very little effect on the Global Stage.
It’s time to take real, meaningful action on alternative energy. Not lame bureaucratic wet dreams that are designed to polarize socialists.
Norawy’s emissions are up 43 percent.
First of all, Norway doesn’t have the same carbon tax system as Denmark and Canada.
Second, the jump in emissions came their acconting was changed and the oil industry emissions were factored in. That’s where the big jump in emissions occurred.
More important, Norway, Denmark, Sweden–their economies haven’t died because of their carbon tax.
Look at the evidence. If you want to get rid of oil, the government needs to go solo and build alternative energy. The oil companies will not stop pumping oil until there is none left.
Well at least we agree on this point.
Frank:
You are an idiot who challeges science. Why should we care what you think? All you care about is your wallet. Not a good basis for citizenship or stewardship.
Wanna call me a left-wing socialist? Try it.
Frank, I’m not going to prove scientifically (especially to you) whether your assertions about reality are correct or not…I’m just pointing out your ability to believe things without really knowing (something I reserve only for faith).
It’s dreary that we have to share the country with people who suffer from conceited ignorance and worse…that these people think the rest of us will benefit somehow by reading their unsourced, uninformed, baseless assertions.
I’ve always said that I’d consider “conservatives” more honest if they would just admit that they’re pissed off all the time. That’s the truth and that’s because “conservatives” believe expressions of anger are what you present when knowledge is not available.
I’ve always wanted to conduct a population survey and observe how people react with hostility to something they know nothing about. I bet most of them would identify as “conservative.”
It’s time to take real, meaningful action on alternative energy. Not lame bureaucratic wet dreams that are designed to polarize socialists.
Bureaucratic wet dreams… cap and trade would call for more regulations and rules… so would caps in general.
There are also Economists who support carbon taxes. For example, Mark Jaccard
And Libertarians.
RT:
Regarding Liblogs, I’d write to David Graham (cdlu.net) and inform him about the URL change. He’s the coder over at Liblogs, so he’d probably be able to help you more quickly.
I’d be interested to see what Frank’s IP address is, as well, RT, just to see if it’s one of the Con trolls going around under several different names trying to pooh-pooh climate change and the effort to stop it.
“Our so-called ‘liberal media’ does it all the time.”
can we all agree to stop using “msm” and start using eric alterman’s “sclm”? it’s more accurate.
KEvron
“If you want to get rid of oil”
is there anyone here who believes we should “get rid of oil”? show of hands, please.
framing betrays mentality.
KEvron
We are probably going to have to figure out how to get rid of oil in the next 20 years.
Even mainstream energy watchdogs have embraced the idea of peak oil and the challenges it is going to pose for the world economy. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, even the most optimistic predictions have peak oil occurring in the next 20 years followed by annual declines in the amount of oil the world economy will be able to use. When this report was written in 2005, they recommended a minimum of a “decade of intense, expensive effort” to mitigate the challenges peak oil will pose. We are 3 years into that decade.
The government will become more interventionist in pushing the country away from oil and into less energy consuming and “green” technologies whether we want it or not.
(P.S.: One thing I really hate about WordPress is that you can’t preview your comments and make sure your HTML works before posting.)
If the leaders of the G8 thought the Al gore theory of global warming is real and the earth is going to be caput in 20 years, why are they waiting till 2050 to cut reductions in half.
And also, why is there never debates going on about climate change. Why is it the same old position that left wingers hold. Why not have a month long debate on CTV or CBC rather than give Suzuki all the air time. Kind of funny, isn’t it.
Global warming is a natural cycle the earth is going through. Try to prove me wrong with 100% science.
Bet you can’t.
Ti-Guy, the IPCC has already admitted that there will be no warming for the next 15 years and that their climate model is flawed.
Liberals like to jump on an issue and then claim its all theirs.
If someone disagrees, even world renowned scientists, then there are all mistaken and misguided.
I would rather listen to a debate involving scientists rather than Ti_guy and his “doom and gloom” theory.
I am willing to bet anyone $5000.00 right now that the world will still be around in 50 years and the seas will be no higher than they are right now.
Any takers.
We will make a legal contract so there can be no bullshit when you’re proven wrong.
Are Liberals so much smarter than Conservatives that they “OWN” the climate issue?
Are you serious?
“If the leaders of the G8 thought the Al gore theory of global warming is real and the earth is going to be caput in 20 years, why are they waiting till 2050 to cut reductions in half.”
i’m going to call that line of reasoning “the maginot” line….
KEvron
“Are Liberals so much smarter than Conservatives that they “OWN” the climate issue?”
no, but smarter none the less.
KEvron
I am willing to bet anyone $5000.00 right now that the world will still be around in 50 years and the seas will be no higher than they are right now.
You know, the trend is against you.
The only way we could claim on that bet is 50 years from now. You have to admit that with inflation $5000 will probably be worth significantly less than it does right now.
Are Liberals so much smarter than Conservatives that they “OWN” the climate issue?
Only because the Conservatives don’t seem to be dealing with the issue. Part of their strategy early on, especially with Ambrose, was to blame the previous government for doing nothing. (Yeah, valid point, but you’re in power now. Use it!) You know, Mulroney did more for acid rain in Canada than Trudeau (I can give him all the credit on that issue). Unfortunately, Harper seems willing to wait a decade before making any cuts.
If the leaders of the G8 thought the Al gore theory of global warming is real and the earth is going to be caput in 20 years, why are they waiting till 2050 to cut reductions in half.
Whooee! G8 leaders know that 1000 people are starving to death every single hour of every single day. The food crisis that is killing millions and threatening 100’s of million was supposed to be one of the main topics. How could they sit down to an 8 course dinner with 24 dishes? Shades of Marie Antoinette. BTW, African leaders in attendance were not invited to the gourmandarama.
If the G8 leaders cared about anything but their own sorryasses, they wouldn’t waste millions of taxpayer dollars going to useless summits where they talk and talk and talk but fall down on walkin’ the walk. G8 meetings are nothing more than a schmoozefest for hob-nobbin’ and shoulder-rubbin’.
Canada’s role is assistant obstructionist to chief obstructionist USA.
JB
“Canada’s role is assistant obstructionist to chief obstructionist USA. ”
Seeing how Canada would be starving to death without the USA buying our oil, I thinks its a bit rich to complain that Harper is friends with the USA.
I hope one day the USA stops buying anything from Canada and then the whole Canadian economy would seize to exist.
You should be nice to the country that gives you everything you need in your life.
From food, to sports, entertainment, culture, money, news, you would have nothing if it wasn’t for the USA.
And don’t forget about the 500 billion the USA gives to the middle east every year for oil.
Without the USA, the world would be broke.
Just remmeber that, you arrogant, jealous loon.
Alright, enough of Fred Bracken.
To answer your time question, it’s now been updated to UTC – 7:00 (PST). It was at the default position previously.
Who is Fred Bracken Ti_Guy?
Your homosexual lover?
Who is Fred Bracken Ti-Guy?
Your gay lover, maybe?
you there?
“Global warming is nothing but a left wing socialist scheme to give more money to poor countries.”
Though it’s a crack pot conspiracy theory what is so bad about helping out people in need that you use it as an insult?
Seriously. I’m shocked at the number of people we have in society that think this way.
Whooee! G8 leaders know that 1000 people are starving to death every single hour of every single day. The food crisis that is killing millions and threatening 100’s of million was supposed to be one of the main topics. How could they sit down to an 8 course dinner with 24 dishes? Shades of Marie Antoinette. BTW, African leaders in attendance were not invited to the gourmandarama.
Cold, but not surprising.
By the way, the CONS own carbon trading plan, like the NDP’s plan, will also sap money from high emission regions as they will need to purchase emission credits from low emission regions. It will also, according to the government, raise prices without relief for consumers:
Nice way the Cons have spun the situation. If the Liberal’s plan is a new NEP, what the hell is their plan?
Fun with stats.
It’s how you get statements like “4 out of 5 dentists approve of fluoridated toothpaste”, 19 times out of 20.
The other 1 graduated in the bottom 5th of his class.
Maybe they don’t like me over there any more. Oh well.
If I recall, Woody Allen once said he wouldn’t want to be part of any organization that would have him as a member.
Of course, that was before he started dating his step-daughter.
I hope one day the USA stops buying anything from Canada and then the whole Canadian economy would seize to exist.
Errr… it’s “cease”, not “seize”. You should be saying: “Without China, the world would be broke”.
It’s the U.S.A. that is broke. Each American owes $600,000 in personal and government debt. The country owes $12 trillion dollars to various foreign lenders by its various levels of government and finance sector.
If the Americans didn’t buy our oil, Canada wouldn’t have trouble selling it elsewhere, but America couldn’t function without it.
Ok. Why is stuff posting out of chronological order?