3 ms·
> Can you spot the constituencies that have outsized voting impact? I suppose people who has to eat and stay warm. I get what you mean, but it still is a good
by entropi 2y ago
> Can you spot the constituencies that have outsized voting impact?
I suppose people who has to eat and stay warm. I get what you mean, but it still is a good blow-softener in my opinion. Even if farmers get some benefits for no reason.
> Broad based carbon taxes are the correct solution, but they're also the reason Trudeau is going to lose the next election.
Well we are not living in a perfect world. I am not familiar with Canada and Trudeau's political opponents, but still. If a "solution" triggers a kneejerk reaction, cutting its own life short; and causing nutjob demagogues to rise, which leads to much greater harm than it prevented in the first place, how is it the correct solution?
- bryanlarsen 2y ago> I suppose people who has to eat and stay warm. No, it's pretty much a giveaway to Eastern Canada, which is the only part of Canada that uses heating fuel widely. Quebec uses electricity for heating, and the rest of Canada uses natural gas. The fertilizer exemption is a protectionist measure. Fertilizer production produces massive amounts of carbon. If Canada taxed carbon on domestically produced fertilizer but not on foreign produced fertilizer it'd kill local fertilizer production for little benefit. The right solution is a carbon tariff at the border, but that's really hard to do unilaterally so we have the fertilizer exemption instead.