r/canadaleft Jul 29 '24

Meme Axe the Tax, baby

Post image
247 Upvotes

37 comments sorted by

44

u/Opening_Pizza Jul 29 '24

I feel like we pay enough taxes, and I'd prefer our leaders used them for fire fighting, forest management, emergency management, over US made weapons.

15

u/Frater_Ankara Jul 29 '24

While true, most people still benefit from the carbon tax via the rebate and it is supposed to help make more informed decisions about carbon intensive products. It also is a start in pushing the needle in the right direction by disincentivizing heavy carbon usage and rewarding eco friendly behaviors.

So the argument of ‘I pay enough in taxes’ is moot unless you are using a ton of carbon and contributing more than average to environmental damage.

5

u/bobbykid tankier-than-thou Jul 29 '24

It also is a start in pushing the needle in the right direction by disincentivizing heavy carbon usage and rewarding eco friendly behaviors

The appropriate time for this was literally more than fifty years ago 

5

u/NLtbal Jul 29 '24

Better late than never, or do you think ‘just fuck it’?

4

u/bobbykid tankier-than-thou Jul 29 '24

No I already explained in my other comment, I think 'we need emergency climate communism and literally nothing else will have any impact'. In addition I also believe 'liberal governments don't deserve a breathe of praise or support over their climate policies because they're all just pissing into the wind' and 'arguing over whether it's good or bad to keep carbon taxes is a deliberate waste of everyone's time and if you do it then you have been conned by the liberals and the conservatives, neither of whom give one shit whether you live or die'

7

u/Frater_Ankara Jul 29 '24

And?

The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago, the second best time is now.

If you’re thinking I’m saying this is all we need you’re sorely mistaken, but that doesn’t mean it’s not an effective tool.

5

u/bobbykid tankier-than-thou Jul 29 '24

The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago, the second best time is now.

In your analogy, liberal carbon tax policies are like planting a tree in a forest that is current on fire. At best it's a perfectly neutral act which will have no impact whatsoever, and at worst it's a waste of time and resources that could have been spent on a more radical solution.

It's not that carbon taxes are slightly good but we need something better. They're not even good. They might have been good in the 70's, but the climate crisis has progressed so much that they are quite literally meaningless.

Take a look at this article about what would actually have to be done to stop a 1.5 or 2 degree global temperature increase. Do you think a carbon tax is going to reduce air travel by 80% by 2030? Is it going to retrofit almost every home in the country to passive house standards? Is it going to massively expand renewable energy infrastructure and simultaneously reduce carbon emissions by modulating industrial production, all while preventing the economy from imploding? No, carbon taxes can't fucking do that. In fact there is no tool that any bourgeois government is willing to use that can do any of those things. Everything they offer is useless

0

u/Frater_Ankara Jul 29 '24

As I implied, carbon tax is just the start, we need an excessive carbon tax as well as several other fronts and perhaps even a war time effort to implement a degrowth economy. There are many tools at our disposal, CT is but one of them and it is not causing more damage than good.

What is your solution, overthrow the government?

1

u/arquillion Jul 30 '24

We can't undo what's gonna happen, at least not immediately. But everything we can do will reduce the impact later down the line. Global warming isn't going to kill us all. Its going to make it more difficult for everyone and it will lead to an atrocious amount of death. But everything that we do manage to do will lower that number

2

u/[deleted] Jul 29 '24

While true, most people still benefit from the carbon tax via the rebate

How? Prices for goods and services will raise, and have already risen.

Do the bourgeoisie just throw their hands up in the air and say "You got us, we have no way to recoup this loss".

2

u/Frater_Ankara Jul 29 '24

Carbon tax has been responsible for about 1% of the cost of food inflation for example, in the grand scheme of things most people get more money back from it then they pay, the lower four quintiles in fact. There are many studies out there on this and the data is pretty clear if you look at it directly.

The reason it’s contested at all is because the bourgeois don’t like it because it hurts them the most, so they spin up disinformation campaigns to sew doubt, etc.

If you’re trying to make an argument about costs being passed on to the consumer, then A) regulations could be introduced to disincentivize businesses from doing it of making it flat out illegal and B) carbon intensive products and activities should cost more anyways, that’s the whole point.

3

u/KitIungere Jul 29 '24

The carbon tax is only responsible for about 0.15%, not 1%. If it is eliminated you won’t see those prices dropping. The profits from n goods will just get a bump & you won’t get a rebate anymore.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 29 '24

The reason it’s contested at all is because the bourgeois don’t like it because it hurts them the most, so they spin up disinformation campaigns to sew doubt, etc.

It is being contested in leftwing subs because it is an absolutely tiny band-aid on an out of control, festering, wound.

If you’re trying to make an argument about costs being passed on to the consumer,

Yes, that is the argument. Costs are, and will continue to be under the LPC, Cons, or NDP, pushed on to the majority.

A) regulations could be introduced to disincentivize businesses from doing it of making it flat out illegal and

I agree - but that hasn't happened yet.

B) carbon intensive products and activities should cost more anyways, that’s the whole point.

Yup, but attacking the climate change problem from the ass end won't work as the rich and NATO militaries continue to massively outpace the common folk in damage.

2

u/Frater_Ankara Jul 29 '24

Every little step in the right direction is still a step in the right direction, carbon tax is better than no carbon tax, that is my only point.

Yes we should do so much more, this at least is a start and not having the tax would be worse. I am very much up for doing many many other things and we absolutely should because CT is the absolute bare minimum, but getting rid of this helps no one.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 30 '24

I'm with you now!

0

u/Opening_Pizza Jul 29 '24

AHahaha

1

u/Frater_Ankara Jul 29 '24

Somewhat expected maturity level and response from someone who listens to Joe Rogan so there’s that.

0

u/Opening_Pizza Jul 29 '24

"‘I pay enough in taxes’ is moot..."

Hold on let me laugh even harder. AHAHAHAHAH

2

u/Frater_Ankara Jul 29 '24

Case in point. Man you sure owned me, I can’t compete with that level of wit.

0

u/Opening_Pizza Jul 29 '24

No you can't which is why you tried to say my point was moot. Trying to take the high road out now is just hilarious.

3

u/Frater_Ankara Jul 29 '24

I stand by what I said, there’s no high road here, but you’ve certainly embellished the low road.

Seriously, do you think this is even remotely clever rather than defending a fragile ego? The inability to converse like an adult is not admirable nor a virtue. But alright, continue to hurr durr, downvote, move on and enjoy your self righteousness.

3

u/bwf456 Jul 29 '24

But... what about Ukraine?

27

u/bobbykid tankier-than-thou Jul 29 '24

Lol I get what you're saying but the carbon tax is not going to do anything to stop the cascade of climate catastrophes that we've entered. In fact I'm pretty sure that nothing short of a soviet-style war communism model, where production is deliberate and coordinated and every kilowatt hour is meticulously accounted for, can stop what has already started.

18

u/BeautyDayinBC Jul 29 '24

At this point, anyone who actually cares about the future is an eco-Stalinist.

3

u/knoxthegoat Jul 29 '24

Yep. The difference in position on this issue between the two parties is essentially one guy films himself blowing somebody and posts it on the internet, while the other guy publicly wags his finger at that same someone, but still blows him behind closed doors anyways. A carbon tax means nothing if there isn't a strong, simultaneous effort to move towards a different form of energy, and this is why oil companies don't care about it one way or another.

6

u/[deleted] Jul 29 '24

A report by MIT using models of different climate change strategies actually showed carbon tax to be the most effective climate change strategy (of anything we’ve tried so far).

21

u/bobbykid tankier-than-thou Jul 29 '24

(of anything we’ve tried so far) 

This phrase is doing so much heavy lifting in this comment that I have DOMS after reading it

11

u/Iron-Fist Jul 29 '24

Delayed onset mental sadness

-1

u/gravtix Jul 29 '24

We’re trying to stop it from getting worse.

10

u/bobbykid tankier-than-thou Jul 29 '24

Yes and you should expect further horrific forest fires regardless, because we are too deep into the climate crisis for these squishy neoliberal strategies 

1

u/RustyTheBoyRobot Jul 30 '24

Left wingers shouldnt automatically support carbon/regressive taxes.

-2

u/actuallyrarer Jul 29 '24 edited Jul 29 '24

I don't even know what this meme is trying to say here

Edit: I was just asking honestly what the meme ment. Fuck the Alberta conservatives and Daniel Smith.

28

u/[deleted] Jul 29 '24

[deleted]

22

u/[deleted] Jul 29 '24

The Alberta government is also vehemently against any environmental action (the carbon tax is barely the bare minimum, and they are still against it). Meanwhile Alberta seems to be suffering the most from the fallout of climate change, including the increase in wildfires that took out Jasper.

They are actively fighting against action that would have worked to avoid these kinds of forest fires.

4

u/saltytarts Jul 29 '24

4

u/tokmer Jul 29 '24

Yes it is, but the article is disingenuous, yes for decades forest management has been lackluster but in the past few years theres been a new management philosophy thats done a lot of good work, including controlled burns in the direction of where the fire came from.

All of this can be found in the jasper forest management reports. Yes there had been bad management for decades but in the years leading up to this fire they adopted the practices indigenous people had been using for generations.

This may have been a too little too late situation but the situation has been escalated by climate change something the article fails to mention once.

1

u/No_Author_9683 12d ago

Hey guys, im new to making subreddits. Im trying to form a particular resistance. Here is the subreddit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CrushPierre/s/v6ub33xHJI

This next part explains my hypothesis as to why this might be effective. You ONLY have to read rhe first part. Dont feel overwhelmed.

JOIN OUR RESISTANCE!!! SPREAD THE WORD.

This read may be a necessity for some to fully understand this idea. I don't claim to be 100% correct about everything stated. I would like this idea to be challenged and developed by this community. Beware my grammar wont be the greatest, and i suffer from pedantic speech. Someone might be able to simplify this, because it might be difficult to understand.

Overall Strategy

This will just be the persuasive portion as to make my argument as clear as i can. I have seen this challenge on a small scale elsewhere, but I want to solidify my hypothesis here. It's become more rigid in my own head. This will be the most simplified version I can possibly do so some of you who struggle to read lots, aren’t immediately turned off.

Fascism(as well as conservatism), is how Trump campaigned, – and is likely to govern as, or, reminiscent of– Functions on beliefs and anti intellectualism.

Leftist ideas typically function with the opposing movement of intellectualism, knowledge, and truth.

The cure to a maladaptive belief is knowledge and truth.

If fascism is anti-intellectual and based on beliefs, then its opposition is knowledge and truth.

If one can weaponize belief and anti-intellectualism, then the same can be said for knowledge and truth.

It can then be said based off that analysis, part of fascism and conservatisms success is weaponizing belief and anti-intellectualism.

It can also be said then, part of the path to victory is successful weaponizing truth and intellectualism in a digestible format.

So this is a war of information and propaganda. They have trapped the moderates they persuaded in a torrent of belief and anti-intellectualism. They have formed an echochamber where they rest with very little to challenge them in an organized format online. Therefore they keep feeding themselves the same information in a loop. While we do the same with knowledge and intellectualism in different secluded spaces. Therefore we must move our discussion to their places. We must powerfully and strategically counter them with propaganda. Information warfare.

Anything beyond this point is an extended long version of my hypothesis. And others can also add their own variations, corrections, etc. We need this to be as perfect as possible.

Full version of hypothesis

We are seeing a few trends globally. We see a rise in conservatism globally, and a rise in democratic backsliding globally. Democracy’s slipping closer to Autocracy.

(Source for democratic backslide) https://ourworldindata.org/less-democratic

(Source for rise in conservativism)

https://www.statista.com/chart/6852/seats-held-by-far-right-parties-in-europe/

Most people coming here probably already understand this. And there are more statistics online to show this trend.

For all this i must make a historical and theoretical analysis of current popular political ideologies.

All of North America is a liberal democracy. And liberal democracy has been the dominant political movement of modern history. I believe it’s quite centered in the present. It provides some individuality, some authority, and strong privatization of the economy.

But for this analysis to function, we must look at extremes as a way to understand what is occuring.

Authoritarian styles range on a bipolar spectrum that everyone is aware of. The left and right spectrum.

On the left we have communism, on the right we have fascism.

So why are they opposed to each other? Some will say fascism can be left or right, that debate doesn't concern this analysis, what concerns this analysis is where do opposites occur within these two movements?

The place I’m most interested in is its means to persuade.

How is it that fascism is made to be palatable? How is it that fascism is made to be widely accepted? And vice versa. How does it become successful?

Some people may see a trump supporter and scratch their heads as to how that person bought what is essentially a scam.

Communism persuades like this.

“You are the proletariat (the worker), and you have always been oppressed by a small minority of people, the plutocrats. They seek to rob you of everything that you rightfully worked to create with your own bare hands. The surplus of your labor. So they can live lavish lives, and you suffer. We can ban together, and remove the plutocrats, reorganize the government, and inhabit it to work towards a stateless classless society that functions on the economic model of communism. Communal ownership.”

Very simple. But you see, it's strongly economic. Materialism.

“you are a majority being oppressed by a small minority of people”.

I'm not here to argue in favor of this, just to state the raw idea itself for analytical purposes.

Fascism however campaigns on something completely opposite to this. If communism argues for materialism being the cause of oppression. Then, fascism argues the source of oppression is ideological. It's based in Belief and not material. And it looks something like this.

“You have had everything taken from you, you were once great, an elite group of people that lived exquisite lives of luxury. Now a group of people have taken that luxury from you! They have stolen the elite status you are entitled to! We must crush these enemy groups that are trying to take over your life, and i will bring back your luxury status, i will make us great again!”

This is fascist propaganda in a nutshell. And most people that just read that can see it's an obvious lie for many reasons. But where does it differ?

The core element of the message isn't economic. The core element is ideological. It is a belief. That is where Communism and fascism differ from my perspective. Economics dont concern fascism, thats why you could have leftist economic models incorporated into fascism, however it doesn't have to be that way.

Hitler had a combination of slavery and state controlled capitalism.

Mussolini had strict state controlled capitalism.

But communism's entire idea is to work towards building a particular economic model. Then the government withers away at the point and people are left with a stateless classes utopia. In theory. Whether that would actually ever work is up for debate. But again I'm not here for that. And it's okay if you think that would work.

Therefore in order for fascists to succeed, they must have people accept their beliefs. The core of their movement is to persuade people into believing something that is false. It isn't truthful. Therefore they must prevent the weaponization of information from the left spectrum that builds propaganda off intellectualism and truth.

And keep in mind, just because something is intellectual and true, doesn't mean it can't be weaponized to prey upon people.

Therefore truth and intellectualism propaganda that is used for the betterment of others' well being is the Greatest threat to fascists' wet dream of depraved nationalism coming to fruition.