Recently, more than one hundred economists signed their names to an open letter defending the Trudeau government's carbon tax policies. It sounds impressive, until you remember that hundreds of experts also used to endorse the idea of eugenics, racial segregation and residential schools.Now, I am not saying that the carbon tax has had the same level of negative impact as the aforementioned historical theories or practices. That would be a bit over the top. But what I am saying, is that the group-think of like-minded intellectuals does not always reflect reality or translate into positive results for society.Do you think, for example, that any of the economists who signed that document would be willing to stand at the check-out of their local gas station and talk with actual people about their defence of the carbon tax? I highly doubt it.How would they explain to struggling Canadians, who are racking up debt at an alarming rate and who for the most part have no alternative than to use fossil fuels, that the carbon tax isn’t adversely impacting their finances?Because despite what those economists say, the fact is that Canadians are being negatively impacted by the carbon tax. Not only that, but the increase coming on April 1 is going to make it worse.Why? Because in reality, no business is just going to eat that increased expense, and not pass it down to the consumer.Take for example the carbon tax on natural gas and propane that’s used to dry grain or heat livestock shelters. While Bill C-234 will exempt the carbon tax on grain drying, it only does so for three years and it provides no exemption for heating barns whatsoever. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates that these expenses will cost agriculture producers $910 million by 2030.And you’ll see those costs reflected in your grocery bill and anytime you dine out at a restaurant.Another good example is Canada Post and other courier services.Canada Post has had a fuel surcharge for nearly two decades; it is a cost that they pass on to their customers. But if the price of fuel goes up because of the carbon tax, then that next care package to the grandkids is going to set you back more than it did before the increase.Oh and guess what! Neither of those increased costs are reflected or returned to you in the Canada Carbon Rebate (CCR) payment — If you receive it at all.The argument of course by those who support the carbon tax is that we are paying this tax to change societies' habits in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and lessen the impacts of climate change.This position is very much akin to the Liberal government's approach to reducing gun crime.In case you’re not aware, the Liberal government approach to reducing gun violence is to target legal and law-abiding firearm owners with increased penalties and regulations, while doing next to nothing to stop gun smugglers, gangs or repeat violent offenders. This includes reducing sentencing requirements for serious gun crimes.Now, if you substitute Canadians for legal firearm owners and countries such as China, the United States, India, Russia and Japan, for the gambit of ne’er do wells listed above, you end up with an apt comparison to our approach to climate change and greenhouse gas reductions.Just like firearm related crime, the focus shouldn’t be on punishing low emitting Canadians with a tax that will have a negligible impact on climate change.Canada doesn’t even crack the top five for worst carbon emitters. In fact we are currently sitting at number seven. Of the top five worst emitters, only Japan has a carbon tax and it is set at measly $2 USD per tonne. When that figure is compared to the $80 CDN per tonne that will take effect in Canada as of 01 April 2024, Japan’s tax is laughable but also incredibly enviable.The fact is that Canada’s global share of CO2 emissions has been trending downwards for decades and is currently sitting at approximately 1.5%. Therefore wouldn’t it make more sense to focus on changing the behaviours of the major emitters, than putting Canadians through the ringer for what would barely constitutes as a rounding error on the global scale?It's highly unlikely that Canada’s carbon tax self-flagellation will convince the major emitters to have a change of heart — it hasn’t yet. So while this carbon tax orthodoxy may be popular with more than 100 Canadian economists as well as the current government, it does not appeal to the majority of Canadians.As a result and despite a chorus of indignant cries, the carbon tax is destined to join the discard pile of other, once well-regarded, but poorly thought-out ideas.The question is, what, if anything will replace it.
Recently, more than one hundred economists signed their names to an open letter defending the Trudeau government's carbon tax policies. It sounds impressive, until you remember that hundreds of experts also used to endorse the idea of eugenics, racial segregation and residential schools.Now, I am not saying that the carbon tax has had the same level of negative impact as the aforementioned historical theories or practices. That would be a bit over the top. But what I am saying, is that the group-think of like-minded intellectuals does not always reflect reality or translate into positive results for society.Do you think, for example, that any of the economists who signed that document would be willing to stand at the check-out of their local gas station and talk with actual people about their defence of the carbon tax? I highly doubt it.How would they explain to struggling Canadians, who are racking up debt at an alarming rate and who for the most part have no alternative than to use fossil fuels, that the carbon tax isn’t adversely impacting their finances?Because despite what those economists say, the fact is that Canadians are being negatively impacted by the carbon tax. Not only that, but the increase coming on April 1 is going to make it worse.Why? Because in reality, no business is just going to eat that increased expense, and not pass it down to the consumer.Take for example the carbon tax on natural gas and propane that’s used to dry grain or heat livestock shelters. While Bill C-234 will exempt the carbon tax on grain drying, it only does so for three years and it provides no exemption for heating barns whatsoever. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates that these expenses will cost agriculture producers $910 million by 2030.And you’ll see those costs reflected in your grocery bill and anytime you dine out at a restaurant.Another good example is Canada Post and other courier services.Canada Post has had a fuel surcharge for nearly two decades; it is a cost that they pass on to their customers. But if the price of fuel goes up because of the carbon tax, then that next care package to the grandkids is going to set you back more than it did before the increase.Oh and guess what! Neither of those increased costs are reflected or returned to you in the Canada Carbon Rebate (CCR) payment — If you receive it at all.The argument of course by those who support the carbon tax is that we are paying this tax to change societies' habits in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and lessen the impacts of climate change.This position is very much akin to the Liberal government's approach to reducing gun crime.In case you’re not aware, the Liberal government approach to reducing gun violence is to target legal and law-abiding firearm owners with increased penalties and regulations, while doing next to nothing to stop gun smugglers, gangs or repeat violent offenders. This includes reducing sentencing requirements for serious gun crimes.Now, if you substitute Canadians for legal firearm owners and countries such as China, the United States, India, Russia and Japan, for the gambit of ne’er do wells listed above, you end up with an apt comparison to our approach to climate change and greenhouse gas reductions.Just like firearm related crime, the focus shouldn’t be on punishing low emitting Canadians with a tax that will have a negligible impact on climate change.Canada doesn’t even crack the top five for worst carbon emitters. In fact we are currently sitting at number seven. Of the top five worst emitters, only Japan has a carbon tax and it is set at measly $2 USD per tonne. When that figure is compared to the $80 CDN per tonne that will take effect in Canada as of 01 April 2024, Japan’s tax is laughable but also incredibly enviable.The fact is that Canada’s global share of CO2 emissions has been trending downwards for decades and is currently sitting at approximately 1.5%. Therefore wouldn’t it make more sense to focus on changing the behaviours of the major emitters, than putting Canadians through the ringer for what would barely constitutes as a rounding error on the global scale?It's highly unlikely that Canada’s carbon tax self-flagellation will convince the major emitters to have a change of heart — it hasn’t yet. So while this carbon tax orthodoxy may be popular with more than 100 Canadian economists as well as the current government, it does not appeal to the majority of Canadians.As a result and despite a chorus of indignant cries, the carbon tax is destined to join the discard pile of other, once well-regarded, but poorly thought-out ideas.The question is, what, if anything will replace it.
