Carbon tax

plio7

GBCA Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
9,876
Reaction score
10,314
Location
Calmer, formerly of the GBCA
exactly, will take a few years before groundwater levels return to pre levels. same as here. Ask a typical resident from these area's as they will likely tell you a different story though? seems like climate extremes are cyclic in nature, may be due to solar flares or chem trails?
watch the videos I posted earlier. or look up Patrick Moore, willie soon, freeman Dyson, etc. we are still currently in a small ice age period. the people sounding alarms are trying to use 50-100 years of data instead of thousands or millions of years ago. I went down a rabbit hole for years on this ch!t when the whole climate change thing really started ringing out. lots of very intelligent people that suddenly are being called conspiracy theorists for actually talking about the science
 

niner

Active VIP Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
8,674
Reaction score
62,531
Location
lacombe
It’s all theory. None of it is fact. Doesn’t matter what side your on.
 

plio7

GBCA Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
9,876
Reaction score
10,314
Location
Calmer, formerly of the GBCA
It’s all theory. None of it is fact. Doesn’t matter what side your on.
not really. carbon dioxide levels are not an issue. to say they are when we are at 150ppm is a theory. the fact that plant life thrives when the atmosphere is over 400ppm is a fact. climate is changing and that is a fact. but the idea we are the issue is a theory. the biggest issue it that they are spending all this time and money on something that isn't the issue rather than actually trying to use the money to chase the real issues like toxic and chemical waste, better recycling programs, etc.

the people pushing the climate change agenda run on study's and theories using adjustable data and variables to make up the data do what they want. most of the people you seen saying its changing but we're probably not the problem are following data and science with set measurable stats. you'll also find the people pushing the agenda refuse to debate with those who are using the science.
 

snopro

Active VIP Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2009
Messages
109,749
Reaction score
108,377
Location
Milo,Alberta
25 years ago when I started my apprenticeship there was a dried up slough right by Hussar. I watched that thing blow white dust every time the wind blew. Husky even drilled a well out in the middle of it. In 2005 I moved a house onto my acreage property and that was the wettest year I have ever seen in my life on the prairies. We had 29” of rain in brooks that summer. Delayed my project over 2 months just trying to get concrete down. Cost me about 50g extra on my project. That same year that dried up slough became a lake. Husky had to build an elevated road to that well and eventually just abandoned it. We have been relatively wet ever since 05 until about 4 years ago. Now driving past that lake it is now a dried up salt flats again blowing white dust every time the wind blows. What I’m getting at is we forget how and when things were in the past if we don’t have some kind of core memory to associate timelines. The world works on cycles that are a lot bigger than we can see.
Sounds like Deadhorse Lake just north of Hussar. Lots of sled engines died on that lake back in the day. Great for racing
 

imdoo'n

Active VIP Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
58,694
Reaction score
52,213
Location
alberta from the back porch
not really. carbon dioxide levels are not an issue. to say they are when we are at 150ppm is a theory. the fact that plant life thrives when the atmosphere is over 400ppm is a fact. climate is changing and that is a fact. but the idea we are the issue is a theory. the biggest issue it that they are spending all this time and money on something that isn't the issue rather than actually trying to use the money to chase the real issues like toxic and chemical waste, better recycling programs, etc.

the people pushing the climate change agenda run on study's and theories using adjustable data and variables to make up the data do what they want. most of the people you seen saying its changing but we're probably not the problem are following data and science with set measurable stats. you'll also find the people pushing the agenda refuse to debate with those who are using the science.
(y) great explanation Chris.
 

plio7

GBCA Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
9,876
Reaction score
10,314
Location
Calmer, formerly of the GBCA
I don’t think we will see the $250 for awhile. The Gst savings on a bag of chips starts in 10 days
CBC of all places did the break down on savings of this "tax break" and worked it out to like $160 over the time its in place for the average family then they'll give you $250 right before they hit you with an extra $150-250 a month in cost for the new carbon tax......
 

pipes

Active VIP Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2008
Messages
27,037
Reaction score
37,979
Location
Bonnyville Alberta
CBC of all places did the break down on savings of this "tax break" and worked it out to like $160 over the time its in place for the average family then they'll give you $250 right before they hit you with an extra $150-250 a month in cost for the new carbon tax......
I doubt that it actually workes out to $160 for the average family. Those numbers are likely overinflated like the Turds ego. And that $250 ain't going to happen to likes of you and me.
 

snopro

Active VIP Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2009
Messages
109,749
Reaction score
108,377
Location
Milo,Alberta
CBC of all places did the break down on savings of this "tax break" and worked it out to like $160 over the time its in place for the average family then they'll give you $250 right before they hit you with an extra $150-250 a month in cost for the new carbon tax......
They are saying polling shows his popularity has gone down with this tax break that everyone knows is an election vote buy. Imagine how much it will tumble in April when he tacks on another 61 cents to a liter of gas?
 

plio7

GBCA Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
9,876
Reaction score
10,314
Location
Calmer, formerly of the GBCA
you can tell he's losing support in a massive way by the way suddenly media is starting to really call them out. they see what's coming and its time to start sucking up to the conservatives so you can try to keep some of that gov funding
 

snopro

Active VIP Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2009
Messages
109,749
Reaction score
108,377
Location
Milo,Alberta
you can tell he's losing support in a massive way by the way suddenly media is starting to really call them out. they see what's coming and its time to start sucking up to the conservatives so you can try to keep some of that gov funding
I watched a clip from a parliamentary committee hearing on the CBC and Andrew Sheer was thanking Catherine Tait the CBC ceo for all she has done for the CBC. He said it just makes the Conservatives job so much easier in their quest to defund them. She did not look happy about that statement.
 

ZRrrr

Active VIP Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2006
Messages
3,338
Reaction score
3,495
Location
In my head
CBC of all places did the break down on savings of this "tax break" and worked it out to like $160 over the time its in place for the average family then they'll give you $250 right before they hit you with an extra $150-250 a month in cost for the new carbon tax......
...and liquor taxes going up.

Read yet another article, from yet another economist, saying that this has high potential to reduce the anticipated interest rate drop December 11th. This "gift" will screw people over more than it's worth!
 
Top Bottom