本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛First 'revenue neutral' is from government point of view. I am very much interested in how much it will affect our ordinary people. I guess there must be some impact, otherwise why should I change the why I consum 'carbon'? I'd really like to see how much it would affect me and if there is low cost alternative way for me to reduce the carbon comsumption since, again, if I cannot get benefit from lower 'carbon' comsuption, why would I? One potential problem is that there are very limited low cost alternatives with current technology in quite some time.
Second, let's say we do change our behavior and reduce the carbon consumption greatly. Then, the 'carbon tax' collected by the government would be greatly reduced. How can government continue to maintained lowered income/business tax? They may have to increase tax. Now, the question will be who will actually benefit from this process?
Third, the carbon tax will increase the cost for all business not only those energy companies - otherwise, Dion will not propose credit to certain sectors and resident for certain area which rely on fosil fuel so much. This will greatly affect the competitiveness of Canada business. How can Canadian product compete with those produced in countries without this tax? I don't know if Dion had thought about this thoroughly. From what I read on various news papers, when asked about this, his answers were 1) other countries are moving in this direction, 2 US president candidate expressed interest in similar ideas, 2) we may apply special import duty to products imported from countries without similar carton tax.
What I think is although other countries are thinking of this, we have no idea when they will implement this (or they may not what to implement this at all). 2 US presidential candidates' interest? They are not president yet and "interest" is not even the election commitment. Add special import duty, I don't know under WTO and NAFTA, how much freedom Canada has to increase import duty unilaterally.
I believe Dion had this 'Green Shift' with some good intention. But, i just don't quite trust this plan would work to the benefit of Canada without more detailed analysis.更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
Second, let's say we do change our behavior and reduce the carbon consumption greatly. Then, the 'carbon tax' collected by the government would be greatly reduced. How can government continue to maintained lowered income/business tax? They may have to increase tax. Now, the question will be who will actually benefit from this process?
Third, the carbon tax will increase the cost for all business not only those energy companies - otherwise, Dion will not propose credit to certain sectors and resident for certain area which rely on fosil fuel so much. This will greatly affect the competitiveness of Canada business. How can Canadian product compete with those produced in countries without this tax? I don't know if Dion had thought about this thoroughly. From what I read on various news papers, when asked about this, his answers were 1) other countries are moving in this direction, 2 US president candidate expressed interest in similar ideas, 2) we may apply special import duty to products imported from countries without similar carton tax.
What I think is although other countries are thinking of this, we have no idea when they will implement this (or they may not what to implement this at all). 2 US presidential candidates' interest? They are not president yet and "interest" is not even the election commitment. Add special import duty, I don't know under WTO and NAFTA, how much freedom Canada has to increase import duty unilaterally.
I believe Dion had this 'Green Shift' with some good intention. But, i just don't quite trust this plan would work to the benefit of Canada without more detailed analysis.更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net