Tuesday, December 30, 2008

What Did He Say??

When this guy,



says this:

What to do? Something radically new. A net-zero gas tax. Not a freestanding gas tax but a swap that couples the tax with an equal payroll tax reduction. A two-part solution that yields the government no net increase in revenue and, more importantly--that is why this proposal is different from others--immediately renders the average gasoline consumer financially whole.

Something tells me my holidays have gone on too long and I've awoken in an alternate universe.

Krauthammer and Dion? Who knew?

h/t - Hopefully worth writing down (Good catch!)

7 comments:

WesternGrit said...

Thanks for posting that. I think we need to spread the word. Maybe the Canadian "unbiased media" will pick up on this?

I'm sure if it's all over Liblogs for a while, some of them will.

I think this really ads credence to the old Liberal plan (hatched by Iggy, by the way). Sure, it already had gobs of "credence" from, oh, I don't know, like 95% of economists in this country, but if it REALLY takes a right-wing, NeoCon ideologue to jump on the bandwagon (from the Land of Bush, no less), then so be it.

If anything, it will put another issue back out there, which the public can "re-think" vis-a-vis, all of the rest of Canada vs. the Conservatives. I think, in these times, slowly, we will see the repudiation of all things Conservative (or a lot of them) - from economic "non-plan", to finance ideas, to bailout strategies, to climate change views, etc...

catherine said...

Here's a US column which refers to some other Republicans going for a carbon tax too.

Happy New Year – A New Political Reality for Carbon Taxes

It would be really exciting if the US went for some kind of carbon tax.

Yes, spread the word on Liblogs and hope the Canadian media picks it up.

knb said...

Hey Western, I see you posted on it too.

I don't know that I hold your faith in the media at the moment, but wholeheartedly agree that it would be good to push this story into some light.

It strikes me as bizarre, no sad really, that we would need the neo-cons to lend credence to good ideas, but if that is what it takes to wake people up, so be it. That said, it must not forgotten where the idea came from.

What I mean is, this is not the time to graciously allow the Con's to promote the idea as their own. Like so much of what Harper has done recently, the idea originated with the Libs but the credit has gone to him. That is what the media must get straight, imo.

I live in hope, ;).

knb said...

Thanks for that Catherine.

If Obama picks up on this, which seems likely given the probable bipartisan support, it certainly would be difficult for Harper and gang to continue to rail against it.

catherine said...

I don't know if it is "likely" as people are expecting Obama to implement a cap and trade, but it does seem there will at least be a lot of discussion and a carbon tax bill will be put forward, so we shall see.

OT, but this is an interesting column from a former student of Ignatieff's. A nice endorsement!

knb said...

Sorry Catherine. You are right of course that Obama ran on a cap and trade platform. I wonder though, if there is enough pressure, will he modify his stance to include cap and trade in the overall plan, (so in the future) and move now with more effective measures, the tax.

Crazy idea, I know, lol! But wouldn't it just be perfect to hear that coming from the US? Dion won't receive the vindication he probably deserves but it would go a long way in establishing credibility for the Liberals. Hmmm, I wonder how the NDP would react?

Thanks for that O/T link. It is a great endorsement. I wonder if it, or time itself, will bring other supporters of Ignatieff out?

WesternGrit said...

Hey KNB... I think the media would be stupid to think this was Harper's idea now, considering they spent the better part of the last 6 months destroying Stephane Dion about it... (but I could be wrong)... lol...

I honestly don't think, however, that Harper will even think about pushing this. He's going to hope that it gets buried down South, then he'll once again (not very earnestly at all) talk about cap n' trade and other less adequate ways to fight climate change - which he doesn't believe anyway.

He has no intention of doing anything anyways. He benefits from the disagreement more than any actual solution. As a matter of fact ALL of Harper's policy is geared around creating conflict, then doing the bare minimum required to appease the public - this usually by lying about their intent, and the supposed "solution". He thrives on the conflict. If Canada is constantly deeply divided on issues, he can talk about how his ideas are "legitimate" because they reflect the will of the 22% of Canadians who voted for him... Legitimized by the fact that he is the "duly elected government", avoiding any recognition of the minority status of it.

The other thing to keep in mind is that high oil prices are good for Harper and Alberta. He won't back down from policy that keeps big oil happy. He will constantly bring up the "economic engine of Canada" argument to silence critics.

I think this could be a wedge issue for us IF Obama champions it in a bi-partisan effort South of the border. If Obama doesn't pick up on it, then we don't touch it, because it won't get any media play up here.

Too bad this didn't come up about 2 months ago...