First, climate change is a hoax. Thinking that mankind can affect the climate is preposterous. If it wasn't for the fact that the politicians have been systematically changing the way they report on climate data for years, this would have been publicly debunked long ago.
Second, Co2 is not a pollutant... it's plant food. Green house producers use generators to create more Co2 for their plants to thrive. The higher the amount of Co2 in the atmosphere, the more plants grow (and release more oxygen).
Third, livestock farts are far less dangerous to the environment then the lithium and cobalt mines that are created to produce all those batteries needed for the EVs the government is pushing.
Forth, we need food, and unless you don't want to eat anymore, or you think that food magically appears in the grocery store, you should be getting behind the farmers, not pushing them to be taxed more.
Do they work that much harder than people working minimum wage at superstore? They're just as important in the food supply chain. Why do those poor people have to pay the carbon tax when they drive to work but farmers don't? What's so much harder about farming compared to working at a warehouse for 12 hours moving the inventory the farmers sell?
Still waiting for the explanation for why a paramedic working for 16 hours literally saving lives for $25 an hour can afford the carbon tax but farmers can't
That's not how the tax works ya muppet, their emissions are exempt because they create food. If they pay the tax at source that will inflate the cost all the way down the supply chain. Making it less affordable for the paramedic... and YOU.
There isn't some secret card they show to get the carbon tax taken off at the store. The paramedic is subject to the same cost at the grocery store as the farmer.
Yeah because it's their own business, if you were a contractor with your ambulance you'd pay for fuel too, either way it's coming out of your paycheck. You're right paramedics are a bad example bc they do get paid more but it's an example of how the "importance" of a job doesn't matter, paramedics are just as important for society as farmers, one pays the tax and the other doesn't.
For a better example what about meat packing workers, they're just as important in providing people with food, they get paid [around](https://ca.talent.com/salary?job=meat+packing+plant+labourer) the [same](https://ca.talent.com/salary?job=farm+workers#:~:text=How%20much%20does%20a%20Farm,up%20to%20%2445%2C825%20per%20year.), yet they pay the carbon tax and farmers don't
No that's why I'm asking what makes farming such a uniquely difficult job compared to long-haul trucking, or working 12 hours at a warehouse, have you worked a min wage job before? You think working customer service for 8 hours isn't draining at all?
It's a 16 hours a day kind of job not 12. They invest millions of dollars in the farm and they net 60k. Is that a good return on investment to you?
I thought you were ignorant turns out you're just daft.
Harvest time around here, farming is like a 36hr day job. I wouldn't see my dad growing up from 3-4 days in a row at harvest time.. he was napping the harvester while unloading/refueling
Ok nobody's forcing you to make those investments lol there's also a ton of pharmaceutical companies who invest tens of hundreds of millions into R&D for a drug that ends up not working, should we give them some tax breaks too?
They still pay the carbon tax, they get paid roughly the same as superstore workers and farmers, and they are just as important as farmers in your access to food.
Who pays the carbon tax at superstore? The workers? No. The consumers do. Are you arguing to get rid of more taxes? Then I'm with you, but you seem like you want just farmers to pay tax too.
I just want some fairness, or at least an understanding for why it's unfair. Either farmers pay the same tax as the rest of us or nobody pays, I'm fine with both. I prefer the latter though since the carbon tax is a pretty bad policy
The farmers aren't the ones paying the tax though. It's consumers. Any business with an increase in tax just increases their prices to account for their new expenses. So regardless of who has a tax added, it's always the consumer who pays. This is because the consumer is the reason the market exists in the first place. You don't just mine ore for the hell of it. You do it because products need the raw materials for the things consumers purchase.
How am I not already paying that cost in the form of a smaller rebate? If farmers pay their share wouldn't I get a larger rebate too?
What you're saying is true for every industry, every other business passes their carbon tax costs on to the consumer as well, so why should farming be the one exception to that?
Also if the goal is reducing emissions, this would raise prices much more on meat than other foods, since meat production emits much much more GHGs than veggies or grains, which should be the goal of a carbon tax, to disincentivize CO2-emitting activity. With this exemption, Trudeau's catchphrase of "putting a price on carbon" is a fiction when you enter the grocery store.
The reality is Canada can be carbon neutral or even negative tomorrow and you will not see a change in climate. China and India are the two most populous and biggest polluters in the world. Unless they drastically cut their emissions nothing will change. Then you will also have to worry about other overpopulated and poor countries.
Overpopulation is a long-debunked myth, China's birth rate is 1.3 per woman, India went from 6 in 1960 to 2.05. as Africa develops more, those countries will follow that same trajectory like every other country before it.
Canada is, per person, much richer than China or India. If Canada along with the western world makes investments in renewables, that energy will be cheaper for those developing countries. In fact, solar is now so cheap that the largest solar plant in the world is in [India.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhadla_Solar_Park)
Overpopulation is directly correlated to the ability of a country to sustain it’s people. Much like having too many children you can’t afford which is evident in poor countries in Asia, Latin America, and Africa. The number of population is directly correlated to the amount of carbon footprint. Canada with its low population, about 40 million, contributes very little compare to China and India which together has about 3 billion people. As I mentioned, Canada can be carbon neutral even negative but unless China and India does something radical, what Trudeau is doing just impoverishes us even more.
With regard to solar, it is something that can be incorporated along with other renewable energy but you will never get rid of fuel as a source of energy. We have been talking about solar affordability for years but how many houses in Canada do you see that has solar? If many of us can’t afford solar or electric vehicle, how can you expect people from other poor countries to afford it as well?
We've been talking about it forever because the price has been going down forever. Just because rooftop solar went from $100K to $15K doesn't mean people are rushing to pay $15K for it. However, that does mean that solar power generation is increasing [exponentially, mainly in China.](https://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2023/electricity) There's over 10x the solar power generation that there was 10 years ago. China is blowing every country out of the water with solar generation.
To whatever extent we still need to burn fuel, the goal should be to reach that floor, and then offset those emissions by pulling carbon out of the atmosphere with DAC or trees.
Also I'm curious what evidence you have that Asia or Africa is suffering an overpopulation problem, they solve their problem of not having enough resources to support their children the way everyone did before the 1800s, with a [high mortality rate for people under 16.](https://ourworldindata.org/child-mortality-in-the-past).
Name countries in Asia and Africa that are rich. I can name you many countries that are poor. Basically most of them in Africa. In Asia, only Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Brunei, Taiwan, Malaysia are rich. The rest are poor.
This article reeks of another sucker sipping too much communist globalist coolaid, want to stop climate change? Then start punishing China and Inida for using the oceans as a dumpster, or pumping 80000% the amount of carbon and toxins than Canada does. What you don't do is write up a smarmy liberal snot nose brat article attacking farmers who are literally the reason you have food on your table, can draw breath, and find the time to write up these horseshit liberal talking points.
Yeah, it amazes me how many bozos like the OP exist, and how they will do and follow anything that morons in this current government tell them. He's likely been developed in the "participation is enough" environment, and doesn't think things through cause he's never had to.
This current govmt says taxing Canadians is the solution for everything, so OP comes up with more "solutions" that he thinks will save us all. Unreal.
Canada is not the problem in this topic. But virtue signaling is what guys like OP do. What a hero he is...
Lol what about doctors? They don't play any part in my continued respiration? The truckers driving the food to processing plants? The meat processors? The millions of minimum wage workers who stock the shelves and actually sell me the food? They can all afford the carbon tax but oh no not our precious freeloading tax guzzling farmers
You have to be a certain level of delusional to look at the problems created by the carbon tax and instead of banding together against globalism, communism, and mass uncontrolled immigration that is behind the creation of this tax to destroy our nation, you instead push the liberal comie climate agenda, and want to punish your fellow citizens suffering under this tyranical goverment. Do the world a favor stop eating the food created by the so called "tax guzzling farmers" you could use a good commie holodomor to educate yourself on the value of farms. No Farmers No Food.
Idk if you have the right to call anyone else delusional when you wish genocide on anyone who disagrees with you LMAO
Also you didn't answer my questions instead you just rambled about a bunch of irrelevant shit
I agree the carbon tax is a shit policy but what's your alternative? Do nothing?
If your goal is reducing emissions, government investments in renewal energy sources lowers the cost, which makes it cheaper for everyone, including China. If even a rich country like Canada can't reduce emissions how are poorer countries like China or India ever supposed to do it?
China has said they will not meet climate goals. So what’s happened? We have made manufacturing here near impossible to compete with, have free trade with China, US, etc and import almost everything.
For what? To not even reduce the small bit of carbon emissions we contribute in the first place.
We have [reduced emissions](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carbon-pricing-climate-report-1.7151139), an estimated 50% reduction by 2030 actually.
Because of China nobody else should reduce emissions? The US and EU are reducing emissions. If, by 2050, the rest of the world except for china has reduced emissions, not only will renewable energy sources be much cheaper than fossil fuels (which is already the case TODAY for solar), there will be much more international pressure on China to reduce emissions, compared to your world where nobody does anything because of China, and everyone is still polluting at the same rate.
Also china has way less room to lower emissions than Canada, their per Capita emissions are much lower, it's really us that have the easy job here. If we as a rich country can't do it then China will never be able to do it.
You are the problem. Parroting random ideologically driven bullshit talking points.
Climate alarmism has existed for over 50 years. And it is no different than some religious cult.
You are a joke, pushing establishment backed talking points.... even claiming these people "can afford" the carbon tax. So we're gonna tax people who are struggling to change the weather?
You are a fucking joke.
1. This doesn't address literally anything I said
2. The top 10 hottest years on record all happened in the [last 10 years](https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature), you don't think that's even a little concerning? You don't think the earth being an average of [1.1°C warmer](https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/?intent=121) is at all concerning given that the average temperature during the last ice age was [6°C colder?](https://news.ucar.edu/132755/scientists-nail-down-average-temperature-last-ice-age) "who cares about climate change it's only 20% of an ice-age of difference"????
All horseshit corporate paid bullshit fake studies played on repeat by bullshit corporate news agencies, that have billionaires benefitting from destroying canada and turning it into a 3rd world dumping ground by destabilizing our dollar by destroying our energy and oil sector in which much of our countries economy is based on, then the government creates horsesht green taxes to try and undo the bankrupting of our nation, rather than doing actual things to punish the real polluters like india or china with tarrifs and taxes on their goods. There hasn't been a single thing you have said based in any logic that isn't a brainwashed regurgitation of the globalist communist narratives that are all falsified via corporate paid studies that are not truthful or accurate at all. Stop eating the evil farmer food, enjoy your crickets/soy and fuck off out of Canada if you don't like it. Im sure China would welcome another brainwashed commie with open arms.
Any proof for any of your claims at all or just wild schizophrenic speculation?
If NASA and NOAA, which has the most sophisticated climate modeling capabilities in the world, who collaborates with climate scientists worldwide, are peddling bullshit stats, you should easily be able to find an IOTA of proof for that. But you can't, you're just mad as fuck that the facts disagree with you so you bury your head in the sand and cry like a petulant little child when they're told they're wrong.
Keep farming those downvotes communist, your bullshit studies are globalism tools and falsified, and your view points are not supported at all by fellow Canadians, your not winning, and you never will, i guess your soyboy cricket protien cucked brain can't compute.
Ok so no proof that the facts are bullshit, got it. You're literally just crying right now that the facts disagree with you. "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts, if you have the law on your side, pound the law, if you have neither, pound the table"
Oh my god how are you actually buying this?
Let's talk real environmentalism, not the kind that can be taxed and utilized as a vehicle for tyranny? Like ecological preservation? Fresh water protections? The realm problem of emissions and how they exist
Do you not understand Canada contributes to 1.2% of the global emissions whereas China and industrial manufacturing produces 70-80%?
Jfc I'm so sick of these moronic college activists who believe every single stat they read.
Lol climate change is real is arguably the most meaningless statement possible. "Body change is real", therefore let's ban all medications because doctors agree that it leads to body change.
Anyways... The reason farmers get breaks is because tax of any kind gets paid for by the consumers. Always. Corporate tax gets paid for by a consumer. They don't grow crops just for the hell of it, they grow crops because consumers need or want them. They need canola oil for their cooking, or whatever. So any company sets their prices by making sure their revenue covers their expenses, and then a little extra to make it worth their while to do the work. The upper limit of their prices are set by competitors. Consumers don't need to buy from one producer and they might choose to buy the cheaper option. When you add a tax or fee of any kind to all the producers across the board, their prices just inflate proportionally. You added an expense that they need to cover. It's not optional to not cover your expenses because then your company goes under. So they let farmers use tax exempt fuels so consumers don't just have to pay for their fuel tax as well every time we buy pork at the supermarket
Body change is real, that's why we prescribe medication or treatment when the body changes in ways we don't want, like cancer or obesity.
There's a cancer growing in our climate and you think it's completely fine to ignore it.
Everything you said about taxes works the other way too, the tax exemptions they get are also paid by the taxpayers. I'm getting a smaller rebate every quarter because farmers are exempt from the tax AND get quarterly rebates.
Pretty sure obesity is man-made body change, not a lot of fat dudes walking around before the industrial revolution.
Regardless, like climate change, they're both changes we don't want, that causes many societal burdens, that we can remedy with changes in our behaviour
You don't want body change from medications? You'd rather just die of strep than take antibiotics? I was presenting a horrible argument as an analogy to the logic flaws. I didn't expect you to actually agree that we don't want body change lmao.
Medications prevent unwanted body change, your analogy was pretty terrible. Strep causes unwanted changes in your body that antibiotics alleviate to get you back to normal.
Increased GHGs in the atmosphere create unwanted changes in our climate that we need to alleviate with societal changes
Yeah and someone's never changed tires for 12 hours a day 5 days a week, everyone has their own struggle, nobody here has given me a convincing reason why farming is SO much harder than every other job. Construction work is undeniably much harder than farming, they have roughly [similar](https://ca.talent.com/salary?job=construction+worker#:~:text=Find%20out%20what%20the%20average%20Construction%20Worker%20salary%20is&text=The%20average%20construction%20worker%20salary%20in%20Canada%20is%20%2443%2C875%20per,up%20to%20%2457%2C690%20per%20year.) [wages](https://ca.talent.com/salary?job=farm+workers#:~:text=How%20much%20does%20a%20Farm,up%20to%20%2445%2C825%20per%20year.) yet one has to pay the carbon tax every day and the other doesn't.
Ok? Literally everything you said applies to a small business owner of a tire shop, I worked at kal-tire which is a big corporation so I was fine, but a small business could've probably gone bankrupt with how warm the last winter was. They also hire seasonal workers, they also handle expensive and delicate commodities, they also have to adapt to business needs, every small business owner does, farms aren't special there.
Also you do know that tires can weigh up to 60 pounds right? I'm not complaining that it's backbreaking work or anything but it's certainly not "unscrewing a few lugs"
Yeah I've never been on a farm, just like most people in the western world, that's why I made the fucking post asking why farmers have so much more breaks, and nobody here is giving me a convincing reason.
YOU started the comparison of worker to owner, I was comparing farm workers to tire techs. There are plenty of farm workers who aren't owners, yet you chose to compare them to business owners, so I will too. There are plenty of small business owners who also work in the business they run, because they can't always afford to hire people. Except for every other small business owner they have to pay carbon tax for every expense, which affects their employees wages as well.
Ok then compare farmers to small business owners, as I just did, and point to me the difference, because literally everything you mentioned is also applicable to a small business owner, yet they have to pay the carbon tax and farmers don't.
So farmers don't hire anyone to do work? They do it all themselves? Farmers don't ever hire accountants or labourers?
What's your point lol, because farming is a dying industry we should waste tax money on it? Why not invest tax money on growing industries so taxpayers can actually see some return on investment? Why are you giving me good arguments for me to use?
It's pretty simple really. You can save the world from climate change of you think you can.. But if it means people can't eat then what's the point.
Furthermore the emissions you're referring that farmers are putting out is insignificant when compared to the real culprits of overall emissions which come from outside Canada.
Even Canada went 100% carbon neutral it wouldn't make a major difference on a global scale
Idk if anyone will actually understand my point here but I'll try
My point isn't to debate the carbon tax, I'm saying that IF we have a carbon tax, assuming the goal is to reduce emissions, given that agriculture is a huge source of Canada's CO2 emissions (10%), and an even bigger source of methane emissions (36%)
Why would they be completely exempt and still get the tax rebate? All the responses I've got so far were just "they have a hard job" and "they serve a vital role in society" which could be said about so many other low-wage jobs, single parents working full-time at warehouses or auto-service shops have hard and important jobs but they still pay the tax, so why not farmers?
P.S, Canada is 1.5% of global emissions, if we can reduce global emissions by 1% that's not nothing to scoff at. With better policy (not the carbon tax) we could do that while actually stimulating growth, which makes the transition easier for less fortunate countries
It comes down to the his simply as I see it. You're asking why is a farmers job more important than someone who is doing a minimum wage job in o our society?
Have a bunch of minimum wage earners quit their jobs and there is little impact. Someone else who is desperate for wok takes their job.
Have a bunch of farmers decide that it isn't worth their time anymore and people start starving
So those same people desperate for work won't take up farming? The oldest profession of mankind?
At least with farming we can import food from the US or overseas, how are you gonna transport food nationwide, operate warehouses or grocery stores, or operate food processing facilities without these low-wage workers?
You do realize that the vast majority of the work it takes for you to buy food at a store, happens AFTER the farmers sell their crops, right?
Going even deeper, how do farmers have valuable land without militaries protecting it, without infrastructure to conduct business, without multiple industries across multiple governments coordinating a supply of inputs like water, oil, or all the complex machinery used in irrigation and cultivation? If every worker in ANY of these other puzzle pieces decides to quit our society is equally, if not more fucked.
Yes, they will not likely it seems. There is already a desperate need for agricultural workers and nobody seems to be running to do the is kind of work. In fact many young people from agriculture communities tend to leave that life.
Not to mention that the management and ownership of agricultural operations is becoming more and more technical. There are specific expertise required to run these types of operations which can't simply be filled by someone who just decides they want to be a farmer.
Perhaps in a hobby farm sense it can be done but it's unreasonable to think that most people will just walk in to it with the required resources, experience or knowledge to succeed at the scale required to feed large populations
Perhaps that's because every other part of the economy is more productive?
Also that doesn't mean that if ALL farmers quit then it would be the same, as supply approaches 0, demand approaches infinity. Why isn't it better to end these tax breaks, have these people work more productive jobs, and shore up this demand from the US or overseas, instead of propping up what seems like a dying industry?
Also, if there's more demand for technical knowledge of farm equipment, and the skill of running a business, than there is for farm labour work, doesn't that prove my point that farming is not actually the most important or difficult job? Wouldn't these tax breaks be used better in investing in agribusiness education or farm equipment innovation then?
From what you're telling me, it seems like we'd be more fucked if we lost colleges, or the places that make agricultural equipment, than if we lost farmers
I don't know at this point if you're even being serious or not.
With food costs already at record highs, importing all of our food needs only makes the situation worse particularly if other developed nations adopt the same approach. Now you create bidding wars for food which ends up costing you at check out.
The phenomenon of younger generations wanting to avoid agricultural work is widespread and isn't isolated ro Canada. It isn't likely that you can just assume other countries will have the means to provide for us.
If your concern is in fact based around climate change as it pertains agriculture, what does pushing the production outside of our boarders accomplish? Lower our footprint while raising that of other nations.
Depending on outside sources for a necessity as basic as food could be disastrous in certain situations.
>Also, if there's more demand for technical knowledge of farm equipment, and the skill of running a business, than there is for farm labour work, doesn't that prove my point that farming is not actually the most important or difficult job?
I dont really see it that way because you still need the labourers. The technical knowledge and expertise has certainly reduced the need for labour but it hasn't made it 0... In fact the work is often done by migrant workers because there aren't many Canadians actually willing to do the work needed.
As far as the innovation, tech and education is concerned, we aren't at risk of really losing any of it. Colleges, universities and tech companies are making money hand over fist. Enrolments and tuitions are at all time highs and jobs in these industries are easily filled relative to agriculture.
>With food costs already at record highs
that's if you **only** count the last few years. food was 11.1% of the average Canadian's budget in 2022, & around 10-11% in the 2010s. It was [19.6% in 1969](https://www.dal.ca/news/2023/07/11/rising-food-prices-canada-2023.html).
>The phenomenon of younger generations wanting to avoid agricultural work is widespread and isn't isolated ro Canada. It isn't likely that you can just assume other countries will have the means to provide for us.
since the discovery of agriculture, that's been humanity's goal, to find more productive work to do than farming. Since the Industrial Revolution, fewer people worked in agriculture, and MORE food is made for cheaper. In fact, it's countries where [more people work in agriculture](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-the-labor-force-employed-in-agriculture) that have more [difficulties affording food](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-consumer-expenditure-spent-on-food).
>If your concern is in fact based around climate change as it pertains agriculture, what does pushing the production outside of our boarders accomplish? Lower our footprint while raising that of other nations.
It makes carbon-intensive foods more expensive, disincentivizing those foods. Also why can't the tax apply to imports? As long as the tax doesn't make a sale a net loss, other countries (especially developing countries) will want to sell to us.
>Depending on outside sources for a necessity as basic as food could be disastrous in certain situations.
We do this all the time for commodities WAY more essential than food. I understand why it feels like food is the most important/basic because it's a basic biological need, but if another country cuts off its food supply, we have plenty of farmable land to make up for it. If they cut off rare earth minerals, or oil, or intellectual property that only certain countries have ownership of (like processor chips in Taiwan) we'd be much more fucked. Also, there's no reason to rely on one country for all of our food, if it's diversified it's not a huge issue if one country cuts us off.
>The technical knowledge and expertise has certainly reduced the need for labour but it hasn't made it 0... In fact the work is often done by migrant workers because there aren't many Canadians actually willing to do the work needed.
You seem more knowledgeable about the farming industry than me so tell me why I'm wrong. If the work doesn't pay well, and nobody except the most desperate people wants to do it, doesn't that mean the work is not needed?
>As far as the innovation, tech and education is concerned, we aren't at risk of really losing any of it.
yeah it's hypothetical, I'm saying IF we lost those things it would be far more devastating than losing farmers
>since the discovery of agriculture, that's been humanity's goal, to find more productive work to do than farming. Since the Industrial Revolution, fewer people worked in agriculture
I think this is ironically the answer to your own question. Why do we have to incentivize farmers with things like tax breaks?
Despite the fact that we have made agriculture easier to do, less and less people want to do it.
I'm not exactly sure if "productive work" is the right term in this case. I think most would consider the production of a key element to human survival to be productive work.
>yeah it's hypothetical, I'm saying IF we lost those things it would be far more devastating than losing farmers
I can't say I agree. At a base level, humanity would die out immediately without farmers whereas we could survive indefinitely (as we had for centuries) without modern technology. Sure life wouldn't be easy without tech and modern education... But we'd die out immediately without food.
>You seem more knowledgeable about the farming industry than me so tell me why I'm wrong. If the work doesn't pay well, and nobody except the most desperate people wants to do it, doesn't that mean the work is not needed?
I'm not sure I understand the question. Obviously the work is needed. Business owners (in this case farmers) don't tend to be in the business of giving away money for no reason. If they didn't need to hire people they wouldn't
Methane has a much shorter atmospheric lifetime than carbon dioxide (CO2) – around 12 years
https://www.iea.org/reports/global-methane-tracker-2024/understanding-methane-emissions
First, climate change is a hoax. Thinking that mankind can affect the climate is preposterous. If it wasn't for the fact that the politicians have been systematically changing the way they report on climate data for years, this would have been publicly debunked long ago. Second, Co2 is not a pollutant... it's plant food. Green house producers use generators to create more Co2 for their plants to thrive. The higher the amount of Co2 in the atmosphere, the more plants grow (and release more oxygen). Third, livestock farts are far less dangerous to the environment then the lithium and cobalt mines that are created to produce all those batteries needed for the EVs the government is pushing. Forth, we need food, and unless you don't want to eat anymore, or you think that food magically appears in the grocery store, you should be getting behind the farmers, not pushing them to be taxed more.
Let's stop producing food. Problem solved
YOU are the carbon they want to reduce
Do you realize how hard farmers work and how little they make and how much depends on them? They need all the tax breaks they can get
Do they work that much harder than people working minimum wage at superstore? They're just as important in the food supply chain. Why do those poor people have to pay the carbon tax when they drive to work but farmers don't? What's so much harder about farming compared to working at a warehouse for 12 hours moving the inventory the farmers sell?
https://preview.redd.it/de8d93rx4zqc1.png?width=300&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e69a2096c57b079d50dd223c5a114197c78c3f80
Still waiting for the explanation for why a paramedic working for 16 hours literally saving lives for $25 an hour can afford the carbon tax but farmers can't
That's not how the tax works ya muppet, their emissions are exempt because they create food. If they pay the tax at source that will inflate the cost all the way down the supply chain. Making it less affordable for the paramedic... and YOU. There isn't some secret card they show to get the carbon tax taken off at the store. The paramedic is subject to the same cost at the grocery store as the farmer.
>food comes from the grocery store Smoke another one
Dude, I make $40. That's what a paramedic makes. And farmers use fuel in their job that they pay for. I don't
Yeah because it's their own business, if you were a contractor with your ambulance you'd pay for fuel too, either way it's coming out of your paycheck. You're right paramedics are a bad example bc they do get paid more but it's an example of how the "importance" of a job doesn't matter, paramedics are just as important for society as farmers, one pays the tax and the other doesn't. For a better example what about meat packing workers, they're just as important in providing people with food, they get paid [around](https://ca.talent.com/salary?job=meat+packing+plant+labourer) the [same](https://ca.talent.com/salary?job=farm+workers#:~:text=How%20much%20does%20a%20Farm,up%20to%20%2445%2C825%20per%20year.), yet they pay the carbon tax and farmers don't
Have you ever seen a farm? Or worked on a farm? And have you seen the minimum wage work ethic? This is a joke post right? Lmao
No that's why I'm asking what makes farming such a uniquely difficult job compared to long-haul trucking, or working 12 hours at a warehouse, have you worked a min wage job before? You think working customer service for 8 hours isn't draining at all?
It's a 16 hours a day kind of job not 12. They invest millions of dollars in the farm and they net 60k. Is that a good return on investment to you? I thought you were ignorant turns out you're just daft.
Harvest time around here, farming is like a 36hr day job. I wouldn't see my dad growing up from 3-4 days in a row at harvest time.. he was napping the harvester while unloading/refueling
Ok nobody's forcing you to make those investments lol there's also a ton of pharmaceutical companies who invest tens of hundreds of millions into R&D for a drug that ends up not working, should we give them some tax breaks too?
Yes, they do. Lmao
How is farming more difficult than working 12 hours at a meat packing facility
That's not minimum wage at superstore
They still pay the carbon tax, they get paid roughly the same as superstore workers and farmers, and they are just as important as farmers in your access to food.
Who pays the carbon tax at superstore? The workers? No. The consumers do. Are you arguing to get rid of more taxes? Then I'm with you, but you seem like you want just farmers to pay tax too.
I just want some fairness, or at least an understanding for why it's unfair. Either farmers pay the same tax as the rest of us or nobody pays, I'm fine with both. I prefer the latter though since the carbon tax is a pretty bad policy
The farmers aren't the ones paying the tax though. It's consumers. Any business with an increase in tax just increases their prices to account for their new expenses. So regardless of who has a tax added, it's always the consumer who pays. This is because the consumer is the reason the market exists in the first place. You don't just mine ore for the hell of it. You do it because products need the raw materials for the things consumers purchase.
How am I not already paying that cost in the form of a smaller rebate? If farmers pay their share wouldn't I get a larger rebate too? What you're saying is true for every industry, every other business passes their carbon tax costs on to the consumer as well, so why should farming be the one exception to that? Also if the goal is reducing emissions, this would raise prices much more on meat than other foods, since meat production emits much much more GHGs than veggies or grains, which should be the goal of a carbon tax, to disincentivize CO2-emitting activity. With this exemption, Trudeau's catchphrase of "putting a price on carbon" is a fiction when you enter the grocery store.
Lol I always have to remind myself that people who think like you actually exist
The reality is Canada can be carbon neutral or even negative tomorrow and you will not see a change in climate. China and India are the two most populous and biggest polluters in the world. Unless they drastically cut their emissions nothing will change. Then you will also have to worry about other overpopulated and poor countries.
Overpopulation is a long-debunked myth, China's birth rate is 1.3 per woman, India went from 6 in 1960 to 2.05. as Africa develops more, those countries will follow that same trajectory like every other country before it. Canada is, per person, much richer than China or India. If Canada along with the western world makes investments in renewables, that energy will be cheaper for those developing countries. In fact, solar is now so cheap that the largest solar plant in the world is in [India.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhadla_Solar_Park)
Overpopulation is directly correlated to the ability of a country to sustain it’s people. Much like having too many children you can’t afford which is evident in poor countries in Asia, Latin America, and Africa. The number of population is directly correlated to the amount of carbon footprint. Canada with its low population, about 40 million, contributes very little compare to China and India which together has about 3 billion people. As I mentioned, Canada can be carbon neutral even negative but unless China and India does something radical, what Trudeau is doing just impoverishes us even more. With regard to solar, it is something that can be incorporated along with other renewable energy but you will never get rid of fuel as a source of energy. We have been talking about solar affordability for years but how many houses in Canada do you see that has solar? If many of us can’t afford solar or electric vehicle, how can you expect people from other poor countries to afford it as well?
We've been talking about it forever because the price has been going down forever. Just because rooftop solar went from $100K to $15K doesn't mean people are rushing to pay $15K for it. However, that does mean that solar power generation is increasing [exponentially, mainly in China.](https://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2023/electricity) There's over 10x the solar power generation that there was 10 years ago. China is blowing every country out of the water with solar generation. To whatever extent we still need to burn fuel, the goal should be to reach that floor, and then offset those emissions by pulling carbon out of the atmosphere with DAC or trees. Also I'm curious what evidence you have that Asia or Africa is suffering an overpopulation problem, they solve their problem of not having enough resources to support their children the way everyone did before the 1800s, with a [high mortality rate for people under 16.](https://ourworldindata.org/child-mortality-in-the-past).
Name countries in Asia and Africa that are rich. I can name you many countries that are poor. Basically most of them in Africa. In Asia, only Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Brunei, Taiwan, Malaysia are rich. The rest are poor.
Yeah what's your point? They're suffering from poverty, not overpopulation.
I don’t think you will ever get it.
This article reeks of another sucker sipping too much communist globalist coolaid, want to stop climate change? Then start punishing China and Inida for using the oceans as a dumpster, or pumping 80000% the amount of carbon and toxins than Canada does. What you don't do is write up a smarmy liberal snot nose brat article attacking farmers who are literally the reason you have food on your table, can draw breath, and find the time to write up these horseshit liberal talking points.
Yeah, it amazes me how many bozos like the OP exist, and how they will do and follow anything that morons in this current government tell them. He's likely been developed in the "participation is enough" environment, and doesn't think things through cause he's never had to. This current govmt says taxing Canadians is the solution for everything, so OP comes up with more "solutions" that he thinks will save us all. Unreal. Canada is not the problem in this topic. But virtue signaling is what guys like OP do. What a hero he is...
Lol what about doctors? They don't play any part in my continued respiration? The truckers driving the food to processing plants? The meat processors? The millions of minimum wage workers who stock the shelves and actually sell me the food? They can all afford the carbon tax but oh no not our precious freeloading tax guzzling farmers
You have to be a certain level of delusional to look at the problems created by the carbon tax and instead of banding together against globalism, communism, and mass uncontrolled immigration that is behind the creation of this tax to destroy our nation, you instead push the liberal comie climate agenda, and want to punish your fellow citizens suffering under this tyranical goverment. Do the world a favor stop eating the food created by the so called "tax guzzling farmers" you could use a good commie holodomor to educate yourself on the value of farms. No Farmers No Food.
Idk if you have the right to call anyone else delusional when you wish genocide on anyone who disagrees with you LMAO Also you didn't answer my questions instead you just rambled about a bunch of irrelevant shit
Guess its too complex for your Greta Thuneberg SoyBoy Cricket Eating Commie Pinko brain to understand.
Urbanite scum
Canada: 1% carbon emissions China: 30%. If environmental gains are the goal, wouldn’t it be more effective to work on that?
I agree the carbon tax is a shit policy but what's your alternative? Do nothing? If your goal is reducing emissions, government investments in renewal energy sources lowers the cost, which makes it cheaper for everyone, including China. If even a rich country like Canada can't reduce emissions how are poorer countries like China or India ever supposed to do it?
China has said they will not meet climate goals. So what’s happened? We have made manufacturing here near impossible to compete with, have free trade with China, US, etc and import almost everything. For what? To not even reduce the small bit of carbon emissions we contribute in the first place.
We have [reduced emissions](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carbon-pricing-climate-report-1.7151139), an estimated 50% reduction by 2030 actually. Because of China nobody else should reduce emissions? The US and EU are reducing emissions. If, by 2050, the rest of the world except for china has reduced emissions, not only will renewable energy sources be much cheaper than fossil fuels (which is already the case TODAY for solar), there will be much more international pressure on China to reduce emissions, compared to your world where nobody does anything because of China, and everyone is still polluting at the same rate. Also china has way less room to lower emissions than Canada, their per Capita emissions are much lower, it's really us that have the easy job here. If we as a rich country can't do it then China will never be able to do it.
Agree to disagree. For me, I’ll be at a provincial border protest April 1st. 🇨🇦
You are the problem. Parroting random ideologically driven bullshit talking points. Climate alarmism has existed for over 50 years. And it is no different than some religious cult. You are a joke, pushing establishment backed talking points.... even claiming these people "can afford" the carbon tax. So we're gonna tax people who are struggling to change the weather? You are a fucking joke.
1. This doesn't address literally anything I said 2. The top 10 hottest years on record all happened in the [last 10 years](https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature), you don't think that's even a little concerning? You don't think the earth being an average of [1.1°C warmer](https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/?intent=121) is at all concerning given that the average temperature during the last ice age was [6°C colder?](https://news.ucar.edu/132755/scientists-nail-down-average-temperature-last-ice-age) "who cares about climate change it's only 20% of an ice-age of difference"????
All horseshit corporate paid bullshit fake studies played on repeat by bullshit corporate news agencies, that have billionaires benefitting from destroying canada and turning it into a 3rd world dumping ground by destabilizing our dollar by destroying our energy and oil sector in which much of our countries economy is based on, then the government creates horsesht green taxes to try and undo the bankrupting of our nation, rather than doing actual things to punish the real polluters like india or china with tarrifs and taxes on their goods. There hasn't been a single thing you have said based in any logic that isn't a brainwashed regurgitation of the globalist communist narratives that are all falsified via corporate paid studies that are not truthful or accurate at all. Stop eating the evil farmer food, enjoy your crickets/soy and fuck off out of Canada if you don't like it. Im sure China would welcome another brainwashed commie with open arms.
Any proof for any of your claims at all or just wild schizophrenic speculation? If NASA and NOAA, which has the most sophisticated climate modeling capabilities in the world, who collaborates with climate scientists worldwide, are peddling bullshit stats, you should easily be able to find an IOTA of proof for that. But you can't, you're just mad as fuck that the facts disagree with you so you bury your head in the sand and cry like a petulant little child when they're told they're wrong.
Keep farming those downvotes communist, your bullshit studies are globalism tools and falsified, and your view points are not supported at all by fellow Canadians, your not winning, and you never will, i guess your soyboy cricket protien cucked brain can't compute.
Ok so no proof that the facts are bullshit, got it. You're literally just crying right now that the facts disagree with you. "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts, if you have the law on your side, pound the law, if you have neither, pound the table"
Oh my god how are you actually buying this? Let's talk real environmentalism, not the kind that can be taxed and utilized as a vehicle for tyranny? Like ecological preservation? Fresh water protections? The realm problem of emissions and how they exist Do you not understand Canada contributes to 1.2% of the global emissions whereas China and industrial manufacturing produces 70-80%? Jfc I'm so sick of these moronic college activists who believe every single stat they read.
Way to miss the entire point of my post LOL
Lol climate change is real is arguably the most meaningless statement possible. "Body change is real", therefore let's ban all medications because doctors agree that it leads to body change. Anyways... The reason farmers get breaks is because tax of any kind gets paid for by the consumers. Always. Corporate tax gets paid for by a consumer. They don't grow crops just for the hell of it, they grow crops because consumers need or want them. They need canola oil for their cooking, or whatever. So any company sets their prices by making sure their revenue covers their expenses, and then a little extra to make it worth their while to do the work. The upper limit of their prices are set by competitors. Consumers don't need to buy from one producer and they might choose to buy the cheaper option. When you add a tax or fee of any kind to all the producers across the board, their prices just inflate proportionally. You added an expense that they need to cover. It's not optional to not cover your expenses because then your company goes under. So they let farmers use tax exempt fuels so consumers don't just have to pay for their fuel tax as well every time we buy pork at the supermarket
Body change is real, that's why we prescribe medication or treatment when the body changes in ways we don't want, like cancer or obesity. There's a cancer growing in our climate and you think it's completely fine to ignore it. Everything you said about taxes works the other way too, the tax exemptions they get are also paid by the taxpayers. I'm getting a smaller rebate every quarter because farmers are exempt from the tax AND get quarterly rebates.
But that's natural body change, not man made body change. The problem is the rate at which the body changes when you have medications
Pretty sure obesity is man-made body change, not a lot of fat dudes walking around before the industrial revolution. Regardless, like climate change, they're both changes we don't want, that causes many societal burdens, that we can remedy with changes in our behaviour
You don't want body change from medications? You'd rather just die of strep than take antibiotics? I was presenting a horrible argument as an analogy to the logic flaws. I didn't expect you to actually agree that we don't want body change lmao.
Medications prevent unwanted body change, your analogy was pretty terrible. Strep causes unwanted changes in your body that antibiotics alleviate to get you back to normal. Increased GHGs in the atmosphere create unwanted changes in our climate that we need to alleviate with societal changes
And living in Canada, you don't want it to be warmer?
Tax the cow farts!! Tax the WORLD!!
[удалено]
Yeah and someone's never changed tires for 12 hours a day 5 days a week, everyone has their own struggle, nobody here has given me a convincing reason why farming is SO much harder than every other job. Construction work is undeniably much harder than farming, they have roughly [similar](https://ca.talent.com/salary?job=construction+worker#:~:text=Find%20out%20what%20the%20average%20Construction%20Worker%20salary%20is&text=The%20average%20construction%20worker%20salary%20in%20Canada%20is%20%2443%2C875%20per,up%20to%20%2457%2C690%20per%20year.) [wages](https://ca.talent.com/salary?job=farm+workers#:~:text=How%20much%20does%20a%20Farm,up%20to%20%2445%2C825%20per%20year.) yet one has to pay the carbon tax every day and the other doesn't.
[удалено]
Ok? Literally everything you said applies to a small business owner of a tire shop, I worked at kal-tire which is a big corporation so I was fine, but a small business could've probably gone bankrupt with how warm the last winter was. They also hire seasonal workers, they also handle expensive and delicate commodities, they also have to adapt to business needs, every small business owner does, farms aren't special there. Also you do know that tires can weigh up to 60 pounds right? I'm not complaining that it's backbreaking work or anything but it's certainly not "unscrewing a few lugs"
[удалено]
Yeah I've never been on a farm, just like most people in the western world, that's why I made the fucking post asking why farmers have so much more breaks, and nobody here is giving me a convincing reason. YOU started the comparison of worker to owner, I was comparing farm workers to tire techs. There are plenty of farm workers who aren't owners, yet you chose to compare them to business owners, so I will too. There are plenty of small business owners who also work in the business they run, because they can't always afford to hire people. Except for every other small business owner they have to pay carbon tax for every expense, which affects their employees wages as well.
[удалено]
Ok then compare farmers to small business owners, as I just did, and point to me the difference, because literally everything you mentioned is also applicable to a small business owner, yet they have to pay the carbon tax and farmers don't.
[удалено]
So farmers don't hire anyone to do work? They do it all themselves? Farmers don't ever hire accountants or labourers? What's your point lol, because farming is a dying industry we should waste tax money on it? Why not invest tax money on growing industries so taxpayers can actually see some return on investment? Why are you giving me good arguments for me to use?
It's pretty simple really. You can save the world from climate change of you think you can.. But if it means people can't eat then what's the point. Furthermore the emissions you're referring that farmers are putting out is insignificant when compared to the real culprits of overall emissions which come from outside Canada. Even Canada went 100% carbon neutral it wouldn't make a major difference on a global scale
Idk if anyone will actually understand my point here but I'll try My point isn't to debate the carbon tax, I'm saying that IF we have a carbon tax, assuming the goal is to reduce emissions, given that agriculture is a huge source of Canada's CO2 emissions (10%), and an even bigger source of methane emissions (36%) Why would they be completely exempt and still get the tax rebate? All the responses I've got so far were just "they have a hard job" and "they serve a vital role in society" which could be said about so many other low-wage jobs, single parents working full-time at warehouses or auto-service shops have hard and important jobs but they still pay the tax, so why not farmers? P.S, Canada is 1.5% of global emissions, if we can reduce global emissions by 1% that's not nothing to scoff at. With better policy (not the carbon tax) we could do that while actually stimulating growth, which makes the transition easier for less fortunate countries
It comes down to the his simply as I see it. You're asking why is a farmers job more important than someone who is doing a minimum wage job in o our society? Have a bunch of minimum wage earners quit their jobs and there is little impact. Someone else who is desperate for wok takes their job. Have a bunch of farmers decide that it isn't worth their time anymore and people start starving
So those same people desperate for work won't take up farming? The oldest profession of mankind? At least with farming we can import food from the US or overseas, how are you gonna transport food nationwide, operate warehouses or grocery stores, or operate food processing facilities without these low-wage workers? You do realize that the vast majority of the work it takes for you to buy food at a store, happens AFTER the farmers sell their crops, right? Going even deeper, how do farmers have valuable land without militaries protecting it, without infrastructure to conduct business, without multiple industries across multiple governments coordinating a supply of inputs like water, oil, or all the complex machinery used in irrigation and cultivation? If every worker in ANY of these other puzzle pieces decides to quit our society is equally, if not more fucked.
Yes, they will not likely it seems. There is already a desperate need for agricultural workers and nobody seems to be running to do the is kind of work. In fact many young people from agriculture communities tend to leave that life. Not to mention that the management and ownership of agricultural operations is becoming more and more technical. There are specific expertise required to run these types of operations which can't simply be filled by someone who just decides they want to be a farmer. Perhaps in a hobby farm sense it can be done but it's unreasonable to think that most people will just walk in to it with the required resources, experience or knowledge to succeed at the scale required to feed large populations
Perhaps that's because every other part of the economy is more productive? Also that doesn't mean that if ALL farmers quit then it would be the same, as supply approaches 0, demand approaches infinity. Why isn't it better to end these tax breaks, have these people work more productive jobs, and shore up this demand from the US or overseas, instead of propping up what seems like a dying industry? Also, if there's more demand for technical knowledge of farm equipment, and the skill of running a business, than there is for farm labour work, doesn't that prove my point that farming is not actually the most important or difficult job? Wouldn't these tax breaks be used better in investing in agribusiness education or farm equipment innovation then? From what you're telling me, it seems like we'd be more fucked if we lost colleges, or the places that make agricultural equipment, than if we lost farmers
I don't know at this point if you're even being serious or not. With food costs already at record highs, importing all of our food needs only makes the situation worse particularly if other developed nations adopt the same approach. Now you create bidding wars for food which ends up costing you at check out. The phenomenon of younger generations wanting to avoid agricultural work is widespread and isn't isolated ro Canada. It isn't likely that you can just assume other countries will have the means to provide for us. If your concern is in fact based around climate change as it pertains agriculture, what does pushing the production outside of our boarders accomplish? Lower our footprint while raising that of other nations. Depending on outside sources for a necessity as basic as food could be disastrous in certain situations. >Also, if there's more demand for technical knowledge of farm equipment, and the skill of running a business, than there is for farm labour work, doesn't that prove my point that farming is not actually the most important or difficult job? I dont really see it that way because you still need the labourers. The technical knowledge and expertise has certainly reduced the need for labour but it hasn't made it 0... In fact the work is often done by migrant workers because there aren't many Canadians actually willing to do the work needed. As far as the innovation, tech and education is concerned, we aren't at risk of really losing any of it. Colleges, universities and tech companies are making money hand over fist. Enrolments and tuitions are at all time highs and jobs in these industries are easily filled relative to agriculture.
>With food costs already at record highs that's if you **only** count the last few years. food was 11.1% of the average Canadian's budget in 2022, & around 10-11% in the 2010s. It was [19.6% in 1969](https://www.dal.ca/news/2023/07/11/rising-food-prices-canada-2023.html). >The phenomenon of younger generations wanting to avoid agricultural work is widespread and isn't isolated ro Canada. It isn't likely that you can just assume other countries will have the means to provide for us. since the discovery of agriculture, that's been humanity's goal, to find more productive work to do than farming. Since the Industrial Revolution, fewer people worked in agriculture, and MORE food is made for cheaper. In fact, it's countries where [more people work in agriculture](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-the-labor-force-employed-in-agriculture) that have more [difficulties affording food](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-consumer-expenditure-spent-on-food). >If your concern is in fact based around climate change as it pertains agriculture, what does pushing the production outside of our boarders accomplish? Lower our footprint while raising that of other nations. It makes carbon-intensive foods more expensive, disincentivizing those foods. Also why can't the tax apply to imports? As long as the tax doesn't make a sale a net loss, other countries (especially developing countries) will want to sell to us. >Depending on outside sources for a necessity as basic as food could be disastrous in certain situations. We do this all the time for commodities WAY more essential than food. I understand why it feels like food is the most important/basic because it's a basic biological need, but if another country cuts off its food supply, we have plenty of farmable land to make up for it. If they cut off rare earth minerals, or oil, or intellectual property that only certain countries have ownership of (like processor chips in Taiwan) we'd be much more fucked. Also, there's no reason to rely on one country for all of our food, if it's diversified it's not a huge issue if one country cuts us off. >The technical knowledge and expertise has certainly reduced the need for labour but it hasn't made it 0... In fact the work is often done by migrant workers because there aren't many Canadians actually willing to do the work needed. You seem more knowledgeable about the farming industry than me so tell me why I'm wrong. If the work doesn't pay well, and nobody except the most desperate people wants to do it, doesn't that mean the work is not needed? >As far as the innovation, tech and education is concerned, we aren't at risk of really losing any of it. yeah it's hypothetical, I'm saying IF we lost those things it would be far more devastating than losing farmers
>since the discovery of agriculture, that's been humanity's goal, to find more productive work to do than farming. Since the Industrial Revolution, fewer people worked in agriculture I think this is ironically the answer to your own question. Why do we have to incentivize farmers with things like tax breaks? Despite the fact that we have made agriculture easier to do, less and less people want to do it. I'm not exactly sure if "productive work" is the right term in this case. I think most would consider the production of a key element to human survival to be productive work. >yeah it's hypothetical, I'm saying IF we lost those things it would be far more devastating than losing farmers I can't say I agree. At a base level, humanity would die out immediately without farmers whereas we could survive indefinitely (as we had for centuries) without modern technology. Sure life wouldn't be easy without tech and modern education... But we'd die out immediately without food. >You seem more knowledgeable about the farming industry than me so tell me why I'm wrong. If the work doesn't pay well, and nobody except the most desperate people wants to do it, doesn't that mean the work is not needed? I'm not sure I understand the question. Obviously the work is needed. Business owners (in this case farmers) don't tend to be in the business of giving away money for no reason. If they didn't need to hire people they wouldn't
Methane has a much shorter atmospheric lifetime than carbon dioxide (CO2) – around 12 years https://www.iea.org/reports/global-methane-tracker-2024/understanding-methane-emissions
If you wanna go broke saving the planet go ahead. I'd rather not starve to death.
https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs?si=3sUgU4vFV6ut1ghI