WARNING: ⚠️ DEBATE POST is shutting down very soon thanks to Facebook and Twitter banning us along with our 400,000 followers, you can follow on alternatives like frontpagelink.com where the radical left doesn't moderate content.
Rachel Notley, the Premier of Alberta has spread tons of misinformation about her tax on carbon ever since she announced it and said it was revenue neutral since her government was going to spend all of the money it took from Albertans next year onwards.
This is not the definition of revenue neutral.
Revenue neutral means raising one tax and lowering others so that total revenue stays the same. This is common sense and has been misused by Trudeau when he said his national carbon pricing plan is revenue neutral.
Technically, this term doesn’t even apply to his plan since he isn’t changing federal taxes at all. Instead, provinces like Ontario and Alberta are imposing carbon taxes on citizens which aren’t revenue neutral and will cost billions of dollars every year. While on this subject, it should be pointed out that the national carbon pricing plan is going to wipe out the tax cut for the middle class since there’s just a single taxpayer.
The tax cut is being financed by increasing taxes on some Canadians and the public debt for everyone. This leads to questions about the promises made last year during the federal election when Trudeau promised middle-class tax cuts that were going to be revenue neutral since it was going to be paid by taxes on the wealthy.
He had also promised to pay for all election promises using $10 billion worth of deficits while they are now at $30 billion.
The question here is whether the billions of dollars being handed to provinces under the national carbon pricing plan is going to impact the federal transfers for health care.
If Trudeau feels the world faces an existential, imminent threat from global warming, why was the CO2 spewing Canadian delegation twice as big as the American and thrice as big as the UK’s at the UN climate meet last year.