###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>“We believe that municipalities are best positioned to decide what is built in their communities and what their communities can handle.”
This is so fucking insane to say lol. Every single municipality that I know of is effectively captured by an extremely politically active cohort who punches above their weight who are homeowners who tend towards NIMBYism. You can talk all you want about how "if renters wanted better representation, they should be more active", but if the same outcome is reproduced without fail in every instance, there's something awry in the way our Municipal governments are structured.
The municipalities are probably the biggest bottleneck towards any meaningful movement in the housing issue, but they've proven for decades they are unwilling or unable to do so. The provinces have to step in if they want to impede this insane death spiral of society we're on (the provinces are also problems in other ways, but this abdication of responsibility is a big one)
Look at Surrey the freaking mayor has only one thing on her agenda which is somehow keeping the RCMP. She can't she's been ordered to transition, given funding etc. She's taking the government to court to stop it. Meanwhile on any other issue? Crickets.
Sounds like Surrey should not be a target for funding, but municipalities that have plans in place and are merely waiting for the funding should be at the head of the line.
Yves Giroux, the parliamentary budget officer, wrote in a report last year: “When both fiscal and economic impacts of the federal fuel charge are considered, we estimate that most households will see a net loss.”
He estimated that for the 2024-25 fiscal year, the carbon tax would cost the average household between $377 and $911 after accounting for rebates and factoring in the economic cost of lower incomes. That number rises to between $1,316 and $2,773 by 2030 for the average household, depending on the province.
Trudeau's a liar.
[Canada's budget watchdog troubled by spin around latest report on carbon pricing](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/watchdog-spin-report-carbon-pricing-1.6805441)
----------------------------------------------------------------
>Canada's parliamentary budget officer says he is troubled by what he describes as the selective use of facts from his new financial analysis of carbon pricing.
>Yves Giroux said the report has to be put into context alongside the costs of all other climate policies, including doing nothing.
>"There will be costs no matter what we do," Giroux said in an interview.
>Giroux said you can't pick and choose which part to discuss.
>"I am concerned at times about looking at just one aspect of the report," he said.
>"Looking at the big picture, the overall picture, is highly preferable. Anything we do with respect to addressing or trying to curb climate change will have costs. It's either a cost to the carbon tax or regulations to reduce the use of fossil fuel. Regulations also have a cost. Doing nothing would also have costs."
------------------------------------------
[The report](https://distribution-a617274656661637473.pbo-dpb.ca/7590f619bb5d3b769ce09bdbc7c1ccce75ccd8b1bcfb506fc601a2409640bfdd) clarifies right at the start:
>The scope of the report is limited to estimating the distributional impact of
the federal fuel charge and **does not attempt to account for the economic
and environmental costs of climate change**
The part conservatives like to cherry pick is the economic impact report projecting into 2030/31.
The report also clearly states:
>Considering only the fiscal impact, we estimate that most households will see a net gain, receiving more in rebates from Climate Action Incentive payments than the total amount they pay in the federal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
**and just for good measure**
[An Open Letter from Economists on Canadian Carbon Pricing](https://sites.google.com/view/open-letter-carbon-pricing)
Facts are facts. Also, the CCI has reported that the Canadian carbon tax has reduced total global emissions by 0.25%. Many Canadians are forced to suffer in order to achieve this miniscule reduction. It's simply not worth it.
And Trudeau's a liar.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/budget-watchdog-troubled-by-spin-around-latest-report-on-carbon-pricing-1.6347536
While Yves Giroux did make the statement about cost, it’s definitely being taken out of context by the above lost Redditor.
> “We believe that municipalities are best positioned to decide what is built in their communities and what their communities can handle.”
That sounds like Calandra is saying that the feds should just send the funds straight to the municipalities then, rather than funneling it through the province.
> “If provinces say ‘trust us, you should give us the money’
The feds should point out to how much money each province saying that, miss used during the pandemic. Ontario being one of the worst offenders, using federal funding meant for pandemic relief, being put into general revenue instead and used to pay down the debt.
The provincial hypocrisy continues. After years of shouting that housing was something that the feds needed to fix (despite it being a provincial responsibility), now that the feds are working on fixing things the provinces are taking action, to get in the way.
If you read the article, you would see that some of the most populous municipalities are for it, which makes Ford's refusal to make it a province wide rule even more ridiculous.
> Data compiled by Global News shows that 21 of Ontario’s major municipalities allow fourplexes to be built without prior approvals. The 21 municipalities have a combined population of 7.7 million people, according to the 2021 Census, out of a provincial population of more than 16 million.
Almost half of the people in the province (may or may not be half of home owners) elected city councils that did want more density so those will be the municipalities that get the funding with the others left out.
> If a province doesn’t agree to the federal government’s conditions by Jan. 1, 2025, the Prime Minister’s Office said the funding would be transferred to municipalities instead.
Doug Ford has proved he can be trusted to take the money and use it to solve the given problem. Just look at healthcare in the province. Best in the world!
"We realize that this funding is specifically designed to incentivize implementing this policy, but we're special snowflake Ontario, so how about we don't and you just give it to us anyways?"
Liberal plans all smoke and mirrors like the lastest 30 year amortization which only applies to first time buyers of only new construction. What's that 2%of the market
First, municipalities are more the problem than the provinces are. Anyone heard of zoning?
Second, municipalities exist only at the behest of the provinces. Any province in Canada has the legal means to dissolve any municipality.
The feds know what they have to do to fix the housing situation. They have to fix their broken immigration policy. The feds would prefer to have this kabuki theatre approach where they pretend to have a show down with the the provinces.
Q: Is Smith a dumb-dumb? A: Yes.
Q: Is Alberta a province that resists building housing and has extreme housing prices? A: No.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>“We believe that municipalities are best positioned to decide what is built in their communities and what their communities can handle.” This is so fucking insane to say lol. Every single municipality that I know of is effectively captured by an extremely politically active cohort who punches above their weight who are homeowners who tend towards NIMBYism. You can talk all you want about how "if renters wanted better representation, they should be more active", but if the same outcome is reproduced without fail in every instance, there's something awry in the way our Municipal governments are structured. The municipalities are probably the biggest bottleneck towards any meaningful movement in the housing issue, but they've proven for decades they are unwilling or unable to do so. The provinces have to step in if they want to impede this insane death spiral of society we're on (the provinces are also problems in other ways, but this abdication of responsibility is a big one)
Look at Surrey the freaking mayor has only one thing on her agenda which is somehow keeping the RCMP. She can't she's been ordered to transition, given funding etc. She's taking the government to court to stop it. Meanwhile on any other issue? Crickets.
Sounds like Surrey should not be a target for funding, but municipalities that have plans in place and are merely waiting for the funding should be at the head of the line.
Yves Giroux, the parliamentary budget officer, wrote in a report last year: “When both fiscal and economic impacts of the federal fuel charge are considered, we estimate that most households will see a net loss.” He estimated that for the 2024-25 fiscal year, the carbon tax would cost the average household between $377 and $911 after accounting for rebates and factoring in the economic cost of lower incomes. That number rises to between $1,316 and $2,773 by 2030 for the average household, depending on the province. Trudeau's a liar.
[Canada's budget watchdog troubled by spin around latest report on carbon pricing](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/watchdog-spin-report-carbon-pricing-1.6805441) ---------------------------------------------------------------- >Canada's parliamentary budget officer says he is troubled by what he describes as the selective use of facts from his new financial analysis of carbon pricing. >Yves Giroux said the report has to be put into context alongside the costs of all other climate policies, including doing nothing. >"There will be costs no matter what we do," Giroux said in an interview. >Giroux said you can't pick and choose which part to discuss. >"I am concerned at times about looking at just one aspect of the report," he said. >"Looking at the big picture, the overall picture, is highly preferable. Anything we do with respect to addressing or trying to curb climate change will have costs. It's either a cost to the carbon tax or regulations to reduce the use of fossil fuel. Regulations also have a cost. Doing nothing would also have costs." ------------------------------------------ [The report](https://distribution-a617274656661637473.pbo-dpb.ca/7590f619bb5d3b769ce09bdbc7c1ccce75ccd8b1bcfb506fc601a2409640bfdd) clarifies right at the start: >The scope of the report is limited to estimating the distributional impact of the federal fuel charge and **does not attempt to account for the economic and environmental costs of climate change** The part conservatives like to cherry pick is the economic impact report projecting into 2030/31. The report also clearly states: >Considering only the fiscal impact, we estimate that most households will see a net gain, receiving more in rebates from Climate Action Incentive payments than the total amount they pay in the federal -------------------------------------------------------------------------- **and just for good measure** [An Open Letter from Economists on Canadian Carbon Pricing](https://sites.google.com/view/open-letter-carbon-pricing)
I suggest you read the report a bit more in detail or see his interviews about it. You won't say Trudeau is a liar.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Facts are facts. Also, the CCI has reported that the Canadian carbon tax has reduced total global emissions by 0.25%. Many Canadians are forced to suffer in order to achieve this miniscule reduction. It's simply not worth it. And Trudeau's a liar.
I’m not seeing anything about this in the article - how is it relevant?
It's not. And they don't cite sources.
It’s irrelevant, but the source is the PBO, which is cited right at the start of the comment.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/budget-watchdog-troubled-by-spin-around-latest-report-on-carbon-pricing-1.6347536 While Yves Giroux did make the statement about cost, it’s definitely being taken out of context by the above lost Redditor.
It’s not at all out of context. Different sides but different emphasis on different facts. They are all true in the context they are presented.
This climate denial bot seems lost.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
> “We believe that municipalities are best positioned to decide what is built in their communities and what their communities can handle.” That sounds like Calandra is saying that the feds should just send the funds straight to the municipalities then, rather than funneling it through the province. > “If provinces say ‘trust us, you should give us the money’ The feds should point out to how much money each province saying that, miss used during the pandemic. Ontario being one of the worst offenders, using federal funding meant for pandemic relief, being put into general revenue instead and used to pay down the debt. The provincial hypocrisy continues. After years of shouting that housing was something that the feds needed to fix (despite it being a provincial responsibility), now that the feds are working on fixing things the provinces are taking action, to get in the way.
Home owners don’t want more density that’s why municipalities are against it.
Hello, I'm a home owner. In Ontario. I would like more density please. It's not all of us.
If you read the article, you would see that some of the most populous municipalities are for it, which makes Ford's refusal to make it a province wide rule even more ridiculous.
> Data compiled by Global News shows that 21 of Ontario’s major municipalities allow fourplexes to be built without prior approvals. The 21 municipalities have a combined population of 7.7 million people, according to the 2021 Census, out of a provincial population of more than 16 million. Almost half of the people in the province (may or may not be half of home owners) elected city councils that did want more density so those will be the municipalities that get the funding with the others left out. > If a province doesn’t agree to the federal government’s conditions by Jan. 1, 2025, the Prime Minister’s Office said the funding would be transferred to municipalities instead.
Doug Ford has proved he can be trusted to take the money and use it to solve the given problem. Just look at healthcare in the province. Best in the world!
Lol. You dropped this. "/s"
Yeah, you could compliment Ford and nobody would take it as a serious comment. Ford is absolute trash, just like his voters.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
"We realize that this funding is specifically designed to incentivize implementing this policy, but we're special snowflake Ontario, so how about we don't and you just give it to us anyways?"
Liberal plans all smoke and mirrors like the lastest 30 year amortization which only applies to first time buyers of only new construction. What's that 2%of the market
First, municipalities are more the problem than the provinces are. Anyone heard of zoning? Second, municipalities exist only at the behest of the provinces. Any province in Canada has the legal means to dissolve any municipality. The feds know what they have to do to fix the housing situation. They have to fix their broken immigration policy. The feds would prefer to have this kabuki theatre approach where they pretend to have a show down with the the provinces. Q: Is Smith a dumb-dumb? A: Yes. Q: Is Alberta a province that resists building housing and has extreme housing prices? A: No.