26 comments

  1. What study? The Ukraine/Russian conflict has increased food costs substantially. You think the carbon tax had zero effect? It’s the same scenario to a slight lesser degree

  2. The news anchor is basing it on the assertion of 1 expert ! 😂😂😂😂 There are tons of studies that show how the increase in taxes contribute to inflation. It doesn’t have to be a “carbon” specific tax. There are studies on increase of payroll taxes. 😂

  3. According to Mr Duncan, correlation = causation. If Mr Duncan had an actual study showing data to back up his premise instead of “if you talk to anyone” it would be much more believable.

  4. the PBO report doesnt include all factors affected by the tax…only the direct dollars collected vs paid out by the gov. It completely ignors that fact that costs to businesses have increases significantly, and the only option is to pass that added cost on to consumers

  5. I can assure you I’m not getting any rebate or money back here in Ontario. So I’m falling further back every month.

  6. Even IF you got more back in carbon tax then you paid, (you don’t, the study referenced is only about direct payments to carbon tax cherry picking data pretty much) how does this help? it means the Gov is going in to debt to give your money back to you, causing more inflation as its devaluing our money, where does he think this money comes from? Honestly this anchor sounded ridiculous in his arguments and possibly delusional.

  7. Government handing out more money to cover their extra taxes means increased supply of money in the system , which means inflation…that’s how inflation took off…we need news anchors that talk on Economics to know some basics about economics…but then again our PM does care about monetary policy…😂

    1. Like an ex with expensive tastes during the relationship and a percentage of your paycheck after the divorce..

  8. The carbon tax is justinflation. It’s a tax within a tax within a tax. They just pass on the cost. Plain and simple.

  9. Can someone please tell me how giving the government more of my hard earned money can magically lower greenhouse gases? Other then making me so poor that I can’t afford to live?

  10. In terms of the environment, it is necessary to re-evaluate Climate Change efforts. So far, the climate change movement has not prevented one square meter of land from eroding, saved the life of one person or animal, nor is responsible for the removal of one single piece of garbage from the roadside. The vastly expensive effort has yielded no results.

    On the other hand, there are 200 years of environmental damage from industrialization which needs to be restored. Countless species have either been heavily damaged or destroyed. The climate change movement has taken so many resources away from these tangible problems and their feasible solutions. The concept of climate change has become so big, most other environmental problems are sadly neglected. So not just for the sake of the economy, the environment needs the government to downsize climate change spending and efforts. We need to concentrate on feasible solutions to tangible problems.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.