Die Cap and Trade!

Cap and trade legislation in the US has already passed the House and is now going on to the Senate. It had a ton of trouble just barely passing the House in a very watered-down form. I'll actually be happy if it gets defeated. Cap and trade is a waste of time and money. A carbon tax combined with income tax rebates is much better for the environment, people and the economy. I hope that in the not-so-far future, Stéphane Dion's Green Shift makes a comeback in Canadian politics. The one who pioneers it will have to explain it much better so that we will better understand how it will help us. Our taxes get cut, while our emissions get reduced. Everyone wins except big polluters.

Other than maybe Jason in Friday the 13th, nothing has supposedly died and come back to life more often than climate legislation and carbon cap-and-trade. A year ago, thanks in part to fierce opposition from business interests led by the Chamber of Commerce, the cap-and-trade bill cosponsored by Henry Waxman and Edward Markey just barely passed the House of Representatives, 219 to 212. As Eric Pooley writes in his great new book The Climate War, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had to wield a mean whip to get her members in line for the vote. (Just eight Republicans voted for Waxman-Markey, and 44 Democrats opposed it.)

Read more at Time Magazine.

Canada Needs High Speed Rail

Heather Mallick writes about the sale of the high speed rail lines in the UK and that Canada needs high speed rail. With high speed rail, everyone wins. It creates jobs, both temporary and permanent and will protect the environment. It's a faster way of travel than the car, yet it doesn't come with all the inconveniences of flying. he UK shouldn't be selling off its high speed rail lines. They will prove useful for the future. It's much better if passenger rail transport is watched over by the government. That's as long as it does a good job. In Canada, Via Rail has gone through a series of heavy budget cuts which forced it to close down many train routes. With many countries seeing the benefits of high speed rail, it is obvious that it's the way of the future. Canada must invest now. By the way, Canada is the only country of the G8 that doesn't have a high speed rail system and one of four in he G20 that doesn't have a high speed rail system. (h/t)

It is ironic to hear Brits bemoaning the possible sale of their one rather dishy fast railway track – High Speed One from St Pancras International to the Channel Tunnel – to a bunch of retired Canadian teachers. It's too late for Britain now. Any society that would allow the sale of its phone, electricity, gas and water to private companies, particularly foreigners, decades ago and then complain about losing Cadbury chocolates... well, your values are skewed.

So are Canadian values, which is where the irony comes in. We'd love it if our teachers bought a high-speed rail line from us. If we had one to sell, which we don't.

Read more at the Guardian.

Disregarding Own Advice

Once again, Prime Minister Harper has shown complete disregard for the facts and his government's advice. In last year's G20 meetings, world leaders agreed to phase out fossil fuel subsidies. In the spring, the Department of Finance recommended that Canada should end tax breaks for big oil and big gas. Last year, we promised to end the wasteful subsidies to big corporations. We are running a deficit. We cannot afford to keep giving presents to multinationals that make billions of dollars in profits each year. Companies make enough money as is. Why don't we keep some of our money... for ourself? These subsidies promote pollution and are a waste of money. They should be ended immediately.

TORONTO — Prime Minister Stephen Harper rejected advice from his officials to eliminate tax incentives for the oil patch on a weekend that saw the world's most powerful leaders disdain fresh attempts to combat climate change in favour of fighting deepening deficits.

The G20 countries promised at their last meeting in Pittsburgh to examine where governments were subsidizing fossil fuel consumption and production and then move to eliminate those subsidies.

Read more at CTV News.

Wow! Is that really it?

What came out of the summit this week was that all countries must cut there deficit in half by 2013. This is not such a big target for any of these countries. As this year's deficit is the one with the big stimulus bills costing billions and billions of dollars. This big increase in spending is stooping after this year, so deficits across the world will shrink for the 2011 budget, and as long as a new recession does not come along, they do not have to try to reduce the deficit any more. Even the U.S. has it easy. Obama has the biggest deficit in the U.S. history, because of all the things he has proposed. By 2013 as long as a double dip recession does not come he is out of the clear too. The only thing anyone here may have a problem is with stabilizing GDP to debt ratio by 2016. This is easy for us since by then we will have a surplus (projected) or at least a very sustainable deficit by then. The U.S. has this problem: their deficit in 2016 will be is 700 billion (projected). This deficit is not going to get them out of the clear for this target. This target I find will be a challenge for only some countries. But the question I would like to ask the leaders "is this initiative worth a billion dollars?" I don't think a billion dollars in extra spending is worth an initiative that many may not have a problem with. The more I think about it the more I feel like this entire thing was a disaster, because nothing really concrete and big came out and I find , and was a complete waste of money. I hope the next one will be done better.

Look at Canadian deficits here

Look at U.S deficit here

G8 G20 what good will it do

The G8 and G20 meetings have ended, but really this will be the same as Copenhagen: the leaders will make promises and forget about it the next day. I support having these summits, but really if we are spending 1 billion dollars then at least actually stay true to your commintements. Because I want to know if this summit is worth the controversy, cost and protesters. If the leaders want to make the G8 and G20 work they have to make the people see more than fake lakes and empty promises. I want something done, but with Stephen Harper not even caring about the environment nothing real is going to happen. So I am still hoping that are leader keeps his promise on spending monety on helath in Africa and keeps the pressure on North Korea and Iran.