The chief avenue the group advocates to cut global warming is to force governments around the world to place an ever
growing tax on carbon emissions as a means to force change in energy policy.
Not exact matches
However, while we are focused
on helping the economy
grow, the NDP wants a $ 21 billion
carbon tax which would cripple our economy and put Canadians out of work.
A concise, clear summary of what we can tell of how British Columbia's
carbon tax is working, 6 years
on, from Sightline: http://daily.sightline.org/2014/03/11/all-you-need-to-know-about-bcs-
carbon-
tax-shift-in-five-charts/ (Where is the Planet3.0 for policy, or is Planet3.0 the Planet3.0 for policy, and if so, how do we carve out a space for this aspect of the site to
grow?)
Oddly, the second highest ranked option — focused
on clean energy innovation and deployment — was presented to the panel of economists as being accompanied by a low but
growing carbon tax, as part of the proposed policy design.
Canadians should measure proposal like Redford's «40:40» — referring to a 40 per cent cut in the
carbon - emission limit and a $ 40 - per - ton
tax on production above that limit — by whether overall emissions will actually stop
growing.
But the upside is three-fold: (i) your
tax reduction or dividend check will offset much, perhaps more than 100 %, of those price increases; (ii) you'll be able to minimize your
tax bite by cutting down
on fuel usage (e.g., shortening those country drives, buying locally -
grown produce, purchasing «green power» from wind and solar cells); and (iii) Americans» combined behavior changes in response to the
carbon tax will go a long way toward protecting the climate and averting the cataclysmic consequences of unchecked global warming.