Skip to content

Carbon tax is not what you think

I am delighted to note that James Perras has at last rested his case Cochrane Eagle letter to the editor "Distorted Carbon Tax debate," May 17.

I am delighted to note that James Perras has at last rested his case Cochrane Eagle letter to the editor "Distorted Carbon Tax debate," May 17. The adage ‘hard cases make bad law’ counsels us to consider the general, rather than rely on our specific personal circumstances to determine equity of outcome. Mr Perras is wrong to equate dislike for the implementation of the Carbon Tax with ‘whining’, and doubles-down when asserting that those earning above an arbitrary threshold are leading a more carbon-intensive lifestyle. Mr Perras is being disingenuous when using the example of a medical procedure. This is not an "apples v apples" comparison which, as an economist, he should know. Healthcare, among other services, is provided out of general taxation (revenue tax) and is not hypothecated: I do not get a rebate if I don’t visit my family physician. Mr Perras and I do agree on the concept that ‘polluter pays’. If I wish to drive a premium-grade gas guzzler, this is my choice and I will pay for that choice at the pump. The stated aim of the Carbon Tax is to wean us off an "undesirable" social behaviour (carbon fuel consumption) - ‘To encourage Albertans to reduce carbon pollution from their cars and homes (https://www.alberta.ca/climate-carbon-pricing.aspx )’: we should be taxed accordingly. This type of tax is known as a restrictive tax (like alcohol, tobacco) and serves two purposes: to raise revenue, and control consumption (social behavior). If I am rewarded with an ‘income distribution windfall’ that is ‘more than adequate’ to cover my expenditure, where is the incentive to change my consumption? So no, Mr Perras, the Carbon Tax is not some benign reflection of a civilized society, but the action of a weak government lacking the moral fibre to introduce a consumption-based tax that would impact its voter base. Restrictive consumption tax + income-based tax rebate = income redistribution, introduced by what is effectively a progressive revenue tax. If the NDP wants to lead and drive societal change via taxation, we all need skin in the game. David Cooper

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks