A new study by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives in British Columbia finds that the wealthy and corporations who emit the most carbon will be hurt the least by the carbon tax instituted in British Columbia on July 1st, 2008. Who will be hurt the most? The poor. While the first year of the tax doesn’t hurt or benefit anyone, beginning in 2009, low-income groups will get hammered by the carbon tax, paying more than their fair share than other income groups.
Read More: www.theprogressivemind.info

The liberal elite that continue to push the global warming myth on anyone who will listen, as I’ve explained in the past, are only out for for your money and control over your lives.  Any possible technology that promises to solve the so-called cause of anthropogenic global warming, namely greenhouse gas emissions, are dismissed by the climate change alarmists even before they see the light of day.  And as much as the alarmists blame big oil for a lack of real innovation in renewable energy, they too are just as …

Here’s a great analysis of the carbon tax instituted in British Columbia back on July 1st of this year. While the tax is designed to give some of the revenue back to the citizens, it nets out to about $40 per household. However, as the tax increases over time, there are no provisions to increase the amount people receive in credits.
Read More: www.canada.com

The European Union is forcing airlines to buy carbon credits beginning in 2012. Now how is this socialist, you ask? The plan doesn’t simply apply to countries under the 12-star flag of the European Union. It applies to all airlines, regardless of nationality, to participate in the program if they take off or land at an airport inside the EU. This plan is expected to cost airlines upwards of four billion dollars annually.
Read More: blogs.takepart.com

This is just the kind of shifty tactic I can see a tax proponent using to manipulate polling numbers.  A true study on the human psyche.  If the recent elections in Canada were any indication, its citizens aren’t interested in a carbon tax.  However, this article from the Globe and Mail takes a different approach.  A poll was taken that rephrased the question to make the carbon tax seem, well, more like a basket of bunnies than a hungry leopard.  2000 people surveyed were asked if they supported a tax …

Former President Bill “I did not have…relations with that woman” Clinton praised the carbon tax in British Columbia, calling Gordon Campbell’s efforts to fight climate change “the greatest economic generator you could embrace.”  Of course, what liberal has viewed a tax that he/she didn’t like?  Mr. Clinton is confused.  Taking money out of the pockets of corporations and individuals alike isn’t an economic generator.  Taxation is an economic depressant and only bolsters the treasuries of countries that enact and increase them.  And if President Clinton was such a proponent of …

I’m glad I don’t live in Canada.  I’m sure it’s a beautiful country, but its leaders are like Al Gore times 10.  In an exchange between Stephane Dion and Richard Madan recently, Dion was asked if he would implement his carbon tax plan even in the face of a recession.  His response was quite standoffish, refusing to call his plan a carbon tax but rather the Green Shift.  Dion refused to delay his Green “carbon tax” Shift due to a recession because it would be good for the economy.
Read More: www.stephentaylor.ca/2008/10/dion-will-implement-carbon-tax-even-if-theres-a-recession/

Liberals in Canada are playing word shuffle games with the citizens of that country. Terms like “revenue-neutral” flutter about, giving taxpayers a false idea while raking in billions for the Canadian government. Some people assume that if a carbon tax is revenue neutral, each tax dollar collected will be returned dollar-for-dollar to the individual paying the tax and that the government sees no net income from the proceeds. This couldn’t be further from the truth. Like many other government tax-and-give programs, this is nothing more than …

You thought the new bailout bill was designed to only save Wall Street and not Green Street.  Think again.  According to this NewsBusters article, the global warming activists have had their input into the new $810 billion bailout package.  So let’s dive into the details to see just how the climate change crowd has infiltrated a bill that was, for all intents and purposes, designed to keep the economy afloat by rescuing big financial institutions from failure.
One provision in the bill provides preferential tax treatment to publicly-traded institutions that engage …

In 1991, Norway enacted a punishing carbon tax - $65 per ton of greenhouse gas emitted.  The result?  Carbon emissions have risen 15% since that time.  The country blames the increase on growth but, with gasoline at or near $10 per gallon, it seems no price is too much to pay for personal transportation.  If you think this can’t happen in the United States, think again.  From the article:

Although the tax forced Norway’s oil and gas sector to become among the greenest in the world, soaring energy prices led to …