So then if it has so much support then Carney is doing the wrong thing IN COPYING A CONSERVATIVE POLICY?
Carney platform promises $130B in new spending, deficits until 2029 :Heart Attack:
- Thread starter DesRicardo
- Start date
His budget proposal is criminal. He is spending more than Justin.
Also, he is a China asset.
There has been a long debate between climatologists about whether we are on a path for high or extremely high global temperatures.
Michael Mann, of hockey stick fame, and Gavin Schmidt of NOAA, believe that we are committed to 2ºC warming and headed to around 3ºC warming total and James Hansen and others think we are headed towards 4ºC warming by the end of the century but likely it will peak at around 8ºC. CO2 emissions are still increasing, sulphur particles from diesel shipping has accelerated warming and we are close to hitting more tipping points.
The biggest immediate worry is hitting one of the bigger tipping points and seeing the AMOC shutdown. This event is hard to model, its a bit more chaotic. But if and when it happens it'll be a massive quick climate change that will make eastern Canada way colder. Essentially, Greenland melt is creating a 'cold blob' in the North Atlantic that could shut down the massive AMOC current.
Gavin Schmidt has a great post on the state of the research on this on his site, realclimate.
RealClimate: The AMOC is slowing, it’s stable, it’s slowing, no, yes, …
RealClimate: There's been a bit of media whiplash on the issue of AMOC slowing lately - ranging from the AMOC being "on the brink of collapse" to it being "more stable than previously thought". AMOC, of course, refers to the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, one of the worlds major...
www.realclimate.org
And a good summary of the Hansen vs Mann debate is here.
The disagreement between two climate scientists that will decide our future
Is reaching net zero emissions by 2050 enough to halt warming? One leading scientist says no.
theconversation.com
Right on queue you mention Harper.
You do know you're obsessed right?
All your hypocritical rantings ultimately bring you back to Harper...every time...without fail!
You should seek some help...seriously. It's pointless having a discussion with someone stuck in a different decade.
The message you're sending is that the Paris accord is a failure.
Why are you mentioning "per capita" when it comes to global climate? Are you one of those people who thinks pollution doesn't travel the globe?
btw why do you pivot to "per capita" when you want to peddle your narrative about emissions, but don't use per capita when you talk about Canada's GDP per capita compared to other G7 countries?
Could it be you like cherries and that's why you pick them?
National tariffs that impact trade relations and the economy are not outside of parliament.
Foreign policy and defence are not outside of parliament.
You support a government that is purposely acting undemocratically. If it was a Conservative government doing this you would enlist your children to fight in a revolution
Stop peddling misinformation as a means to justify your biased views.
If that's what you seriously believe, then why wasn't the carbon tax suspended during the pandemic? In fact, it kept increasing. Even in a pandemic they justified it because of the importance of "fighting climate change."
Now like a miracle, on the eve of an election, it's been scrapped.
When a person is brainwashed they can't think critically about things. So?
You have either not been paying attention, or the Liberal brainwashing machine is working on you.
This was going on well before Trudeau resigned...
Atlantic Liberal MPs press Trudeau for rural carbon tax carve-out
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberal-atlantic-mps-pitches-carbon-tax-rural-carve-out-1.6966939
They have fooled you into believing the climate was so important that you accepted & defended the carbon tax even while it increased during a pandemic. Now they've convinced you that the economy is more important and they've scrapped it.
Note: when people are brainwashed they don't know they're brainwashed.
They are executive decisions made by the ruling government in day to day operations outside of the parliament.
The ruling government sets tariff rates through regulations under the authority of laws already passed by Parliament (Customs Tariff Act).
Tariff changes are a response, not brand-new legislation every time.
Can be debated or questioned in parliament, but they are still decisions made by the ruling government alone.
Stop engaging in mental gymnastics to conjure up processes that dont exist.
Wrong. Parliament is where these issues are discussed in our democratic system.
And know that the next time you refer to someone like Trump as being a Fascist dictator I'll remind you of your hypocrisy.
Yes they can be questioned in parliament.
But as I said earlier (and made slight edits to my post), they are executive decisions under the provisions of pre-existing laws.
Parliament being prorogued while a new leader is selected is also completely valid and within the rules of governance.
Just because it wasn't convenient for your side does not mean it was wrong.
Trump on the other hand is fascist because he ignores court orders, denies people constitutional rights.
You should make slight edits to your morals and ideology but I digress.
Funny how you think one is a fascist and the other is not.
Also funny that you spread misinformation about Trump to peddle your obvious bias and to justify supporting a multi-national fascist by definition and your measure.
That's how brainwashing works. And it's worked very well on you. The Liberal party is indeed good at something based on the work they've done on you.
You call Carney of all people a fascist, which is laughable while defending a fascist convicted felon and adjudicated rapist. lmfao.
What's worse you engage in mental gymnastics and come up with a non-response, to my comment.
It may have something to do with you failing to succeed in making an argument and face palming a few too many times.
Not saying that China are any saints in this respect. However, when you take the total amount of emissions since 1990 then China are still second to the USA:
That is why it was so important for both the USA and China to immediately address the intensity of their greenhouse gas emissions.
But pulling out of the Paris Accord by Trump in his previous tenure and currently, only goes to show that the USA are not taking Climate Change seriously, and are infatuated with those silly tariffs. It is a much bigger difference if you go back from pre-industrialization times to presently:
Now that Trudeau is no longer in office can you explain why Carney has not only closed that gap, but pulled ahead of Pee Pee?
Remember that prior to the 2015 Elections harper had the lowest approval ratings as compared to all the opposition leaders at that time. Even Elizabeth May was ahead of him. Both Trudeau and Mulcair were far more popular than him. When a leader has had around a decade in office, most Canadians want change!!
So are you then saying that Harper did nothing wrong in his decade in charge?
Pee Pee who released his platform after Carney did so, seems to try and copy Carney's platform policies though pretending that he will be "more fiscally responsible"!!
Yet Pee Pee who says that he will also address The Climate Change has nothing on his platform to tackle it!!
Why is Pee Pee's budget also about spending big then? His budget wants to release big bucks to the elitists and crumbs to the rest of the Canadians.
Then he is a criminal, according to your definition!!
Why are your feathers always ruffled when Harper is mentioned in the relevant context?
Just go take your medications if you cannot debate in a civil manner. But of course if Pee Pee does not win the elections then you will no doubt be shedding a lot of crocodile tears for ages!!
You are comparing apples with crumbs when trying to log together Carbon Emissions versus GDP!!
When you have a population like China that is more than 4 times that of the USA, then you expect the Chinese to be on a level playing field to the USA with respect to human CO2 emissions?
Do you think that The Paris Accord will not take the Per Capita level of emissions when comparing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions by different nations around the Globe?
Look at the per capita Emissions since the mid 18 Century and who are mainly responsible for the Climate Change:
Per capita CO₂ emissions
Carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions from fossil fuels and industry. Land-use change is not included.
ourworldindata.org
