this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2023
11 points (78.9% liked)

Canada

7106 readers
260 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Regions


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social & Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Not an issue for me. 17 cents more in 2030? I'm sure the greedy corps would have pushed the fuel price by a lot more in 7 year's time.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

17 cents? That's just normal price hike in the last 6 month.

It'll go down 4 cents then up 10 cents, rinse and repeat every 2 weeks πŸ˜“

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

And that's just what the Parliamentary Budget Office predicted. The article also has another prediction:

"There's a zero per cent chance it would be worse than what the Parliamentary Budget Office is saying," said Wolinetz, who predicts a cost impact of under 10 cents a litre by 2030.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

sounds good to me.

Conservatives will oppose it because they live in a fantasy world view fed to them by people working for oil companies.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Good. Some people will try to phrase this as a bad thing because yes, you will pay more (eventually, anyway -- article says they don't expect "any real bite until around 2025"). But we should be paying more given the environmental damage that burning this fuel causes. We should not be effectively subsidizing oil companies by paying the cost of their negative externalities.

If anything, I think there should be even more than this. We should have Norway style taxation on fuel. They have a massive savings fund that massively dwarfs our own closest equivalent.

[–] ConTheLibrarian 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Also I was reading that the ceiling impact will be ~$0.17/L... and that the actual cost to consumers is expected to be lower.

I have a 40L tank... Gas costing $4 more per fill to help stop the goddamn planet burning up seems worth it to me.

I think the real concern should be if Oil/Gas companies will actually reduce emmisions or just use this as cover to gouge us $0.17 on day 1 and $1.70 on day 1000.

[–] S_204 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's not going to stop the planet from burning unless you (and the rest of us) stop driving as much as we do...

[–] ConTheLibrarian 1 points 1 year ago

Fully agree it won't prevent catastrophe on its own. I'm a huge proponent of better public transit and more walkable cities.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

More incentive for people to look at hybrids or electric for their next car.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Why put such a shitty spin on it? We're developing clean fuel tech -- focus on that, mention the increase in costs, and spin it as a way to accelerate the transition to electric mobility.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I'll just ride my bike more. I'm easily saving $2-6 per errand by using a bike instead of a car.