Calgary - July 3, 2014 - As the next federal election approaches, I can't help but think global warming/climate change/climate disruption will be a big issue. I also think the next Prime Minister may be eager to pass some type of global warming/climate change/climate disruption legislation to change the weather... like a carbon tax. In fact, Liberal leader Justin Trudeau said he was in favour of it the other day. It may astound people who know me, but I'm all in.
I read about global warming/climate change/climate disruption daily and one thing I've learned from the experts from the global green movement (aka BIG Green) is the best way to change the climate and ensure the weather is at its optimum is to tax carbon (aka CO2).
Therefore, I propose direct human taxation of carbon, as opposed to taxing it at the source. Instead of carbon taxing businesses and industry, we carbon tax people, because it's people who are responsible for the increase in carbon emissions because we consume things. I know this because David Suzuki said so while he was visiting one of his many homes or travelling on one of his diesel buses. That means if we all stopped buying and consuming the planet would no longer be in peril, so why blame and tax business and industry?
So, you might ask, how do we carbon tax people? Simple, it's done when you do your taxes.
I propose the federal government add a number of small boxes to our tax forms that will say: 'Please check the appropriate box if you wish to contribute $100/$200/$500/insert amount here to save the planet.’ With about 15 million people paying income taxes in Canada, those contributions will add up to a fair chunk of change every year to ensure perfect planetary temperature... whatever that is. (Personal note: Anything above fu*#ing brutal in mid January is good for me.)
Now, I can hear the calls of how unfair this system will be. Many people won't contribute anything at all. Yes, that's true, because a majority of people think the whole global warming/climate change/climate disruption hysteria is complete BS. I also think a lot of people who religiously believe in global warming/climate change/climate disruption will pass on the contribution because they talk the talk, but their need for big cars, cell phones, big homes, electricity, food and all the comforts of modern living outweigh their need for government weather modification. Some people call that hypocrisy, but who am I to judge? Also, what could possibly be unfair about people having the right to choose to do or not do something? After all, being anti pro choice is wrong... right? I also think many people will oppose a voluntary contribution to fight global warming/climate change/climate disruption because, like socialism, they think fighting it must be shared misery.
I'm eager to hear what you think of my plan? If you believe the world is in imminent danger be prepared to give generously, because what you don't give voluntarily the government may take by force.