December 14, 2015

Canadian Taxpayers Federation's 2015 "Alberta Taxpayer Naughty and Nice List"

Paige MacPhersonAlberta CTF Director
Flagging comment from
Andrew, Nathan……congratulations, you are both officially one of comrade Nutleys (Stalins) useful idiots!
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-12-15 19:54:36 -0500
ANDREW STEPHENSON … why yes I can explain it, now try and keep up. Miss MacPherson is showing the “highlights” of the actual report. Now the NDP expanding the sun shine list is a good thing, and they were given credit for it. BUT…the rest of the bullshit they are pulling off, far – far outways this one good deed.
I am glad I could help.
commented 2015-12-15 11:49:59 -0500
Ya nailed it, Mike – the way to describe any Leftist.

I’ll also add Marx, Lenin, Hitler, North Korea’s Gov.‘s, Red China’s Gov.’s, Cuba, Vietnam, What Venezuela had, etc

MIKE KRCHNAK commented 43 mins ago
Andrew, Nathan……congratulations, you are both officially one of comrade Nutleys (Stalins) useful idiots!
commented 2015-12-15 11:06:35 -0500
Mike Krchnak,

Please go read the release, tell me what’s #3 on the four items of the “nice” list, and could you suggest a reason why Ms. McPherson leaves this, and only this, item out?
commented 2015-12-15 11:01:00 -0500
Andrew, Nathan……congratulations, you are both officially one of comrade Nutleys (Stalins) useful idiots!
commented 2015-12-15 10:53:59 -0500
Nathan W, no one disagrees that a carbon tax reduces emissions. However, it doesn’t do this automatically, obviously. First, all consumers will be paying higher prices, this much is obvious. Higher food prices, higher travel prices, higher electricity prices… it really is a tax on everything. Second, in order to actually reduce emissions, corporations and consumers alike have to foot another bill. One that may not be worth the supposed ‘necessary’ savings in emissions, and may not be affordable for some consumers whatsoever. That’s another thing. Some people are very low emissions producers already (drive small cars, use little electricity, but they too will have to pay extra for everything and won’t be able to practically spend money to reduce emissions. Is it going to magically become more realistic to heat ones home through green energy?
And all of this is done for what is obviously very dubious rationale. Is the temperature really going to change in a positive or negative direction to human actions? Is Alberta’s small impact really worth penalizing ourselves? Are we in any tangible way better off? Do we really have to push the pace this hard to get off or reduce usage of fossil fuels? Will the impact on the economy be far more punishing than it’s worth? Is it even tangible for us cold weather, low wind, low water (remember the glaciers? Yeah I’m betting they’ll pretty much melt away regardless), non-geothermal resource Albertans to push green energy and get off of carbon burning heat and electricity sources? Will anyone ever invest in the real green technology (for efficiency), nuclear? Is global warming even bad in any way, especially for us Albertans (more growth in every feasible sector due to longer growing times, longer construction seasons, more efficient [less heat cost] industry, better agriculture, more forestry growth [CO2 has a double positive impact])?
So what if we produce “less emissions”. What does that really prove or accomplish?
commented 2015-12-15 10:53:05 -0500
I read this story on some Media Party sites, the lefty/progressive/Marxists sure love to hate the CTF. Like the delusional dirty ticks that infest this site, the programmed-robot – goose-stepping- trained monkeys lie and make stuff up about the CTF in their ‘comments’ and it’s all okayed by the Media Party commissars as part of their commie agenda. It’s only the truth-speakers that get censored by the Media Party.
The non-partisan CTF works for the Canadian taxpayer and they’re doing a bang-up job. Help them out with some funding…
commented 2015-12-15 10:28:06 -0500
You missed #3 on the “nice” list … the NDP government.
commented 2015-12-15 08:05:07 -0500
I thought right wingers respected economists. Most economists agree that cap and trade is more efficient than a carbon tax, but that a carbon tax is more politically feasible, and moreover both will reduce emissions.

Why not speak with some economists before posting your poorly informed opinions about the effects of a carbon tax. Here’s the idea: If it’s more expensive you will consume less of it (switch to green energy or become more efficient).

I thought right wingers were accustomed to lecturing people about the simplistic stuff in ECON 101, but this one’s pretty cut and dried. A carbon tax will reduce emissions.
commented 2015-12-14 22:49:15 -0500
My thinking is that all the dippers should have their vehicles impounded until the next election. Let them experience a bit of the hardships that they want to impose on the rest of us.
commented 2015-12-14 20:23:10 -0500
Great list. I love how the list is very impartial, where it praises the good NDP politicians that did not screw up. And at the same time, the list gave it to the idiot PC leader for stepping down.