January 18, 2017

Calgary’s Omega Properties announces increase for tenants due to NDP carbon tax

Holly NicholasRebel Commentator
 

The NDP told us not to worry about the trickle down effects of their carbon tax, but now many businesses—from trucking companies to daycares—have announced added costs that will be passed on to Albertans.

Omega Properties based in Calgary are charging their tenants $17 per month on top of rent to make up for the costs of the Alberta NDP’s carbon tax brought in on January 1.

The charges will be applied to all new leases on of any one of their 250 unit properties. It will also be added to all renewed leases once they’ve expired.

Omega Properties says they aren’t entitled to a rebate like tenants are, so they figure the cost won’t break the bank for residents since the average rebate for a single person is $200.

If you’re following the math, this means some tenants will end up paying their entire rebate toward the fees that landlords say will be put into a green fund in order to make their building more efficient.

So now we know that for some Albertans, a rebate will barely cover the increased costs for gassing up a vehicle, let alone the extra fees for natural gas and the new costs that many businesses have confirmed they’ll be implementing due to the tax.

The Alberta government insisted there wouldn’t be a trickle down effect from their carbon tax, but we’re already seeing additional expenses getting passed on to consumers and it’s only the third week of January!

Forget the trickle. At this point, I think it’s more realistic to expect a downpour of added costs in the coming days and weeks.

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2017-01-19 20:40:41 -0500
“Dale Warren commented 4 hours ago
Stephenson . . . ALL the evidence for Gorebull Warming is based on computer models and the NOAA adjusting historical data . . . not Science!
The reality is in the last twenty years if the so-called changes were rounded off to the nearest DEGREE . . . the graphs would be a FLAT LINE ! ! !
There is NO reliable, affordable alternative energy . . . as the folks in Ontar-i-owe now know! "

At least there’s evidence in support of climate change models. The denier side seems to involve, mostly, telling us that you don’t like models, and then providing no alternative evidence whatsoever. This illustrates a profound ignorance of the scientific method, which involves the best model. The various climate change models (the result is very replicable between models and researchers) may not be perfect, but they’re better than the complaining that the deniers bring to the table.

That’s why you don’t round to the nearest degree. The changes are not quite so coarse. The difference between interglacial and glacial is only about 3 degrees, so you can see why “rounding” might be deceptive.

I have solar panels on my roof. They’re pretty reliable. I don’t live in Ontario.
commented 2017-01-19 20:36:13 -0500
“David White commented 5 hours ago
ANDREW….I thought the purpose of the tax was to reduce carbon emissions with the goal of controlling climate and saving the planet, which it won’t. The primary goal is to lie and bilk money out of us. Call back in a few years. I predict your bank account will be as empty as your head.

ANDREW….. Do tell how reducing CO2 levels in the atmosphere from almost dangerously low levels now will help us? When sun spot activity crawls to a low level and the earth rapidly cools, what shall we do then? I guess I didn’t give our politicians enough credit. By not exploiting the oil sands we can just throw a match in and sit around the camp fire.

ANDREW…..grow a brain. "

The intent is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. If you consider it a cash grab, that’s fine, you’re allowed an opinion, although I doubt that argument will gain much traction among the government, or those who prioritize the environment.

For most ecosystems, carbon dioxide levels don’t become limiting until about 100ppm. We’re currently four times that. Generally speaking plant growth is limited by growing season, being eaten, or nutrient limitations, typically phosphorus and sometimes nitrogen. It’s only when these limitations are removed, as in a greenhouse, where that becomes a limit. In the wild, “Carbon fertilization” has been observed in only a few locations and is actually something more of an artifact of water limitations. In most locations climate change obscures the effect, although it’s possible to deconvolute the variables and determine that it’s generally not an influence in most climates.

The sunspot cycle has been declining for a century. By about 1970, we were adding enough carbon dioxide to overwhelm the slight natural cooling. Natural climate change is a lot slower than anthropogenic influences; a new ice age will be a 50,000 year process, not 50.

The name calling tells us you know you’re not arguing from a position of strength. An argument should be able to stand on its own merit.
commented 2017-01-19 18:17:21 -0500
Not to forget the NDP increased the minimal wage as well . Now with the added carbon tax the NDP is making it harder to do business for the little guy , and just wait once prince trudope ads his federal carbon tax it just keeps getting better .
commented 2017-01-19 16:14:13 -0500
Stephenson . . . ALL the evidence for Gorebull Warming is based on computer models and the NOAA adjusting historical data . . . not Science!
The reality is in the last twenty years if the so-called changes were rounded off to the nearest DEGREE . . . the graphs would be a FLAT LINE ! ! !
There is NO reliable, affordable alternative energy . . . as the folks in Ontar-i-owe now know!
commented 2017-01-19 15:29:02 -0500
ANDREW….I thought the purpose of the tax was to reduce carbon emissions with the goal of controlling climate and saving the planet, which it won’t. The primary goal is to lie and bilk money out of us. Call back in a few years. I predict your bank account will be as empty as your head.

ANDREW….. Do tell how reducing CO2 levels in the atmosphere from almost dangerously low levels now will help us? When sun spot activity crawls to a low level and the earth rapidly cools, what shall we do then? I guess I didn’t give our politicians enough credit. By not exploiting the oil sands we can just throw a match in and sit around the camp fire.

ANDREW…..grow a brain.
commented 2017-01-19 14:51:40 -0500
“Robert Hewgill commented 3 hours ago

Might I suggest looking into solar panels?

You can suggest it, but I won’t be doing it. I want constant power, not fading power. The well is 220 power, as is the close dryer, oven, air compressor, and welder. You can’t weld with fading power, and if there’s one thing that is hard on an electric motor that shortens its life, it weak power input. "

Hmm. I wonder if anybody has ever invented any sort of voltage regulator to address that very issue. Oh, wait, they have.

“David White commented 2 hours ago
ANDREW STEPHENSON blurted….”Of course, installing such a system would have the unintended consequence of reducing your carbon emissions, which means….the tax did its job.

No you idiot, unless the job of the carbon tax is solely to extort money from the serfs for unchecked spending by the federal and provincial politburos we are stuck with"

This is going to sound really circular, and that’s because it is. Apparently, though, you’re so full of partisan vitriol to have missed such an obvious point, which is that if the stated goal of the tax is to reduce carbon emissions, and the tax pushes you into using a low-emission off grid generation system, then … your emissions have been reduced, meeting its primary goal. All the name calling in the world (which seems to be all the opposition has these days) doesn’t change this blindingly obvious conclusion.
commented 2017-01-19 14:12:08 -0500
Just a note to all those unionized public service bureaucrats, your union political arm NDP will leave a lot of destruction in their wake after they are kicked to the curb. And you can be assured your time of reckoning will be at the forefront of that reset. The time is now long past for spending reduction to be done with a scalpel, the next time spending reduction will be done with a chainsaw, and seeing as you were quite happy to sit smugly and watch Albertans suffer we will be happy to return the favour when it’s your turn
commented 2017-01-19 12:49:26 -0500
ANDREW STEPHENSON blurted…."Of course, installing such a system would have the unintended consequence of reducing your carbon emissions, which means….the tax did its job.

No you idiot, unless the job of the carbon tax is solely to extort money from the serfs for unchecked spending by the federal and provincial politburos we are stuck with. I thought the job of the tax was to control the climate and save the earth. Were we LIED to? We end up broke, and the climate churns along on its own terms. Are you that naiive sucker?

LLOYD NOLAN….thanks for the revelation…those three ducks could easily be lined up at some point….I’ll have to keep an eye on their itinerary.

HARLEY MCCARTNEY….HA HA HA. Before long it WILL be Dec 31
commented 2017-01-19 12:08:08 -0500
Andrew Stephenson commented 1 hour ago
“Robert Hewgill commented 16 hours ago
Every cent will be passed on to the consumer. We’ve been looking at getting one of those stand alone generators and running it off the natural gas, and cutting the power off. Rather than having deliver charges for electricity and gas, we would only have the one for gas. The savings from eliminating the electricity delivery charges should offset the increased use of gas. "

Might I suggest looking into solar panels?

You can suggest it, but I won’t be doing it. I want constant power, not fading power. The well is 220 power, as is the close dryer, oven, air compressor, and welder. You can’t weld with fading power, and if there’s one thing that is hard on an electric motor that shortens its life, it weak power input.
commented 2017-01-19 11:10:33 -0500
“Leviticus 2013 commented 5 hours ago
Watch land and housing prices increase as job opportunities increase in Saskatchewan..
Brad wall protects the last fronttier in Canada.!! "

Maybe. Maybe not. They’re only slightly better off given that their oil is mostly conventional and shale which is slightly more cost effective than Alberta’s bitumen, though their potash sector which is a major player, is still laying off. Right now infrastructure projects are absorbing the surplus labour freed up by labour, but what happens to the thousands of people working on the Regina Bypass when it’s done in a few years?

Brad Wall or not, companies would inevitably be anticipating national rollout of carbon taxes. Sask may not have them … for now, but accountants aren’t stupid and anticipate one going in place in the next few years anyway. Companies consider not just the current political environment, but also future ones. That’s also why Trump’s pro-coal stance won’t go anywhere, nobody’s going to open a coal plant that the next government will close down again a decade out, or why oil sands investment isn’t ever going to regain its former levels as the long term markets are no longer certain, displaced by shale oil and plateauing to declining demand.
commented 2017-01-19 11:00:27 -0500
“Robert Hewgill commented 16 hours ago
Every cent will be passed on to the consumer. We’ve been looking at getting one of those stand alone generators and running it off the natural gas, and cutting the power off. Rather than having deliver charges for electricity and gas, we would only have the one for gas. The savings from eliminating the electricity delivery charges should offset the increased use of gas. "

Might I suggest looking into solar panels? The cost of a solar setup with batteries is a bit more expensive, but no fuel costs, or you can set up for net metering which alleviates the need for a battery bank – sell power to the grid during the day and buy it back at night. If you’re a bit strategic and generate more than you use you may even make a few dollars doing it.

If you insist on going fully off-grid it’s actually worth putting in the solar panels even with backup generator, as the savings from using solar when available (vs the more expensive generator) more than pays for the panels.

Of course, installing such a system would have the unintended consequence of reducing your carbon emissions, which means …. the tax did its job.
commented 2017-01-19 10:24:19 -0500
Hi Jeff /Bill same here. No raises and am I working just for the tax woman Nutley.
when is tax freedom day now December 31.
commented 2017-01-19 09:58:34 -0500
DAVID , for the sake of thrifty ness , if the Ducks were lined up
commented 2017-01-19 09:32:30 -0500
Has the cost of THREE rifle bullets gone up much lately? I still have a bag of pop bottles to turn in. My entire retirement fund. BUT….I have an IDEA
commented 2017-01-19 05:59:39 -0500
Watch land and housing prices increase as job opportunities increase in Saskatchewan..
Brad wall protects the last fronttier in Canada.!!
commented 2017-01-19 00:09:29 -0500
Many Albertans are quite upset here, and I don’t blame you as I have been paying a carbon tax for 7 years. It does nothing for the air. You will get even more upset once you discover the stupid things that the Prov. and Municipalities spend the money on. Its a complete joke.
commented 2017-01-18 23:00:21 -0500
If the minimum wage was frozen and the carbon tax was eliminated tomorrow, do you think that prices would go down? Maybe. But what if it happened in a year or maybe two. Ask an Australian
commented 2017-01-18 22:55:13 -0500
Robert Raymond commented 8 mins ago
Robert Hewgill,

Don’t think you’ll be able to go to a generator exclusively!
I’m sure any forward thinking government such as the ones that we have will be able to pass some kind of law or regulation preventing you from doing so.
If not, they will surely find a way of taxing you to death!

DJBT

They are always looking for ways to tax us. This carbon tax is only going to keep growing, and it will be like the deliver and line charges that are always far more than the actual cost of the electricity. Why not eliminate one whole set of those charges. I’ve found that by buying one of these stand alone generators, and buying one that is more than what you actually need for a house, they only have to run at about an 1/8 to a 1/4 of their actual capacity. When they do that, they consume very little natural gas. Around a 28 KW generator would be plenty
commented 2017-01-18 22:52:23 -0500
Robert Raymond commented 8 mins ago
Robert Hewgill,

Don’t think you’ll be able to go to a generator exclusively!
I’m sure any forward thinking government such as the ones that we have will be able to pass some kind of law or regulation preventing you from doing so.
If not, they will surely find a way of taxing you to death!

DJBT

They are always looking for ways to tax us. This carbon tax is only going to growing, and it be like the deliver and line charges that are always far more than the actual cost of the electricity. Why not eliminate one whole set of those charges. I’ve found that by buying one of these stand alone generators, and buying one that is more than what you actually need for a house, they only have to run at about an 1/8 to a 1/4 of their actual capacity. When they do that, they consume very little natural gas. Around a 28 KW generator would be plenty.
commented 2017-01-18 22:36:08 -0500
Robert Hewgill,

Don’t think you’ll be able to go to a generator exclusively!
I’m sure any forward thinking government such as the ones that we have will be able to pass some kind of law or regulation preventing you from doing so.
If not, they will surely find a way of taxing you to death!

DJBT
commented 2017-01-18 22:32:21 -0500
Why do we trust elected officials.
Most were born with a silver spoon in their mouth ready to feed at the trough.
They feel entitled and live way better than most Canadian but probably not as well as some of our recent immigrants.

Trudeau is not the golden boy, he’s just tin
commented 2017-01-18 22:09:36 -0500
So wait a minute here , ndp your telling us that a carbon dioxide tax will be charged to us end users in say 20 situations , and we get a rebate on one back , but our cost of living will increase on the other 19 separate co2 costing situations or however large one lives

Good work HOLLY , your fanfare is growing
commented 2017-01-18 21:30:00 -0500
Just the start and just the tip of the iceberg of tax inflated costs from this “everything tax” as producers hand the costs down to the end user – My prediction is food, transportation, home heating and rents will see the greatest inflationary spiral from carbon taxing – also seniors, single income parents and struggling working class will feel this the most.

When the struggle to get by becomes impossible, remember this tax is and provides no benefit to the climate the environment or Canadians, it is a raw tax grab by malevolent power structures.
commented 2017-01-18 20:18:31 -0500
She is an idiot if they do not think there will be a trickle down event.
Of course no one I know makes under 52g a year and under 92 as a couple she thinks that 66% of the people earn less than that what world does she live in.
Any here are my costs so far.
Fuel- anticipated increased cost for 2 vehicles – $50.00/mo or $600.00 a year
Heating – just got my first bill it increased from last year by $85.00 so another $700-1000.00

For my business
I expect surcharges on shipping from ups and the likes of 2-3% so I spend $40 000 a year on shipping which will = $1200.00
suppliers will increase their prices 1-3% because of added cost so for my small little business that is another $5000.00 a year
and that does not take into account all the other costs that will increase

Since I run my own business and we are in the middle of a recession I cannot increase my prices so that will come directly off of what I earn at the end of the year which I anticipate will be about $10 000.00

So at the end of the day this carbon tax will cost me personally about $15000.00 or more. How soon can we get these idiots out of here.
commented 2017-01-18 20:07:39 -0500
For Notley to even make such an assertion in the first place what beyond ridiculous. How could she control every company in the province?
commented 2017-01-18 19:59:18 -0500
Great summary of down stream economics. Normally it should be to the positive, but with the Non-Democratic Party it is to the negative because they hate their electorate. I have already experienced two carbon hits to my budget, which I have taken out on two of my monthly charitable contributions to cover the cost with a letter is is strictly due to carbon extortion. Sadly, I must say. I have some more charitable contributions to sacrifice, before sacrificing my life style. Something the Non-Democrats of today do not understand, while the Christian New Democrats of the past did: Knowles, Douglas, GRANT NOTLEY. I would bet all would be adversarial to this government because it is anti-people, but pro self aggrandizement.

Broken record time. Get involved in the municipal elections. Alberta’s mid-terms.
commented 2017-01-18 19:26:00 -0500
It’s okay everyone , Notley will have no trouble, that is what matters. Us peasants do not need luxuries like food and clothing and such.
commented 2017-01-18 18:40:38 -0500
Every cent will be passed on to the consumer. We’ve been looking at getting one of those stand alone generators and running it off the natural gas, and cutting the power off. Rather than having deliver charges for electricity and gas, we would only have the one for gas. The savings from eliminating the electricity delivery charges should offset the increased use of gas.
commented 2017-01-18 18:22:30 -0500
Luckily all those unionized civil servants are still getting their pay raises to absorb the, union political arm, NDP carbon tax. Cuz surely they can’t be expected to bear the burden like those mere taxpayers…..Right?