Do you live in the city with public transportation? Then I would definitely agree.
Otherwise, Canada can be really big and rural. Not having access to car (or in this case, potentially not being able to afford it) can be really damaging to your career, lifestyle, social life.
I grew up in the interior of BC 9 hours East of Vancouver. All of our driving policy (new driver rules and licensing) was dreamed up by street racing ridden Vancouver politics. The result was really damaging in small communities, as 18 year olds could only drive with 1 passenger. In effect, this eliminated young peoples ability to designate a DD. People didn't stop partying...they just drove.
Point being, policies designed for city residents don't always fit out in the rural areas.
Close the externalities and the prices of food, energy, and building materials will adjust accordingly. I have absolutely nothing against rural people or lifestyles but if you choose to commute two hours a day so you can live in the country, you should pay the true price of your lifestyle to society.
Again: Show your math. How do you figure out what the "externality" is? What's to stop you from saying it's $500 per barrel of oil consumed if that would result in your desired policy outcome?
I'm not advocating a specific policy. That's up to economists to decide. Here's the conversion as I see it:
embro: I wish gas was more expensive
pearkes: People in rural areas are very dependent on cars and would be disproportionately affected by increased gas prices
me: Cars have a lot of associated externalities such as CO2 emissions and air pollution, taxation is one way to internalize these externalities. If this process disproportionately affects rural people, it's because society has been subsidizing them by accepting the effects of their externalities. If this results in higher corn prices, for example, then corn prices should be higher to reflect it's true cost to society. By giving the market the true prices of goods it can more efficiently allocate resources.
In Sweden, this is partially solved by giving you a tax rebate on your commute. So people who live rurally and need to commute into a city get some money back.
Well then you're also hoping for your food to triple in price because what do you think the farmers and fishermen here in Canada use for energy to power their vehicles?
Or is that just typical Toronto center of the universe thinking?
I'm glad you bring that up, yes if we triple price, we can expect food and most things to skyrocket as well. Apart from giving them a rebate or some sort of big tax credit, I don't have a solution to bo honest.
I do not live in Toronto or even nearby, population of my city is 130,000. The public transportation is ok only if you don't have kids.
My point is, a majority of people don't even consider public transportation or electric cars, hybrids are a joke, except for the Chevy Volt.
The government incentives have been increasing but they don't seem to convince a lot of people.
Otherwise, Canada can be really big and rural. Not having access to car (or in this case, potentially not being able to afford it) can be really damaging to your career, lifestyle, social life.
I grew up in the interior of BC 9 hours East of Vancouver. All of our driving policy (new driver rules and licensing) was dreamed up by street racing ridden Vancouver politics. The result was really damaging in small communities, as 18 year olds could only drive with 1 passenger. In effect, this eliminated young peoples ability to designate a DD. People didn't stop partying...they just drove.
Point being, policies designed for city residents don't always fit out in the rural areas.