April 16, 2025 • 29 mins
In this episode of Green Tea Party Radio, hosts Zach Torpy and Katie Zakrzewski dive into Canada's contentious carbon tax debate. With Prime Minister Mark Carney's recent move to eliminate the consumer carbon tax ahead of a snap election, conservatives find themselves at a strategic crossroads. Is this political maneuvering, or a genuine economic strategy?
Zach and Katie explore:
-
How Canada's previous carbon tax worked and its direct impacts on everyday Canadians.
-
Economic strategies employed by Canada to counteract U.S. tariffs under President Trump, including the purchase and coordinated sell-off of U.S. treasury bonds.
-
The real-world effects of the carbon tax on Canadian households, highlighting rebates and perceived versus actual economic impacts.
-
Insights into industrial carbon taxes versus consumer taxes, examining their effectiveness and public perception.
The hosts also discuss broader conservative environmental solutions, the complexities of tariff strategies, and what future carbon pricing policies might look like in Canada and potentially the U.S.
Action Steps:-
Research and understand Canada's evolving carbon tax policy.
-
Stay informed about Canada's snap election results and their implications for environmental policy.
-
Reflect on how similar policies could impact economic and environmental outcomes in the United States.
-
Email your thoughts: info@greenteapartyradio.com
-
Follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok.
-
Support our work and get early access episodes and merch at greenteapartyradio.com.
Thank you to all our patrons and listeners! Your support fuels our mission to highlight conservative solutions to climate change.
Disclaimer: Green Tea Party Radio is an independent project and doesn’t represent the views of the Diocese of Little Rock, Catholic Climate Covenant, NASA, or any of our employers.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
>> Zach (00:08):
Hello, and welcome to the Green Tea Party, where we discuss
conservative solutions to environmental problems. My name is
Zach Torpy.
>> Katie (00:14):
And I'm Katie Zachreski. Together we'll guide you
through complex issues and provide strategies to address them. Um,
all while remaining faithful to our conservative values.
>> Zach (00:24):
Trust me, it'll be a good time.
>> Katie (00:26):
Yeah, it's a party, so grab your mugs
and we'll pour the tea.
>> Zach (00:33):
So, Katie, I'm gonna jump into the weeds
a little bit on a very in depth topic that
I'm not an expert on.
>> Katie (00:42):
All right.
>> Zach (00:42):
Due to the economics that we all now have to learn about because of the
state of.
>> Katie (00:46):
I don't like the economics, though. Okay.
Well, all right, let's go.
>> Zach (00:50):
So today's episode is going to be about Canada,
and the current Prime Minister of Canada is Mark Carney.
They're having a snap election on April 28,
and Canada has been a
major target for Trump and his tariffs. So I
think it's important to show how they are
reacting and interacting with these, uh,
(01:11):
this new situation there. They've been handed
so over.
When Trump had put on the major tariffs,
what was that? What day did he call Liberation Day? Liber. When
he. When Trump
started Liberation Day,
Mark Carney wasn't just sitting around doing nothing.
(01:34):
He started buying $350
billion worth of US treasury
bonds and then went over to Europe and
met with European leaders and EU
leaders and countries like Japan and Korea
and discussed how
to hit back against Trump and his tariffs
if he went too far and was causing too much of an issue.
(01:57):
So part of the reason that many
economists believe that Trump pulled back
from his giant reciprocal tariffs that he
initiated was the
concerning trend in the bond market
where interest rates were going up and was going to be more
expensive for us to buy debt. So what
Canada had done is they had bought $350 billion US treasury bonds
(02:19):
and coordinated a slow sell off
with other countries in the eu, Japan and Korea
to basically, once Trump was
being too aggressive with tariffs, they would start selling off these treasury
bonds and make the bond market signal that it
was going to go into a recession or a depression, which
is like a major screaming
(02:40):
red light for economists. So
a lot of people think that's why Trump pulled back. So
this is what, actually, if this is what Mark Carney
was working on and what he was trying to implement, it
clearly worked and it clearly spooked Trump enough to make him pull
back on the reciprocal tariffs, even though everyone's still got their
10% slap and China got its like,
145%, which, which is just
(03:03):
basically a Nimargo at this point, Right?
>> Katie (03:05):
Yeah. With the exception of phones, of
course.
>> Zach (03:08):
Yeah. So
it's just going to be very interesting going forward, seeing how
world leaders react and coordinate
with and react and coordinate and try to fight against
Trump's aggressive wolf warrior
diplomacy and what an actual
very educated and very
(03:29):
intelligent leader in Mark Carney is able
to do and coordinate with other countries when faced with
opposition such as Trump's.
>> Katie (03:36):
All right, yeah. I've been hearing a lot of economists talk about how
this is Trump's big 5D chess move, and I think we're
giving him a little too much credit, but. All right,
you mean the guy who authorized Iran random guy to fire a bunch of
nuclear engineers and then didn't find out until after the fact they
were nuclear engineers? Yeah. I'm pretty sure this is part of his
elaborate 20 step D checkmate.
>> Zach (03:57):
Yeah. It's a weird time when you have to read like
very off the mainstream economic
papers written by like, Steven Moran and Peterson
Navarro and try to understand
Trump's like, end goals and
like, are we going, are we going for de
growth? Are, are we just going to
(04:18):
go for a future where things cost more because
they're being produced in America and it's all. And people have to get used
to having less? Is that what the new
Republican stance is going to be? Because I think
environmentalists are sort of on board with that.
>> Katie (04:31):
Right.
>> Zach (04:32):
It's like the, the horseshoe theory. If you go so right and left, you
come back around, meet in the middle.
>> Katie (04:36):
Yeah, yeah. And so that's, Yeah, I, I'm,
I'm really interested to see where, uh, this ends up
going. Uh, I am now just speaking filler because I totally
forgot the point that I was going to make. Um, so, yeah,
let's just hop right into it.
>> Zach (04:49):
So today we're discussing Canada's carbon
tax. And during the
recent snap election, or since Mark Carney came in
to became the pm, he has cut
the consumer carbon tax. And Pierre
Polar has campaigned consistently
and hard against the, uh, carbon tax.
If you. The famous Axe the Tax logo,
(05:12):
or I don't even know what to call it, like
saying, oh, oh, slogan, slogan. This slogan
is what he, what he's been communicating constantly and
it's been effective because Canadians hate
the carbon tax. So how
Canada's carbon tax works is there's two
different setups. There's a consumer
(05:33):
carbon tax which was
started in 2019. It put a
price on carbon at $20 per ton and
went up by $10 a year to $50 in
2022 and it's now been.
And after that was increasing by $15 a year
until 2030 when it will reach $170
(05:53):
per ton. As of
2024, the carbon tax sat
at $80 per ton. So
putting this in real word, real,
real word, consumer terms added
17.6 cents to a liter of gas.
Or in American freedom loving American Eagle
(06:13):
terms, 60.48
cents per gallon of gas.
>> Katie (06:19):
Yeah, no thanks, I'll pass.
>> Zach (06:21):
Yeah, so it's a significant increase on um, the cost of
gas. And it was meant to be a sticker shock to
Canadians. It's meant to like scare people away using gas
and try to find ways to cut costs.
>> Katie (06:32):
Yeah, but that's hard to do overnight with that big of an
adjustment.
>> Zach (06:36):
Well, it's been, it's been adjusted in
over. Well that's good.
>> Katie (06:41):
At least that it wasn't like immediate.
>> Zach (06:43):
Yeah, but it was adjusted in pretty fast over, over five years
is a pretty quick increase to that.
Um, Stuart LG from the University of
Ottawa, professor of economics, said
when something costs more, people use less of it. We find
ways to be more efficient or adopt alternatives. And
in tying it with the rebate, the more you reduced,
(07:04):
the more you came out ahead of the pocketbook. Those who reduced
the most actually made money in the end.
So what this did was, this did do
what the uh, citizen climate lobby has been lobbying for
and sent checks back to citizens.
All right, so about
90% of revenue was returned to families with a
quarterly check. Uh, the other 10% I think was
(07:26):
given to grants for efficiency.
And I think the local government said it got to decide what they each
did with that. So like the provinces or as
we call it, states.
But as of April 1,
2025, the federal government has removed the fuel
charge or the carbon tax for
consumers. So Mark Carney saw it was very
(07:49):
unpopular and pulled away from it
and has given the Canadians what they asked for and
removed it, which is what the conservatives have,
has been like the main stance of conservatives. So it sort of
kicks a leg out from under them.
>> Katie (08:02):
I was gonna say. Yeah, now they're just gonna sit in the corner and wait for something else
to react to.
>> Zach (08:07):
Yeah. But it also begs the question of is this just
electioneering or will he keep to this?
Okay, will he put it back on after or will he
just like a.
>> Katie (08:16):
Modified version of it? Yeah, after the
fact.
>> Zach (08:20):
So a lot of questions up in the air. It
was hard to tell. Yeah. For
the other portion of the carb tax Is for large industries
and m big polluters. This
is, they followed a pricing system that uh,
it's very by province, but most of the provinces used a
cap, uh and trade system or an
(08:40):
output based pricing. So these are designed to be cost
effective and protect Canadian competitiveness.
Um, so it would use a based output based
pricing system which regulated facilities based on
their emissions intensity rather than the total emissions.
Like, so
it taxed them more on
how efficient they were instead of like
(09:02):
taxing how much they were
producing. Like if you're producing cement really efficiently,
you got, you got more tax credits
back that you could sell to the rest of the industry in a cap and
trade. Okay, so this allowed for a
large trading market between large emitters.
Quebec was integrated with the Western climate initiative, which
included some, um, large group of western
(09:25):
states and a cap and trade system. Large
emitter trading systems matter most for sectors that are
emission intensive and trade
exposed Firms that make goods like
steel, cement, aluminum, or produce relatively
large amounts of greenhouse gas emissions per unit.
The lets price of the
prices the emissions associated with a firm's output.
(09:46):
So firms only pay carbon price if they exceed a, uh,
certain threshold of emissions intensity.
Firms that emit above the threshold have to buy
credits to cover their excess emissions. Firms
that meet the threshold are not liable for carbon pricing.
And firms that emit less than threshold
generate credits that they can sell to the other firms for
(10:07):
profit. M so the more
efficient you were, the less emissions you had, the
more carbon credits you got and were able to sell to
your competitors at a premium
to boost your own income.
>> Katie (10:20):
Well, that's all well and good, Zach, but you're the
numbers guy. Was it working?
>> Zach (10:25):
That's a very important question.
>> Katie (10:27):
Perhaps the crux of all of this.
>> Zach (10:30):
So I got two polls to stand on. We got
emissions and the economy. So first, the emissions
the consumer carbon price or fuel charge
for was expected to cut
emissions by 14%
by 2030. The industrial carbon
price was expected to cut emissions by
a very wide range. I found 23 to
(10:52):
48% by 2030.
So this showed that they were having
major impacts on
removing emissions. Uh, and if this is, if you were
trying to reduce your total pollution
output, this was clearly working. In
2023, Canada's emissions declined
despite a growing economy. They went down by
(11:15):
0.9% compared to 2022, and
8.5% decreased compared to
2005. So the emissions were heading in the
right direction. The tax was proving
effective. But the industrial carbon tax
was much more impactful than the, uh, consumer
carbon tax. Which is why the Liberals decided
to axe the consumer carbon price and keep on
(11:38):
the industrial.
>> Katie (11:39):
Okay, um, so not
necessarily a bad choice, it seems
like.
>> Zach (11:46):
Yeah, so it gave some relief to Canadian
families and
allowed how they're kept on the main portion of the carbon tax,
which will continue to reduce the total impacts,
but on the economy wise.
Digging into the numbers there, I've read so many
articles and so many research papers on this. It was
a lot to go through.
>> Katie (12:07):
Pretty good before bed reading, I'm sure.
>> Zach (12:09):
Yes, Very, very tired, Very, very
soothing.
>> Katie (12:13):
Was. Slept like a light or went out like a light after that.
>> Zach (12:16):
Yeah. Uh, Canadians were expected to get
380 to $1,800 for families of
four in Alberta annually from
the carbon rebates. And this is the consumer carbon
tax. Parliamentary budget office reported the
average net cost for a household in Alberta was a
thousand fifty six dollars. That's how much
additional addition in pay
(12:37):
they, that's how much additional
money they were spending because of this tax. They're expected
to get a rebate of
$1,779 for a family
of four coming out with a surplus of
$723.
>> Katie (12:52):
You know, personally, I hate to be that person, but I don't know that
that's enough of a profit to justify all this in the
first place. Maybe I'm just a cynic, but like, if we're
going to go through the effort of doing all this, I want to see four
figures. Maybe I'm just being greedy, but like,
I feel like we could have done better with that.
>> Zach (13:08):
Canada, I mean, they are, they're
reducing emissions while getting nothing.
>> Katie (13:14):
Yeah, way good. But, but when you,
when you consider the fact that it drives up cost too,
it's also like, well, it hurt itself in its
confusion, but it
was.
>> Zach (13:25):
An overall surplus for families, which was.
>> Katie (13:28):
And that's what matters. At the end of the day, it wasn't costing anybody
more. So we'll take that.
>> Zach (13:32):
And they had provisions to give more money to people who
lived in rural areas who would be driving more
and would be using more gas.
>> Katie (13:41):
Well, that's good that they at least thought about that.
>> Zach (13:43):
Yeah. So that was very inclusive.
>> Katie (13:46):
Okay, you know what? I'll get off my high horse. I'll take it.
>> Zach (13:49):
In a 2021 study,
um, among low income
households, 94% got more in
rebates than their carbon tax costs, with
more than half netting $30 per month. High income
households also
got 55% got more than they
put in. Um,
(14:10):
but when they pulled this, only
14% of people pulled thought they
were getting more than they put in while 54%
thought they were paying more.
>> Katie (14:21):
Interesting. So they didn't feel like there was a
difference.
>> Zach (14:24):
Yes. So they were looking at the price on the pump
and feeling like they were paying more. But when that check was coming
in once a quarter they felt like it didn't
make up for the cost even though the numbers sort of showed
that it was was making up for the
cost.
>> Katie (14:39):
That's interesting. And I wonder if that has to do with the
frequency of each.
>> Zach (14:44):
Yes, I think that's probably a major impact of like
you're going to the gas station
like more than once a quarter.
>> Katie (14:51):
For sure.
>> Zach (14:52):
Yeah, once a week and like
so it's hard to really see it.
And a ah study emissions pricing contributed about
0.5% UH overall
increase in consumer prices since 2019
accounting for a fraction
of the 19 increase in overall goods
(15:12):
prices. Um, according to the
Fraser Institute, a libertarian conservative
Canadian public policy think tank, the tax will
harm the Canadian economy, Environment and
climate Changed Canada
Organization estimates that the real or
inflated adjusted GDP in a scenario with a without a
carbon tax in 2030 would be
(15:34):
2688 billion. With a carbon
tax the number drops to 2663
billion which is a difference of $25 billion
which amounts to
0.92%
reduction in real GDP in 2030.
So these are far off projections
which is always quite difficult. Little um,
(15:56):
fortune teller.
>> Katie (15:57):
Yeah, yeah. Just to see where they stack up in
reality.
>> Zach (16:01):
But I don't know in my opinion if the average
citizen was getting more money than they were putting in,
especially the average lower
income person and the cost was
only a uh, percent less than
1% of GDP.
Not even like, not even like the full, a full percent off of
gdp. It's a percent of the total GDP
(16:23):
that they would be going down. I think that's a worthy
investment in to reduce pollution.
Although I guess some Canadians could argue
that climate change isn't the worst thing for Canada. It
opens up major trade routes for them, uh, makes more of their
land arable. So they're probably a uh, country that
would benefit from climate change. So maybe
(16:43):
some people would care less about the environment.
But if you were environmentally focused and worried about
climate change, this was clearly proving
effective in reducing
emissions impacts while also providing
economic input to
averages.
>> Katie (17:01):
Good to know.
>> Zach (17:02):
So I view go digging into the
numbers. I thought this seemed like an effective policy even
though Canada was now pulling, pulling out of
it due to the large sentiment against
it. I think this goes that comes down to a lot of
effective communication. And.
>> Katie (17:19):
Well, part of me also wonders. And, and I think that this is the
fallacy of almost every single
environmental campaign or
attempt at economic, environmental
campaigns that we see. I think where
almost every single environmental effort needs to
start is with the people who are messing it up for everybody in the first place, and
that's industries. But when you
(17:41):
start at the very bottom, at the grassroots,
well, those are the folks who were getting screwed over in the first place.
I don't even think they should have touched
the, the gasoline prices for everyday
people. They should have gone straight with corporations and
industries and started from there because those are going to be the folks who are going to have the
biggest carbon footprint in the first place. So I
(18:01):
feel like if they had started there and gotten a little bit of confidence
built up and the people who saw that this is just not an
attack on the everyday person, it probably would have
been more successful. But I'm tired of a lot of these
environmental economic
policies that the first person
that, that can tell the difference and usually in a negative
(18:22):
way is the working class. Well, when they're not the
ones ruining the planet in the first place compared to
their industrial counterparts.
>> Zach (18:30):
Yeah, the people not at fault.
>> Katie (18:31):
Exactly. Footing the bill.
Exactly, exactly, exactly. And I think that if
they had changed that, if they had just left that,
uh, that gasoline price change out of it and
just focused on corporations and industries,
I think we'd still have a Canadian carbon tax
today.
>> Zach (18:50):
Well, that is what the current PM is going, is
doing now. It'll, um, be interesting to see
how this plays out in the snap election because now this is probably
moving the football back and forth between the Conservatives and Liberals.
>> Katie (19:02):
Oh yeah.
>> Zach (19:02):
Where now the Conservatives are gonna be like, we're, we're going to get rid of
all of the carbon tax and make sure nothing is impacting
Canadians. And the Liberals are going to focus on
being like, well, we think the system we're implementing now is
efficient.
>> Katie (19:15):
Right. We can do it well. And that's what we're
doing.
>> Zach (19:18):
Yeah. So it really is like coming down to communication and
marketing and how they sell this
policy. And it really is hard to
beat an effective slogan such as ax attacks.
>> Katie (19:30):
Yeah, that picked up steam real quick. I mean, that's right up there with
drill, baby, drill. I think.
>> Zach (19:35):
Yeah, Once it's simple, it's easy to sell. Once you're,
once you're explaining your position on
national TV and people have to tune in for a
nuanced, complicated take going into like percentages
and numbers and Percentiles.
>> Katie (19:49):
I genuinely have this theory as a writer that the brain is
hardwired to be obsessed with rhymes. If you've got
a slogan that rhymes, it is like jingling car keys in
front of a baby. It is just you, you. It does
not. Like, every single time I see somebody with a, with a
rhyming slogan, I go, damn, that's good, man.
Like, whether they're on my side or not, I'm like, that's
(20:09):
good.
>> Zach (20:10):
Yeah, that's how you do it.
Mhm.
I think it's clearly, I think Trudeau, as much as
people were like, oh, he's pretty and charming, like
that was pretty.
>> Katie (20:20):
He had the pretty tax. He, uh, he was, he was young
and handsome and he could explain what the binary was. And
now, um, yeah, that, that, that goes
so far. When gas is 60 something
cents higher than it was before, people don't care how pretty you
are.
>> Zach (20:37):
To spray this gas on you.
>> Katie (20:39):
Ah. The only thing that will trump good looks in any,
any, any country is the economy.
It is the, it is the only thing. It is a solid
number two only to the economy.
>> Zach (20:50):
So, yeah, be very telling how
this goes gets debated going forward and who pulls out in
Canada, because the Conservatives had fallen
behind in the, in the polling after being
basically tied to Trump as a anchor, who is
attacking their country. And
honestly, this is a policy I would support in the US I think would be
(21:10):
great. I think we should start with the, um,
carbon border tax.
>> Katie (21:15):
Yes.
>> Zach (21:16):
And start with the tariff policy of high
polluters. I think it's an easy way to attack countries.
And then China can't claim the moral
high ground against us when we're just slapping them with random tariffs
for Truly, truly, Zach.
>> Katie (21:28):
I think that that's why I've been beating my head against the wall more lately than
ever before. Like, I feel like we're right there. We're
right there. We're right on the edge of me being
able to make a case for a carbon price at a carbon, carbon
border adjustment. If we're going to be doing tariffs
anyway, man, then let's just, let's
just reach out. It's right within
grasp and just grab it. It's right there. We're doing it
(21:50):
anyway. Let's just have an
environmental reason as justification. And then a lot of the
people criticizing the tariffs are going to shut up. It's the biggest number
one I can think of. It is, I hate to be that particular.
The art of the deal. It's literally, I swear to God,
this. Zach, I almost sent this meme to you, I saw it late last night. I
laughed my ass off, and it was like, trump imposes
(22:11):
tariffs of X percentage on China. All right. Yeah,
let's do it. Trump takes him back. The art of the deal.
Trump reintroduces tariffs. All right, we're doing it. He
takes them back. The art of the deal. It's just like,
okay, all right. If we're going to be right there,
let's just go ahead and say, oh, yeah. And another reason we're doing
it is because y'all pollute all the time. Like, if we're looking
(22:31):
for reasons to dunk on China, we're there, they're there.
We don't have to make them up. Let's just pull that into
our argument as well. It'd be great pr. You'd throw a
bone to the people who were worried about that. Come on. This is the
5D chess move. Trump, come call me. Call
me. Yeah.
>> Zach (22:47):
It would be a policy that could unite liberal people
behind him. Get people.
>> Katie (22:51):
Because. Because what's going to happen? Are folks on the left who are like,
pro environment going to say, well, not like that. We didn't actually
want to hold polluters accountable? Of course they're not going to say that. They're going to
be in support of it. It's your opportunity to have a little bit of wiggle room
on it.
>> Zach (23:03):
Yeah, yeah. And I think it's also important for, I
think, Trump's terrorist policy. What they're missing is clear
stated goals of what they're trying to accomplish.
>> Katie (23:11):
Yeah. Like, what is the reason why we're doing this other than because they're
trying to, like, okay, but why?
>> Zach (23:16):
Especially for other countries. I feel like countries like
Vietnam, Mexico, Canada, Malaysia
feel like they're just being attacked as, like, for no reason.
They're like, what do you want? They don't know what.
>> Katie (23:27):
Yeah, like, what do we need to change for this to go away?
And they're not being told. Nobody is. Which
makes it seem like it's all arbitrary. Even if the
reason's not true, just tell me we're doing it because they're
polluters. Okay, all right. I can put that in my pipe and smoke
it. Better than. I don't know, because I felt like it. Uh, the art of the
deal. Like, okay, I can't do anything with that.
>> Zach (23:47):
If you give them a goal to work towards, this will.
I also feel like Trump's really obsessed with the,
um, the, uh, trade
imbalance, which is tied to the strength of the
dollar. It's like, yeah, we're the richest
country in the world.
>> Katie (24:01):
Yeah.
>> Zach (24:01):
But we buy stuff from all over the world because it
works.
>> Katie (24:05):
Yeah. Are you kidding me? That's how the economy works.
When you're. I'm gonna say it. The
biggest, best country in the world. Uh, people want to buy your, uh,
want to sell to you.
That is how the or the deal works.
Like, why are we having to explain
Economics 101 to the President who's
owned multiple businesses? What. What is going on?
(24:26):
What. What is happening? The. I'm going to write the Art of
the Deal and we're going to debut it on this show. We're just going to have a series
where I like read my version of the Art of the Deal and that's going to be like
six straight episodes. And it's going to be like,
don't piss off the people who give you all your. Without having a backup
plan. The Art of the Deal. Like, I'm like, like,
what is going on?
>> Zach (24:46):
Yeah, I think it'll be. We'll have to
see if US Manufacturing actually
does come back in the next couple years. But I think
it's too short of a time span to really.
>> Katie (24:57):
Oh, yeah, no.
>> Zach (24:58):
Their hands and make a. Have Companies making a
10 to 20 year plan building out.
>> Katie (25:03):
Who's gonna be doing it? People who went to
school for four to six years for a completely different
field. Good luck with that.
Like, who, Who. Who's gonna be working these
jobs? Who. Who? Like, who is this
for? I don't understand. Like, that's what I don't
get. I'm like, then why did I go get more degrees
than a thermometer if I'm just gonna be working the factory
(25:25):
assembly line? Like, what, what was the point of that? Are you gonna forgive
my student loans? Like what? Like what goes on? Like, what, What?
What? I just have. So I don't get it. It's like the
equivalent of like when your dad tells you, oh, we'll just
walk inside businesses and tell them you're looking for
a job. It's like, my brother in Christ. That might have worked
in 1983.
>> Zach (25:45):
Um, not even.
>> Katie (25:46):
But, but, but, but that don't work no more. Okay. And.
And the guy who believes that is in charge of the economy.
Like, yeah, you just walk inside somewhere with your resume and you tell them you want a
job and you walk out and start on Monday. Yeah. That's
not. Sorry M. Yeah.
>> Zach (26:00):
So. Interesting world we are in. Little too interesting
for my take.
>> Katie (26:04):
Yeah. I've got no interest in what's going on right now? I. I
am. I'm team Giant Meteor that they keep
saying has a point 025 chance
of hitting us. Let's bump it up to 1%. Come on,
we can do it. Let's see it. I'm serious. Come on,
let's. Giant meteor 20, 27, 20,
28. Whatever.
>> Zach (26:22):
All right, ready? Ready to close it out?
>> Katie (26:25):
Yeah. On that note. Yeah. Giant Meteor is,
uh. Yeah. Here's your action. Here's your action
step. Write a letter to the giant meteor and convince it to
crash into the the earth in
three years and a few minutes to do it.
You'll come on the show and we'll interview you about it.
>> Zach (26:41):
Do you get a free no climate change anymore?
>> Katie (26:43):
Yeah, you get a free GTPR bumper sticker. Since we don't
have to talk about climate change anymore. If you convince the giant meteor to
smack straight into the planet. I will give you my GPS
coordinates if you'd like to plug those into your appeal. So, yeah,
let's. I don't know that there are any action steps for this one. I would just say
do a little bit of research on, um, Canada's carbon price.
We'll have an episode here in a few weeks about the American carbon
(27:03):
price. I would say just keep an eye on Canada's snap election,
see what comes from that. We'll, uh, we'll be talking about it after the
fact because I'm sure that none of this is going to go away anytime soon.
So we'll talk about it more then. But for now, let's.
Let's close it out. Zach, for
you, our listener. Email us with your thoughts.
Our email is info
greenteapartyradio.com thank you.
>> Zach (27:26):
For listening to Green Tea Party Radio. And a very special thank you
to all of our patrons. We couldn't do this without you. If
you're interested in getting early access episodes as well as Green Tea Party
merch, check us out at green greente party radio.com
get feedback, tell us what's on your mind, and follow us on Facebook, Instagram,
Twitter and TikTok.
>> Katie (27:41):
And just so you know, this is our passion project. We don't have
any organizational sponsor, uh, unless Giant Meteor
wants to sponsor us. Just a reminder that Green Tea
Party Radio is not representative of the Diocese of
ul, Catholic Climate Covenant, NASA, or any of our
employers. We are just young conservatives building a movement because
we want the world to know the conservatives, particularly young ones
(28:02):
like us, have important things to say about climate
change.
>> Zach (28:06):
And if you want to, if you want to hear our show in your college
radio station, email us@inforeentea
partyradio.com Give us the details about your campus and your
radio station. That email, again, is info
greent partyradio.com thanks for
listening.
>> Katie (28:20):
Thank you, Zach. I didn't think that we were going to hit
Canada's carbon price and giant
meteor all in one episode. Um, so if
anybody doubts our efficiency. Doge, come in
here for a master class. We can show you what all you can get done in
32 minutes.
>> Zach (28:35):
I think we're getting any Canadian listeners.
>> Katie (28:37):
Since we've done Canadian
folks, let us know how much you hate us. Um, or how much you
like us. Um, Surprise me. I. I like getting
fan mail and death mail. Um, and I get a good balance of
balance. All right, let me wrap it up.
It.
Hello, and welcome to the Green Tea Party, where we discuss
conservative solutions to environmental problems. My name is
Zach Torpy.
>> Katie (00:14):
And I'm Katie Zachreski. Together we'll guide you
through complex issues and provide strategies to address them. Um,
all while remaining faithful to our conservative values.
>> Zach (00:24):
Trust me, it'll be a good time.
>> Katie (00:26):
Yeah, it's a party, so grab your mugs
and we'll pour the tea.
>> Zach (00:33):
So, Katie, I'm gonna jump into the weeds
a little bit on a very in depth topic that
I'm not an expert on.
>> Katie (00:42):
All right.
>> Zach (00:42):
Due to the economics that we all now have to learn about because of the
state of.
>> Katie (00:46):
I don't like the economics, though. Okay.
Well, all right, let's go.
>> Zach (00:50):
So today's episode is going to be about Canada,
and the current Prime Minister of Canada is Mark Carney.
They're having a snap election on April 28,
and Canada has been a
major target for Trump and his tariffs. So I
think it's important to show how they are
reacting and interacting with these, uh,
(01:11):
this new situation there. They've been handed
so over.
When Trump had put on the major tariffs,
what was that? What day did he call Liberation Day? Liber. When
he. When Trump
started Liberation Day,
Mark Carney wasn't just sitting around doing nothing.
(01:34):
He started buying $350
billion worth of US treasury
bonds and then went over to Europe and
met with European leaders and EU
leaders and countries like Japan and Korea
and discussed how
to hit back against Trump and his tariffs
if he went too far and was causing too much of an issue.
(01:57):
So part of the reason that many
economists believe that Trump pulled back
from his giant reciprocal tariffs that he
initiated was the
concerning trend in the bond market
where interest rates were going up and was going to be more
expensive for us to buy debt. So what
Canada had done is they had bought $350 billion US treasury bonds
(02:19):
and coordinated a slow sell off
with other countries in the eu, Japan and Korea
to basically, once Trump was
being too aggressive with tariffs, they would start selling off these treasury
bonds and make the bond market signal that it
was going to go into a recession or a depression, which
is like a major screaming
(02:40):
red light for economists. So
a lot of people think that's why Trump pulled back. So
this is what, actually, if this is what Mark Carney
was working on and what he was trying to implement, it
clearly worked and it clearly spooked Trump enough to make him pull
back on the reciprocal tariffs, even though everyone's still got their
10% slap and China got its like,
145%, which, which is just
(03:03):
basically a Nimargo at this point, Right?
>> Katie (03:05):
Yeah. With the exception of phones, of
course.
>> Zach (03:08):
Yeah. So
it's just going to be very interesting going forward, seeing how
world leaders react and coordinate
with and react and coordinate and try to fight against
Trump's aggressive wolf warrior
diplomacy and what an actual
very educated and very
(03:29):
intelligent leader in Mark Carney is able
to do and coordinate with other countries when faced with
opposition such as Trump's.
>> Katie (03:36):
All right, yeah. I've been hearing a lot of economists talk about how
this is Trump's big 5D chess move, and I think we're
giving him a little too much credit, but. All right,
you mean the guy who authorized Iran random guy to fire a bunch of
nuclear engineers and then didn't find out until after the fact they
were nuclear engineers? Yeah. I'm pretty sure this is part of his
elaborate 20 step D checkmate.
>> Zach (03:57):
Yeah. It's a weird time when you have to read like
very off the mainstream economic
papers written by like, Steven Moran and Peterson
Navarro and try to understand
Trump's like, end goals and
like, are we going, are we going for de
growth? Are, are we just going to
(04:18):
go for a future where things cost more because
they're being produced in America and it's all. And people have to get used
to having less? Is that what the new
Republican stance is going to be? Because I think
environmentalists are sort of on board with that.
>> Katie (04:31):
Right.
>> Zach (04:32):
It's like the, the horseshoe theory. If you go so right and left, you
come back around, meet in the middle.
>> Katie (04:36):
Yeah, yeah. And so that's, Yeah, I, I'm,
I'm really interested to see where, uh, this ends up
going. Uh, I am now just speaking filler because I totally
forgot the point that I was going to make. Um, so, yeah,
let's just hop right into it.
>> Zach (04:49):
So today we're discussing Canada's carbon
tax. And during the
recent snap election, or since Mark Carney came in
to became the pm, he has cut
the consumer carbon tax. And Pierre
Polar has campaigned consistently
and hard against the, uh, carbon tax.
If you. The famous Axe the Tax logo,
(05:12):
or I don't even know what to call it, like
saying, oh, oh, slogan, slogan. This slogan
is what he, what he's been communicating constantly and
it's been effective because Canadians hate
the carbon tax. So how
Canada's carbon tax works is there's two
different setups. There's a consumer
(05:33):
carbon tax which was
started in 2019. It put a
price on carbon at $20 per ton and
went up by $10 a year to $50 in
2022 and it's now been.
And after that was increasing by $15 a year
until 2030 when it will reach $170
(05:53):
per ton. As of
2024, the carbon tax sat
at $80 per ton. So
putting this in real word, real,
real word, consumer terms added
17.6 cents to a liter of gas.
Or in American freedom loving American Eagle
(06:13):
terms, 60.48
cents per gallon of gas.
>> Katie (06:19):
Yeah, no thanks, I'll pass.
>> Zach (06:21):
Yeah, so it's a significant increase on um, the cost of
gas. And it was meant to be a sticker shock to
Canadians. It's meant to like scare people away using gas
and try to find ways to cut costs.
>> Katie (06:32):
Yeah, but that's hard to do overnight with that big of an
adjustment.
>> Zach (06:36):
Well, it's been, it's been adjusted in
over. Well that's good.
>> Katie (06:41):
At least that it wasn't like immediate.
>> Zach (06:43):
Yeah, but it was adjusted in pretty fast over, over five years
is a pretty quick increase to that.
Um, Stuart LG from the University of
Ottawa, professor of economics, said
when something costs more, people use less of it. We find
ways to be more efficient or adopt alternatives. And
in tying it with the rebate, the more you reduced,
(07:04):
the more you came out ahead of the pocketbook. Those who reduced
the most actually made money in the end.
So what this did was, this did do
what the uh, citizen climate lobby has been lobbying for
and sent checks back to citizens.
All right, so about
90% of revenue was returned to families with a
quarterly check. Uh, the other 10% I think was
(07:26):
given to grants for efficiency.
And I think the local government said it got to decide what they each
did with that. So like the provinces or as
we call it, states.
But as of April 1,
2025, the federal government has removed the fuel
charge or the carbon tax for
consumers. So Mark Carney saw it was very
(07:49):
unpopular and pulled away from it
and has given the Canadians what they asked for and
removed it, which is what the conservatives have,
has been like the main stance of conservatives. So it sort of
kicks a leg out from under them.
>> Katie (08:02):
I was gonna say. Yeah, now they're just gonna sit in the corner and wait for something else
to react to.
>> Zach (08:07):
Yeah. But it also begs the question of is this just
electioneering or will he keep to this?
Okay, will he put it back on after or will he
just like a.
>> Katie (08:16):
Modified version of it? Yeah, after the
fact.
>> Zach (08:20):
So a lot of questions up in the air. It
was hard to tell. Yeah. For
the other portion of the carb tax Is for large industries
and m big polluters. This
is, they followed a pricing system that uh,
it's very by province, but most of the provinces used a
cap, uh and trade system or an
(08:40):
output based pricing. So these are designed to be cost
effective and protect Canadian competitiveness.
Um, so it would use a based output based
pricing system which regulated facilities based on
their emissions intensity rather than the total emissions.
Like, so
it taxed them more on
how efficient they were instead of like
(09:02):
taxing how much they were
producing. Like if you're producing cement really efficiently,
you got, you got more tax credits
back that you could sell to the rest of the industry in a cap and
trade. Okay, so this allowed for a
large trading market between large emitters.
Quebec was integrated with the Western climate initiative, which
included some, um, large group of western
(09:25):
states and a cap and trade system. Large
emitter trading systems matter most for sectors that are
emission intensive and trade
exposed Firms that make goods like
steel, cement, aluminum, or produce relatively
large amounts of greenhouse gas emissions per unit.
The lets price of the
prices the emissions associated with a firm's output.
(09:46):
So firms only pay carbon price if they exceed a, uh,
certain threshold of emissions intensity.
Firms that emit above the threshold have to buy
credits to cover their excess emissions. Firms
that meet the threshold are not liable for carbon pricing.
And firms that emit less than threshold
generate credits that they can sell to the other firms for
(10:07):
profit. M so the more
efficient you were, the less emissions you had, the
more carbon credits you got and were able to sell to
your competitors at a premium
to boost your own income.
>> Katie (10:20):
Well, that's all well and good, Zach, but you're the
numbers guy. Was it working?
>> Zach (10:25):
That's a very important question.
>> Katie (10:27):
Perhaps the crux of all of this.
>> Zach (10:30):
So I got two polls to stand on. We got
emissions and the economy. So first, the emissions
the consumer carbon price or fuel charge
for was expected to cut
emissions by 14%
by 2030. The industrial carbon
price was expected to cut emissions by
a very wide range. I found 23 to
(10:52):
48% by 2030.
So this showed that they were having
major impacts on
removing emissions. Uh, and if this is, if you were
trying to reduce your total pollution
output, this was clearly working. In
2023, Canada's emissions declined
despite a growing economy. They went down by
(11:15):
0.9% compared to 2022, and
8.5% decreased compared to
2005. So the emissions were heading in the
right direction. The tax was proving
effective. But the industrial carbon tax
was much more impactful than the, uh, consumer
carbon tax. Which is why the Liberals decided
to axe the consumer carbon price and keep on
(11:38):
the industrial.
>> Katie (11:39):
Okay, um, so not
necessarily a bad choice, it seems
like.
>> Zach (11:46):
Yeah, so it gave some relief to Canadian
families and
allowed how they're kept on the main portion of the carbon tax,
which will continue to reduce the total impacts,
but on the economy wise.
Digging into the numbers there, I've read so many
articles and so many research papers on this. It was
a lot to go through.
>> Katie (12:07):
Pretty good before bed reading, I'm sure.
>> Zach (12:09):
Yes, Very, very tired, Very, very
soothing.
>> Katie (12:13):
Was. Slept like a light or went out like a light after that.
>> Zach (12:16):
Yeah. Uh, Canadians were expected to get
380 to $1,800 for families of
four in Alberta annually from
the carbon rebates. And this is the consumer carbon
tax. Parliamentary budget office reported the
average net cost for a household in Alberta was a
thousand fifty six dollars. That's how much
additional addition in pay
(12:37):
they, that's how much additional
money they were spending because of this tax. They're expected
to get a rebate of
$1,779 for a family
of four coming out with a surplus of
$723.
>> Katie (12:52):
You know, personally, I hate to be that person, but I don't know that
that's enough of a profit to justify all this in the
first place. Maybe I'm just a cynic, but like, if we're
going to go through the effort of doing all this, I want to see four
figures. Maybe I'm just being greedy, but like,
I feel like we could have done better with that.
>> Zach (13:08):
Canada, I mean, they are, they're
reducing emissions while getting nothing.
>> Katie (13:14):
Yeah, way good. But, but when you,
when you consider the fact that it drives up cost too,
it's also like, well, it hurt itself in its
confusion, but it
was.
>> Zach (13:25):
An overall surplus for families, which was.
>> Katie (13:28):
And that's what matters. At the end of the day, it wasn't costing anybody
more. So we'll take that.
>> Zach (13:32):
And they had provisions to give more money to people who
lived in rural areas who would be driving more
and would be using more gas.
>> Katie (13:41):
Well, that's good that they at least thought about that.
>> Zach (13:43):
Yeah. So that was very inclusive.
>> Katie (13:46):
Okay, you know what? I'll get off my high horse. I'll take it.
>> Zach (13:49):
In a 2021 study,
um, among low income
households, 94% got more in
rebates than their carbon tax costs, with
more than half netting $30 per month. High income
households also
got 55% got more than they
put in. Um,
(14:10):
but when they pulled this, only
14% of people pulled thought they
were getting more than they put in while 54%
thought they were paying more.
>> Katie (14:21):
Interesting. So they didn't feel like there was a
difference.
>> Zach (14:24):
Yes. So they were looking at the price on the pump
and feeling like they were paying more. But when that check was coming
in once a quarter they felt like it didn't
make up for the cost even though the numbers sort of showed
that it was was making up for the
cost.
>> Katie (14:39):
That's interesting. And I wonder if that has to do with the
frequency of each.
>> Zach (14:44):
Yes, I think that's probably a major impact of like
you're going to the gas station
like more than once a quarter.
>> Katie (14:51):
For sure.
>> Zach (14:52):
Yeah, once a week and like
so it's hard to really see it.
And a ah study emissions pricing contributed about
0.5% UH overall
increase in consumer prices since 2019
accounting for a fraction
of the 19 increase in overall goods
(15:12):
prices. Um, according to the
Fraser Institute, a libertarian conservative
Canadian public policy think tank, the tax will
harm the Canadian economy, Environment and
climate Changed Canada
Organization estimates that the real or
inflated adjusted GDP in a scenario with a without a
carbon tax in 2030 would be
(15:34):
2688 billion. With a carbon
tax the number drops to 2663
billion which is a difference of $25 billion
which amounts to
0.92%
reduction in real GDP in 2030.
So these are far off projections
which is always quite difficult. Little um,
(15:56):
fortune teller.
>> Katie (15:57):
Yeah, yeah. Just to see where they stack up in
reality.
>> Zach (16:01):
But I don't know in my opinion if the average
citizen was getting more money than they were putting in,
especially the average lower
income person and the cost was
only a uh, percent less than
1% of GDP.
Not even like, not even like the full, a full percent off of
gdp. It's a percent of the total GDP
(16:23):
that they would be going down. I think that's a worthy
investment in to reduce pollution.
Although I guess some Canadians could argue
that climate change isn't the worst thing for Canada. It
opens up major trade routes for them, uh, makes more of their
land arable. So they're probably a uh, country that
would benefit from climate change. So maybe
(16:43):
some people would care less about the environment.
But if you were environmentally focused and worried about
climate change, this was clearly proving
effective in reducing
emissions impacts while also providing
economic input to
averages.
>> Katie (17:01):
Good to know.
>> Zach (17:02):
So I view go digging into the
numbers. I thought this seemed like an effective policy even
though Canada was now pulling, pulling out of
it due to the large sentiment against
it. I think this goes that comes down to a lot of
effective communication. And.
>> Katie (17:19):
Well, part of me also wonders. And, and I think that this is the
fallacy of almost every single
environmental campaign or
attempt at economic, environmental
campaigns that we see. I think where
almost every single environmental effort needs to
start is with the people who are messing it up for everybody in the first place, and
that's industries. But when you
(17:41):
start at the very bottom, at the grassroots,
well, those are the folks who were getting screwed over in the first place.
I don't even think they should have touched
the, the gasoline prices for everyday
people. They should have gone straight with corporations and
industries and started from there because those are going to be the folks who are going to have the
biggest carbon footprint in the first place. So I
(18:01):
feel like if they had started there and gotten a little bit of confidence
built up and the people who saw that this is just not an
attack on the everyday person, it probably would have
been more successful. But I'm tired of a lot of these
environmental economic
policies that the first person
that, that can tell the difference and usually in a negative
(18:22):
way is the working class. Well, when they're not the
ones ruining the planet in the first place compared to
their industrial counterparts.
>> Zach (18:30):
Yeah, the people not at fault.
>> Katie (18:31):
Exactly. Footing the bill.
Exactly, exactly, exactly. And I think that if
they had changed that, if they had just left that,
uh, that gasoline price change out of it and
just focused on corporations and industries,
I think we'd still have a Canadian carbon tax
today.
>> Zach (18:50):
Well, that is what the current PM is going, is
doing now. It'll, um, be interesting to see
how this plays out in the snap election because now this is probably
moving the football back and forth between the Conservatives and Liberals.
>> Katie (19:02):
Oh yeah.
>> Zach (19:02):
Where now the Conservatives are gonna be like, we're, we're going to get rid of
all of the carbon tax and make sure nothing is impacting
Canadians. And the Liberals are going to focus on
being like, well, we think the system we're implementing now is
efficient.
>> Katie (19:15):
Right. We can do it well. And that's what we're
doing.
>> Zach (19:18):
Yeah. So it really is like coming down to communication and
marketing and how they sell this
policy. And it really is hard to
beat an effective slogan such as ax attacks.
>> Katie (19:30):
Yeah, that picked up steam real quick. I mean, that's right up there with
drill, baby, drill. I think.
>> Zach (19:35):
Yeah, Once it's simple, it's easy to sell. Once you're,
once you're explaining your position on
national TV and people have to tune in for a
nuanced, complicated take going into like percentages
and numbers and Percentiles.
>> Katie (19:49):
I genuinely have this theory as a writer that the brain is
hardwired to be obsessed with rhymes. If you've got
a slogan that rhymes, it is like jingling car keys in
front of a baby. It is just you, you. It does
not. Like, every single time I see somebody with a, with a
rhyming slogan, I go, damn, that's good, man.
Like, whether they're on my side or not, I'm like, that's
(20:09):
good.
>> Zach (20:10):
Yeah, that's how you do it.
Mhm.
I think it's clearly, I think Trudeau, as much as
people were like, oh, he's pretty and charming, like
that was pretty.
>> Katie (20:20):
He had the pretty tax. He, uh, he was, he was young
and handsome and he could explain what the binary was. And
now, um, yeah, that, that, that goes
so far. When gas is 60 something
cents higher than it was before, people don't care how pretty you
are.
>> Zach (20:37):
To spray this gas on you.
>> Katie (20:39):
Ah. The only thing that will trump good looks in any,
any, any country is the economy.
It is the, it is the only thing. It is a solid
number two only to the economy.
>> Zach (20:50):
So, yeah, be very telling how
this goes gets debated going forward and who pulls out in
Canada, because the Conservatives had fallen
behind in the, in the polling after being
basically tied to Trump as a anchor, who is
attacking their country. And
honestly, this is a policy I would support in the US I think would be
(21:10):
great. I think we should start with the, um,
carbon border tax.
>> Katie (21:15):
Yes.
>> Zach (21:16):
And start with the tariff policy of high
polluters. I think it's an easy way to attack countries.
And then China can't claim the moral
high ground against us when we're just slapping them with random tariffs
for Truly, truly, Zach.
>> Katie (21:28):
I think that that's why I've been beating my head against the wall more lately than
ever before. Like, I feel like we're right there. We're
right there. We're right on the edge of me being
able to make a case for a carbon price at a carbon, carbon
border adjustment. If we're going to be doing tariffs
anyway, man, then let's just, let's
just reach out. It's right within
grasp and just grab it. It's right there. We're doing it
(21:50):
anyway. Let's just have an
environmental reason as justification. And then a lot of the
people criticizing the tariffs are going to shut up. It's the biggest number
one I can think of. It is, I hate to be that particular.
The art of the deal. It's literally, I swear to God,
this. Zach, I almost sent this meme to you, I saw it late last night. I
laughed my ass off, and it was like, trump imposes
(22:11):
tariffs of X percentage on China. All right. Yeah,
let's do it. Trump takes him back. The art of the deal.
Trump reintroduces tariffs. All right, we're doing it. He
takes them back. The art of the deal. It's just like,
okay, all right. If we're going to be right there,
let's just go ahead and say, oh, yeah. And another reason we're doing
it is because y'all pollute all the time. Like, if we're looking
(22:31):
for reasons to dunk on China, we're there, they're there.
We don't have to make them up. Let's just pull that into
our argument as well. It'd be great pr. You'd throw a
bone to the people who were worried about that. Come on. This is the
5D chess move. Trump, come call me. Call
me. Yeah.
>> Zach (22:47):
It would be a policy that could unite liberal people
behind him. Get people.
>> Katie (22:51):
Because. Because what's going to happen? Are folks on the left who are like,
pro environment going to say, well, not like that. We didn't actually
want to hold polluters accountable? Of course they're not going to say that. They're going to
be in support of it. It's your opportunity to have a little bit of wiggle room
on it.
>> Zach (23:03):
Yeah, yeah. And I think it's also important for, I
think, Trump's terrorist policy. What they're missing is clear
stated goals of what they're trying to accomplish.
>> Katie (23:11):
Yeah. Like, what is the reason why we're doing this other than because they're
trying to, like, okay, but why?
>> Zach (23:16):
Especially for other countries. I feel like countries like
Vietnam, Mexico, Canada, Malaysia
feel like they're just being attacked as, like, for no reason.
They're like, what do you want? They don't know what.
>> Katie (23:27):
Yeah, like, what do we need to change for this to go away?
And they're not being told. Nobody is. Which
makes it seem like it's all arbitrary. Even if the
reason's not true, just tell me we're doing it because they're
polluters. Okay, all right. I can put that in my pipe and smoke
it. Better than. I don't know, because I felt like it. Uh, the art of the
deal. Like, okay, I can't do anything with that.
>> Zach (23:47):
If you give them a goal to work towards, this will.
I also feel like Trump's really obsessed with the,
um, the, uh, trade
imbalance, which is tied to the strength of the
dollar. It's like, yeah, we're the richest
country in the world.
>> Katie (24:01):
Yeah.
>> Zach (24:01):
But we buy stuff from all over the world because it
works.
>> Katie (24:05):
Yeah. Are you kidding me? That's how the economy works.
When you're. I'm gonna say it. The
biggest, best country in the world. Uh, people want to buy your, uh,
want to sell to you.
That is how the or the deal works.
Like, why are we having to explain
Economics 101 to the President who's
owned multiple businesses? What. What is going on?
(24:26):
What. What is happening? The. I'm going to write the Art of
the Deal and we're going to debut it on this show. We're just going to have a series
where I like read my version of the Art of the Deal and that's going to be like
six straight episodes. And it's going to be like,
don't piss off the people who give you all your. Without having a backup
plan. The Art of the Deal. Like, I'm like, like,
what is going on?
>> Zach (24:46):
Yeah, I think it'll be. We'll have to
see if US Manufacturing actually
does come back in the next couple years. But I think
it's too short of a time span to really.
>> Katie (24:57):
Oh, yeah, no.
>> Zach (24:58):
Their hands and make a. Have Companies making a
10 to 20 year plan building out.
>> Katie (25:03):
Who's gonna be doing it? People who went to
school for four to six years for a completely different
field. Good luck with that.
Like, who, Who. Who's gonna be working these
jobs? Who. Who? Like, who is this
for? I don't understand. Like, that's what I don't
get. I'm like, then why did I go get more degrees
than a thermometer if I'm just gonna be working the factory
(25:25):
assembly line? Like, what, what was the point of that? Are you gonna forgive
my student loans? Like what? Like what goes on? Like, what, What?
What? I just have. So I don't get it. It's like the
equivalent of like when your dad tells you, oh, we'll just
walk inside businesses and tell them you're looking for
a job. It's like, my brother in Christ. That might have worked
in 1983.
>> Zach (25:45):
Um, not even.
>> Katie (25:46):
But, but, but, but that don't work no more. Okay. And.
And the guy who believes that is in charge of the economy.
Like, yeah, you just walk inside somewhere with your resume and you tell them you want a
job and you walk out and start on Monday. Yeah. That's
not. Sorry M. Yeah.
>> Zach (26:00):
So. Interesting world we are in. Little too interesting
for my take.
>> Katie (26:04):
Yeah. I've got no interest in what's going on right now? I. I
am. I'm team Giant Meteor that they keep
saying has a point 025 chance
of hitting us. Let's bump it up to 1%. Come on,
we can do it. Let's see it. I'm serious. Come on,
let's. Giant meteor 20, 27, 20,
28. Whatever.
>> Zach (26:22):
All right, ready? Ready to close it out?
>> Katie (26:25):
Yeah. On that note. Yeah. Giant Meteor is,
uh. Yeah. Here's your action. Here's your action
step. Write a letter to the giant meteor and convince it to
crash into the the earth in
three years and a few minutes to do it.
You'll come on the show and we'll interview you about it.
>> Zach (26:41):
Do you get a free no climate change anymore?
>> Katie (26:43):
Yeah, you get a free GTPR bumper sticker. Since we don't
have to talk about climate change anymore. If you convince the giant meteor to
smack straight into the planet. I will give you my GPS
coordinates if you'd like to plug those into your appeal. So, yeah,
let's. I don't know that there are any action steps for this one. I would just say
do a little bit of research on, um, Canada's carbon price.
We'll have an episode here in a few weeks about the American carbon
(27:03):
price. I would say just keep an eye on Canada's snap election,
see what comes from that. We'll, uh, we'll be talking about it after the
fact because I'm sure that none of this is going to go away anytime soon.
So we'll talk about it more then. But for now, let's.
Let's close it out. Zach, for
you, our listener. Email us with your thoughts.
Our email is info
greenteapartyradio.com thank you.
>> Zach (27:26):
For listening to Green Tea Party Radio. And a very special thank you
to all of our patrons. We couldn't do this without you. If
you're interested in getting early access episodes as well as Green Tea Party
merch, check us out at green greente party radio.com
get feedback, tell us what's on your mind, and follow us on Facebook, Instagram,
Twitter and TikTok.
>> Katie (27:41):
And just so you know, this is our passion project. We don't have
any organizational sponsor, uh, unless Giant Meteor
wants to sponsor us. Just a reminder that Green Tea
Party Radio is not representative of the Diocese of
ul, Catholic Climate Covenant, NASA, or any of our
employers. We are just young conservatives building a movement because
we want the world to know the conservatives, particularly young ones
(28:02):
like us, have important things to say about climate
change.
>> Zach (28:06):
And if you want to, if you want to hear our show in your college
radio station, email us@inforeentea
partyradio.com Give us the details about your campus and your
radio station. That email, again, is info
greent partyradio.com thanks for
listening.
>> Katie (28:20):
Thank you, Zach. I didn't think that we were going to hit
Canada's carbon price and giant
meteor all in one episode. Um, so if
anybody doubts our efficiency. Doge, come in
here for a master class. We can show you what all you can get done in
32 minutes.
>> Zach (28:35):
I think we're getting any Canadian listeners.
>> Katie (28:37):
Since we've done Canadian
folks, let us know how much you hate us. Um, or how much you
like us. Um, Surprise me. I. I like getting
fan mail and death mail. Um, and I get a good balance of
balance. All right, let me wrap it up.
It.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.