Unless of course the government invests in those basic necessities to keep the cost to consumer low.
Like having the government spend taxes on actual subsidized food production with the goal of it being a service to the people, not a business. Or on housing to the scale where real estate doesn’t get out of control due to low supply.
Id rather a world where necessities are cheap and luxuries are expensive than the world we have now where necessities are expensive and luxuries are cheap.
No it does not. It means the difference is turned into higher profit. This is what we saw. We did not see the price of groceries going down when thr tax was removed
Unless of course the government invests in those basic necessities to keep the cost to consumer low.
Like having the government spend taxes on actual subsidized food production with the goal of it being a service to the people, not a business. Or on housing to the scale where real estate doesn’t get out of control due to low supply.
Id rather a world where necessities are cheap and luxuries are expensive than the world we have now where necessities are expensive and luxuries are cheap.
Removing the carbon tax on food production is investing in basic necessities. Lowering the costs means lower prices at the til.
No it does not. It means the difference is turned into higher profit. This is what we saw. We did not see the price of groceries going down when thr tax was removed
The industrial carbon tax hasn’t been removed. The carbon taxes placed on food production are still in place.