Well obviously, not all businesses will benefit. Oil companies which make money polluting the air and water will stand to lose money from this. But from their own mouths, Oil companies want a price on carbon so that they can plan their future business operations.

People WILL make money off of it green technology. It is no stereotype that many European nations like Germany and Denmark have reduced their emissions and increased their economy by 40% since 1990.

You're correct, many people with money want more money if it's "green" or not. Thus, to curb that mentality, if you make it more expensive to pollute, you effectively change their behavior so that they make money while polluting less. That's just common sense. As the government, it can set consequence and benefits for making money a certain way.

The Government is being asked to Reduce their GHG emissions. It is up to our government to come up with ways to do it. Being eco friendly AND cost effective can very well go hand in hand. It is also common sense that if you use less energy, you electric bill is lower. If you use less gas, your vehicle maintenance bill is lower. You would be reducing your cost (ie. be cost effective), and reduce emissions (ie. be eco friendly).

It is a sad, backward mentality that the Harper Gov't perpetuates when they say cutting greenhouse gas emissions will destroy our economy. There's a lot of money and jobs that can be produced, as well as money saved, when reducing GHG emissions.

Simple example: A lot of emissions come from Coal plants, so how can we increase our efficiency and reduce energy use? Well, lets retrofit existing public buildings to use less energy. This would require technology that we can start producing IN Canada. We can retrain the thousands of people that lost their manufacturing jobs, produce these new green manufacturing jobs, save tax money from lower utility costs, lower emissions, and boost our economy with new products that we can sell and export. These same technologies can be applied to the private sector as well.

Instead of subsidizing the tar sands, apply the same "model" above and invest in green energy. The tar sands emit most of the emissions anyways, so if we could stop its growth and reduce it, we kill two birds with one stone.

Reducing emissions will also save tens of millions in health costs for Canada from treating smog related diseases as well as reduce Cancer levels (inhaling these emissions is just as bad as smoking those cigarettes).