carbon tax thread

[Dazz]

It was put to the test

Turn it up - she stood there 6 days before the election and said what everyone in the whole country heard her say. There was a good reason she lied - she would have been booted out if she had of told the truth of what Labor really wanted. The Greens have twisted her arm even more to extract their pound of flesh.

It was not put to the test, the Australian people have never voted for or against such a tax and to say otherwise you are simply deluding yourself.

We got a parliament that had 72 for the Coalition + Tony Crook + Bob Katter = 74

Indeed....and given the electors in the seat of Kennedy, Bob Katter would be crazy to support any other party other than the conservatives ;

Seat of Kennedy
Katter....................46.7%
Liberal/Nationals......26.6%
Labor.....................20.2%
Greens.....................4.5%

How could he support anyone else other than the Liberals....his electorate has spoken.

And 72 Labor (with a slight edge in 2 party preferred), + Adam Bandt + 3 Independents that very much believe in climate change.

Let's just take a wee quick look at the details of those electorates and see how those folk voted shall we ;


Seat of New England
Windsor...................61.9%
Nationals.................25.2%
Labor........................8.1%
Greens......................3.6%

An absolute travesty of justice. He won't last the next election IMO, the people are livid. Only 11.7% of the population voted for left wing parties. He is representing very conservative people. The only thing to say is that he garnered 62% of the vote, and therefore quite rightly can do as he pleases. He'll struggle big time to get back in.


Seat of Lyne
Oakeshott................47.1%
Nationals..................34.4%
Labor.......................13.5%
Greens......................4.3%

Only 17.8% of the population voted for left wing parties. He is also representing very conservative people. I think he'll lose his seat next time around.


Seat of Dension
Labor.......................35.8%
Liberals.....................22.6%
Wilkie........................21.3%
Greens......................19.0%

This is a joke....Wilkie is a one hit wonder. You can guarantee the Libs will throw their weight behind the Labor candidate to ensure Labor victory on this seat, excluding Wilkie and the Greens completely. They learnt their lessons and honed their skills in the Victorian election.


Seat of Melbourne
Labor.......................38.1%
Greens......................36.2%
Liberals.....................21.0%

Once again, this is a joke....Bandt is also one hit wonder. You can guarantee the Libs will throw their weight behind the Labor candidate to ensure Labor victory on this seat, excluding the Greens completely as they did during the Victorian election.


I predict you'll find the Australian people won't stand for this indecision and cosy cuddling up to minor parties, who alter the agenda from what they voted for. It'll be the red or blue team. This muddled purple / green motley crew in the Parliament will not last. It's an aberration that, the effects of which will be wiped clean.


History will remember this Parliament for the two independent reps of very conservative NSW country electorates of New England and Lyne not supporting conservative party politics....and the consequences that followed. Shame on them.

 

[murph14]

I think it's VERY important to get out there the crazy green rubbish that is going on

...And here is that list of JUST the tax reform part bs:

The Australian Greens’ Taxations Policy

New Taxes or tax increases (Policy section reference)

1. Increased income tax rates ( 3.3.2)
2. New Consumption tax with multiple rates (3.3.8)
3. Increase capital gain tax (3.3.9,3.3.10)
4. Higher Fringe Benefit tax (3.3.3)
5. Eliminate salary sacrificing (3.3.3)
6. Introduce estate duties [including family home] (3.3.11)
7. Introduce gift tax (3.3.12)
8. Higher Medicare levy with progressive rates (3.3.15, 3.3.16)
9. Eliminate Private Health Insurance rebate (3.3.18)
10. Increased taxations of superannuation(3.3.19, 3.3.20)
11. Tax family trusts (3.3.14)
12. Increased company tax to 33% (3.3.21)
13. Tax on franked dividends (3.3.22)
14. Carbon levy (3.3.24)
15. Increased timber royalties (17.1.8)
16. Tax equivalent on non recycled paper (17.1.8)
17. Tax bottles and containers (17.1.7)
18. plastic bag levy (17.1.7)
19. private transport user tax (2.4,2.5)
20. Tax on batteries (7.1.12)
21. Increased tax on rental property (3.3.28)
22. Mining environmental levy (15.1.6)
23. Nutrient pollution tax (3.3.25)
24. Tax on fossil fuel usage (3.3.25)
25. Tax on water pollution (3.3.25)
26. Tax on soil pollution (3.3.25)
27. Tax on air pollution (3.3.25)
28. Tax on timber use (3.3.25)
29. Tax on use of ocean (3.3.25)
30. Tax on use of freshwater (3.3.25)
31. Tax on mineral use (3.3.25)
32. Tax on land sites according to land value (3.3.25)
33. Tax on electromagnetic spectrum assets (3.3.25)
34. Tax on petroleum (3.3.25)
35. Higher taxes on ecologically damaging industries 3.3.27)
36. Currency transaction tax (3.3.36)
37. 33 % tax surcharge on high corporate salaries (3.3.31)
38. Pay-roll tax to fund employee entitlements (4.3.25)
39. Landfill taxes (16.2.3)
40. Increased environmental charges and fines (16.2.3)

 

[lizzie]

The next 2 years cannot pass quickly enough. I hope they end up with the double dissolusionment ... them Greens are scary and deceptive buggers!

 

[eKwatee]

...And here is that list of JUST the tax reform part bs:

The Australian Greens’ Taxations Policy

New Taxes or tax increases (Policy section reference)

1. Increased income tax rates ( 3.3.2)
2. New Consumption tax with multiple rates (3.3.8)
3. Increase capital gain tax (3.3.9,3.3.10)
4. Higher Fringe Benefit tax (3.3.3)
5. Eliminate salary sacrificing (3.3.3)
6. Introduce estate duties [including family home] (3.3.11)
7. Introduce gift tax (3.3.12)
8. Higher Medicare levy with progressive rates (3.3.15, 3.3.16)
9. Eliminate Private Health Insurance rebate (3.3.18)
10. Increased taxations of superannuation(3.3.19, 3.3.20)
11. Tax family trusts (3.3.14)
12. Increased company tax to 33% (3.3.21)
13. Tax on franked dividends (3.3.22)
14. Carbon levy (3.3.24)
15. Increased timber royalties (17.1.8)
16. Tax equivalent on non recycled paper (17.1.8)
17. Tax bottles and containers (17.1.7)
18. plastic bag levy (17.1.7)
19. private transport user tax (2.4,2.5)
20. Tax on batteries (7.1.12)
21. Increased tax on rental property (3.3.28)
22. Mining environmental levy (15.1.6)
23. Nutrient pollution tax (3.3.25)
24. Tax on fossil fuel usage (3.3.25)
25. Tax on water pollution (3.3.25)
26. Tax on soil pollution (3.3.25)
27. Tax on air pollution (3.3.25)
28. Tax on timber use (3.3.25)
29. Tax on use of ocean (3.3.25)
30. Tax on use of freshwater (3.3.25)
31. Tax on mineral use (3.3.25)
32. Tax on land sites according to land value (3.3.25)
33. Tax on electromagnetic spectrum assets (3.3.25)
34. Tax on petroleum (3.3.25)
35. Higher taxes on ecologically damaging industries 3.3.27)
36. Currency transaction tax (3.3.36)
37. 33 % tax surcharge on high corporate salaries (3.3.31)
38. Pay-roll tax to fund employee entitlements (4.3.25)
39. Landfill taxes (16.2.3)
40. Increased environmental charges and fines (16.2.3)

Its amazing, the Greens want all these taxes but yet hardly any of the Green voters pay any or very little tax.

 

[NedKelly]

...And here is that list of JUST the tax reform part bs:

The Australian Greens’ Taxations Policy

New Taxes or tax increases (Policy section reference)

1. Increased income tax rates ( 3.3.2)
2. New Consumption tax with multiple rates (3.3.8)
3. Increase capital gain tax (3.3.9,3.3.10)
4. Higher Fringe Benefit tax (3.3.3)
5. Eliminate salary sacrificing (3.3.3)
6. Introduce estate duties [including family home] (3.3.11)
7. Introduce gift tax (3.3.12)
8. Higher Medicare levy with progressive rates (3.3.15, 3.3.16)
9. Eliminate Private Health Insurance rebate (3.3.18)
10. Increased taxations of superannuation(3.3.19, 3.3.20)
11. Tax family trusts (3.3.14)
12. Increased company tax to 33% (3.3.21)
13. Tax on franked dividends (3.3.22)
14. Carbon levy (3.3.24)
15. Increased timber royalties (17.1.8)
16. Tax equivalent on non recycled paper (17.1.8)
17. Tax bottles and containers (17.1.7)
18. plastic bag levy (17.1.7)
19. private transport user tax (2.4,2.5)
20. Tax on batteries (7.1.12)
21. Increased tax on rental property (3.3.28)
22. Mining environmental levy (15.1.6)
23. Nutrient pollution tax (3.3.25)
24. Tax on fossil fuel usage (3.3.25)
25. Tax on water pollution (3.3.25)
26. Tax on soil pollution (3.3.25)
27. Tax on air pollution (3.3.25)
28. Tax on timber use (3.3.25)
29. Tax on use of ocean (3.3.25)
30. Tax on use of freshwater (3.3.25)
31. Tax on mineral use (3.3.25)
32. Tax on land sites according to land value (3.3.25)
33. Tax on electromagnetic spectrum assets (3.3.25)
34. Tax on petroleum (3.3.25)
35. Higher taxes on ecologically damaging industries 3.3.27)
36. Currency transaction tax (3.3.36)
37. 33 % tax surcharge on high corporate salaries (3.3.31)
38. Pay-roll tax to fund employee entitlements (4.3.25)
39. Landfill taxes (16.2.3)
40. Increased environmental charges and fines (16.2.3)

I can now see why disaffected labor voters might vote for them. That must be why there is no fishing tax.

 

[bluestorm]

...And here is that list of JUST the tax reform part bs:

The Australian Greens’ Taxations Policy

New Taxes or tax increases (Policy section reference)

Can't be true. If you listen to a Green voter you would think that the Greens are really only concerned about the environment.
Looking at the list of Green tax policy, it looks like we are well on the way to having all these tax increases. And with Gillard and Labor having gotten Australia into a huge debt, the Carbon Tax is only the start of tax increases to start paying it all off.

What I find funny is that there are people here who support the Greens and invest in property, yet would be the types of people most impacted by implementation of Green policies, including Carbon Tax and ETS, removal of negative gearing, removal of CGT concessions, etc.

- progressive taxes such as income taxes are preferable to regressive forms of taxation such as the GST.
- removing the concessional arrangements for Capital Gains Tax;
- only allowing losses from an investment to be offset against income from the same investment;

 

[Intrinsic_Value]

What I find funny is that there are people here who support the Greens and invest in property, yet would be the types of people most impacted by implementation of Green policies, including Carbon Tax and ETS, removal of negative gearing, removal of CGT concessions, etc.

;

i think you will find there is a very small minority in somersoft who support it.
They will be characterised by the following factors:

(a) people like Evan who do not have a huge exposure to property
(b) Obession whatever: have bought into residential property in the early stages, are now massively cashflow positive, isnt really effected by negative gearing anymore (since got on the cycle early), has lots of time now to reflect on passive social issues.
(c) those who actually are not residential property investors in any serious manner, but are still members of this forum.

 

[Intrinsic_Value]

...And here is that list of JUST the tax reform part bs:

The Australian Greens’ Taxations Policy

New Taxes or tax increases (Policy section reference)

(16.2.3)

I wouldnt worry as the greens become 'more mainstream' they will have to become more accountable for their actions.

Its easy as a fringe political party to just mouth off, it becomes harder as one needs to actually have an input into the governance of the country.

Wait till the next election, its going to be very very interesting.

(a) the major political parties have seen the error of their ways by having any tyeup with the greens. This wont occur again.
(b) the feel good wanna bees, when times are good, might be feeling that times are not so good anymore and will get back to fundamentals.
(c) there will always be a 'hardcore' green vote, but it will go back to where it belongs, in the fringes, not in mainstreem politics.

At the end of the day, 10-15% of the population voted for the greens. That means 90-85% of the population didnt. Yet our overal government policy is being dictated by this 10-15% minority vote.

This will be rectified at the next election.

 

[bdc]

Turn it up - she stood there 6 days before the election and said what everyone in the whole country heard her say. There was a good reason she lied

...


History will remember this Parliament for the two independent reps of very conservative NSW country electorates of New England and Lyne not supporting conservative party politics....and the consequences that followed. Shame on them.

I have deleted my posts, I came to these forums for RE advice not to get into political discussions which don't tend to have a very nice tone or bring the best out in people on the internet (and people rarely change their opinion over the net anyway).

But I do have to say a couple of things seeing as I was quoted.

To lie you really have to have intent to deceive or knowingly tell a falsehood, without this, you are just wrong or mistaken.

I think people should drop the Liar call, a parliament such as this was basically unprecedented, if Labor had of had a majority it would have gone straight to an ETS instead of carbon tax in the interim.


Also, your statistics do not represent what you seem to be concluding Dazz, you can't know from those statistics what % of the electorate is Left or Right leaning, just because the Nats are 2nd in Lyne and New England doesn't mean that they are conservative electorates, you can't conclude how people lean from that without knowing how the people who voted for the independents lean, which isn't known...

Also, if you look at the results of the recent state election, the independents did better than the state average and they have large margins, so it's certainly not a sure thing they will lose, in fact, Besseling actually gained a few % in the state election (It shows as -30%, but its inaccurate as it compares to the previous state election which he wasn't running in, if you compare it to the Bi election which he did run in you will see he gained in primary vote, but other parties didn't run a candidate which pushed the Nats over the edge).

Looking at the state results, both Oakeshott and Windsor are fairly safe based on their margins, and it also shows these electorates aren't as conservative as you seem to think.

Anyway, I will try and stick with lurking around and getting RE info instead of getting into political debates over the internet...at least on these forums ; D

 

[bluestorm]

I have deleted my posts, I came to these forums for RE advice not to get into political discussions which don't tend to have a very nice tone or bring the best out in people on the internet (and people rarely change their opinion over the net anyway).

These discussions are the the Coffee Lounge section. You don't need to read this section.
Also, political decisions can have impacts on investments. You only need to follow the US political debate to understand that. Many of us investors don't just want to look at property in isolation. That's what the passive investor who assumes they can just make easy money sitting around and waiting for property to go up and up.
For me, because I invest property, and day trade shares, it's important to know whats happening in the world.

 

[The Fence]

Looking at the state results, both Oakeshott and Windsor are fairly safe based on their margins, and it also shows these electorates aren't as conservative as you seem to think.

Looking at the next election you will be shown just how conservative these two electorates are because Windsor & Oakshott are now both on the hit list of voters. Even Windsor's best friend and (former) supporter is very very angry & dissapointed with him ....!!

I live in Windsors electorate and fairdinkum there are buggerall people who are not conservative types I can tell you, and we are all dissillusioned with Windsor and have concluded that he does not give a rats and is only feathering his own nest. That my friend is the word on the street here, I hear no support for him whatsoever.

 

[evand]

If what you're saying is true then why do most left seats reside in inner city expensive areas?

The outer aspirational, Mcmansion suburbs are the majority of Liberal voters these days. You know, John Howards mortgage belt that voted him into power in 2001.

Do you post anything that is factual?

And as for the rest of your post. Did you actually read the articles? It disproves everything you are saying.

Now you are kidding.

Only a leftie could forget who wanted the banks to lend more - to the underclasses - and who privatized the "People's Bank".

Lefties en masse are so financially illiterate, they don't know both these things were instigated by those infamous pin up socialists, Hawke and Keating.

When the unintended consequences (at least to financially illiterate lefties) eventually follow as night the day, left bent bozos get in a flap about not seeing it coming, and go into PR manic mode, trying to pin it on the evil dirty right.

Personally, I think because the Left are always targeting voters in their tweens, and females, they think they can get away with lying about recent history, in which these voters are sadly ill informed. And that's not a sexist comment, if it is fact, which it is.

 

[evand]

Almost as scary as the Shooters party (that want into introduce shooting into schools).

Fred Nile (that wants to ban ethics classes ins schools), lets not forget Pauline Hanson. All right wing and all a lot more dangerous that the greens.

The next 2 years cannot pass quickly enough. I hope they end up with the double dissolusionment ... them Greens are scary and deceptive buggers!

 

[evand]

Its a discussion, not a vote. Its an internet forum, not the parliament. Why do you keep banging on about this?

No you will not. You'll vote Greens and Labor to push your lefty idealogies further....and you'll ignore / name call / denigrate anyone with a differing opinion....like this...





This so-called on-going pointless "debate" has gone on for 820+ posts in the first thread and now about 80+ posts in the second thread and I'm yet to hear of one person who has changed their stance / opinion / vote based on any of the posts.


Like all online blogs / opinions / debates, it all comes to nothing.


The only way to settle the "debate" is with a vote, where the majority's opinion over-rules the minority's opinion.


With 149 out of 150 candidates for the Federal lower house going before the Australian people at the last election with a vow not to introduce a carbon tax, the result ended up being 72 a piece.....hence the tension in the 'political ruling air' ever since. No-one has a mandate to do anything !!


Now the Australian people have a clearer picture of both the Greens policy and the Labor policy on the issue, as compared with the Liberal and National party policy....and now know what damage can be done if they do not clearly elect a winning major party and leave it to the minor parties to cosy up and do deals.....we'll soon see who is in the majority and all this "debate" can finally be put to rest.


I haven't seen one poster from the left side willing to put it to the test.

 

[evand]

Just like Tony Rabbit back flipped on his support for climate change. He even admitted being a liar last year.

The Liberals (have and do) bend over for the nationals, Fred Nile, The shooters party or whatever right wing Loonys hold the balance of power.

Turn it up - she stood there 6 days before the election and said what everyone in the whole country heard her say. There was a good reason she lied - she would have been booted out if she had of told the truth of what Labor really wanted. The Greens have twisted her arm even more to extract their pound of flesh.

It was not put to the test, the Australian people have never voted for or against such a tax and to say otherwise you are simply deluding yourself.

 

[our obsession]

They are quite disturbing, the mindset they carry and feed is indeed a puzzle, not unlike the far righters that had such an obvious affect and influence upon Anders Breivik.

The capacity for their rational thought and critical thinking, (for some of them, not all), is concerning. They play the same dvd over and over and over again, it's almost like they try to convince themselves. I don't think an opposition leader like Tony Abbott helps, (meaning not much going on upstairs). he has had such a negative, non contributory to anything much air...

If nothing else it was an interesting observation of some human behaviour, but it is quite un original now. Same old, same old...but Stefan does attempt a sublime to the ridiculous...

 

[StefanA]

If what you're saying is true then why do most left seats reside in inner city expensive areas?

Because idle types with Arts degrees feel insecure if there's not a cinema showing subtitled films, 8 cafes, and 10 cheap ethnic restaurants all within an inebriated walk of home. They like to huddle in areas where there's lots of public servants, and PS jobs are more so in the cbd and inner ring. Not too many lefties would be happy working in Lumea, and if they did, they'd still prefer to commute from Grayndler, such is their scorn and hatred of the aspirational underclasses. You see, the paradox of the urban Left is they hate the working class, and distance themselves from it as best they can.

Lefties in general, despite their pretend interest in all things natural, are also more comfortable as far from nature as they can get - give them concrete and the population density of the inner metro ring.

Lefties gravitate to where the younger hip and happening generation rent. Why? because even when they are no longer young, they imagine they are, magically thinking immersing themselves amongst undergraduate tweens will keep them youthful. It is the twenty and thirty something renters that help inflate the left vote in these suburbs.

Of course, the latte lifestyle offers their kids little and robs a lot - kids lose the freedom to play down by a quiet bushland creek, ride bikes, swing a hammer making stuff in the backyard, having a few pets, and a decent vegetable garden. Nope, lefties don't see a kid as deprived in missing out on this stuff.

The outer aspirational, Mcmansion suburbs are the majority of Liberal voters these days. You know, John Howards mortgage belt that voted him into power in 2001.

good for the mortgage belt. Home of the honest hard working private sector, many self employed in small business, whose priority is to pay down their mortgage, rather then pay more taxes to star eyed lefties wanting even greater job security than the mortgage belt bogans they detest.

Do you post anything that is factual?

You'd have to know the facts to tell.

And as for the rest of your post. Did you actually read the articles? It disproves everything you are saying.

Maybe my mind isn't smog and lead polluted enough to see things from your Sydney urban perspective.

 

[josko]

They are quite disturbing, the mindset they carry and feed is indeed a puzzle, not unlike the far righters that had such an obvious affect and influence upon Anders Breivik.

The capacity for their rational thought and critical thinking, (for some of them, not all), is concerning. They play the same dvd over and over and over again, it's almost like they try to convince themselves. I don't think an opposition leader like Tony Abbott helps, (meaning not much going on upstairs). he has had such a negative, non contributory to anything much air...

If nothing else it was an interesting observation of some human behaviour, but it is quite un original now. Same old, same old...but Stefan does attempt a sublime to the ridiculous...

Hi obsession,

Tony Abbott has a degree in Economics. It is obvious that Gillard and Swan do not. Abbott is also a Rhodes Scholar.

I think Abbott is just not a terribly good public speaker, although I did hear him speak back in March and was suprisingly impressed. He has his moments it seems.

Regards JO

 

[josko]

Just like Tony Rabbit back flipped on his support for climate change. He even admitted being a liar last year.

The Liberals (have and do) bend over for the nationals, Fred Nile, The shooters party or whatever right wing Loonys hold the balance of power.

Tony Rabbitt (should b two t's) back-flipped because like most politicians except anyone in The Labor party and Malcolm Turncoat, he is listening to the majority and actually understanding that the MAJORITY of people do NOT want this CO2 Tax and are questioning man-made Climate Change and Global Warming.

Rabbitt did NOT bend over to Bob Brown, Windsor and Oakeshott- THAT much is obvious. Which way did Julia bend?

Regards JO

 

[evand]

OK, where does one start? Unis are full of lazy, privileged Lib voters' kids doing art degrees. Always has been.

the inner west of Sydney is slowly but surely being overtaken by Easter suburbs and north shore right wing Lib voters trying to look hip and edgy.

For the first time, in the last fed election, the previous very left seat of Balmain almost had a Liberal win. A sign of whats happening to the inner west left seats.

There are more vegie gardens, chooks, sustainable living, creeks and parks in my electorate than in the outer suburbs (where i grew up, so ive seen both sides of the fence). Even my kids school has organic gardens and chooks.

Tweens? Isnt that age 9 to 12 or something? What are you on mate?

But you havnt addressed my reply to your initial post of lefties being financially illiterate at all, even thio they mostly live in more expensive reas than Little Johnnys, Lib voting aspirational classes. You just moved the goal posts. As you have done all along.

Again, do you post anything factual?

Because idle types with Arts degrees feel insecure if there's not a cinema showing subtitled films, 8 cafes, and 10 cheap ethnic restaurants all within an inebriated walk of home. They like to huddle in areas where there's lots of public servants, and PS jobs are more so in the cbd and inner ring. Not too many lefties would be happy working in Lumea, and if they did, they'd still prefer to commute from Grayndler, such is their scorn and hatred of the aspirational underclasses. You see, the paradox of the urban Left is they hate the working class, and distance themselves from it as best they can.

Lefties in general, despite their pretend interest in all things natural, are also more comfortable as far from nature as they can get - give them concrete and the population density of the inner metro ring.

Lefties gravitate to where the younger hip and happening generation rent. Why? because even when they are no longer young, they imagine they are, magically thinking immersing themselves amongst undergraduate tweens will keep them youthful. It is the twenty and thirty something renters that help inflate the left vote in these suburbs.

Of course, the latte lifestyle offers their kids little and robs a lot - kids lose the freedom to play down by a quiet bushland creek, ride bikes, swing a hammer making stuff in the backyard, having a few pets, and a decent vegetable garden. Nope, lefties don't see a kid as deprived in missing out on this stuff.



good for the mortgage belt. Home of the honest hard working private sector, many self employed in small business, whose priority is to pay down their mortgage, rather then pay more taxes to star eyed lefties wanting even greater job security than the mortgage belt bogans they detest.



You'd have to know the facts to tell.



Maybe my mind isn't smog and lead polluted enough to see things from your Sydney urban perspective.