Getting rid of the Carbon Tax

[Sunfish]

But you are saying that Turnbull and Gore don't actually believe the AGW thesis. They are in fact simply spreading unwarranted alarm to get rich. Right?

That's just freakin' wow!

You take everything so damn literally. You are just arguing because you enjoy it.

I cannot know what Turnbull believes and I have never charged him with being as mercenary as Gore but once a Goldman Sax banker, always one. Gore is definitely a scamster. A liar, if you like.

You haven't told me why you are happy to climb into bed with [wanna be] billionaires yet. Gore is rapidly becoming one and on the back of GW.

 

[Belbo]

You take everything so damn literally. You are just arguing because you enjoy it.

I cannot know what Turnbull believes and I have never charged him with being as mercenary as Gore but once a Goldman Sax banker, always one. Gore is definitely a scamster. A liar, if you like.

You haven't told me why you are happy to climb into bed with [wanna be] billionaires yet. Gore is rapidly becoming one and on the back of GW.

Dude, I don't think anything about me could interest an imagination like yours. I'm just normal.

 

[Sunfish]

It makes more sense when you wear tin foil hat

Like any pro/anti debate there are nutters on both sides. It pays not too label all of them as the same.

So you were only pretending that you don't like insults. You rather like them it seems.

 

[Ideo]

So you were only pretending that you don't like insults. You rather like them it seems.

I'm more than happy to descend to your level if that is what you want.

It was clearly a joking comment - my second sentence about their being nutters on both sides and it being important not to label those with a moderate position on either side as the same was the important part of that.

 

[The Fence]

Note to self - Sunfish posts are not yours

I got confused because you came in swinging because you had a petty grudge to settle, and didn't contribute anything to the discussion. Maybe you should engage brain before the keyboard. Most of your posts do not contribute to any subject except to argue and play god.

Get over your grudge. It's a different forum style here and I apologised. End of the matter as far as I am concerned. Not when you end with your last sentence below.

Sunfish, whether intentional or not, made some sweeping comments that were very thinly veiled insults. I called him up on it. You carried on with your petty grudge.

You are still carrying on with your petty grudge. So grow up, accept the apology that was issued and move on with your life.

No, no grudge. You hold the grudge.

Forgiveness isnt deserved you when you keep it going with comments like your last sentence above. You are here to disrupt, upset and annoy.
When you apologise you do not do it gracefully old mate, so it's meaningless.

How dare you tell me to grow up. You really are a law unto yourself arent you.


,

 

[Ideo]

No, no grudge. You hold the grudge.

Forgiveness isnt deserved you when you keep it going with comments like your last sentence above. You are here to disrupt, upset and annoy.
When you apologise you do not do it gracefully old mate, so it's meaningless.

How dare you tell me to grow up. You really are a law unto yourself arent you.


,

So, anyway, now that we have that off our chest.

Back to carbon tax, eh?

As it is nearly certain to be implemented, baring catastrophic collapse and new election (which is unlikely but I'm not writing it off), how would it be repealed after the next election?

And would it actually be repealed?

 

[Ausprop]

So, anyway, now that we have that off our chest.

Back to carbon tax, eh?

As it is nearly certain to be implemented, baring catastrophic collapse and new election (which is unlikely but I'm not writing it off), how would it be repealed after the next election?

And would it actually be repealed?

it could be repealled with a simultaneous increase in GST. the increase in GST won't cost anybody anymore and the usual suspects could be paid off - along with $1000 cheques for everyone earning under $30k per year.

 

[Peter 14.7]

So, anyway, now that we have that off our chest.

Actually LOL loved it, Peter

 

[Peter 14.7]

it could be repealled with a simultaneous increase in GST. the increase in GST won't cost anybody anymore and the usual suspects could be paid off - along with $1000 cheques for everyone earning under $30k per year.

Ausprop for PM!

This is such a good idea. As a professional I have to charge GST and you know what...the system works, it is very simple. I cost more than I earn i get it back. If I earn more than my costs I pay it. And, despite myths otherwise, it is very hard to get around using black money/cash. Someone pays.

A carbon Tax hits me if I am making $$ our losing $$$$$$. Fundamentally flawed and anti economy.

The GST is fundamentally fair.

I.e. (rounded for ease) If I want to take Good Wife to restaurant and spend $100 on a meal I contribute $10 to the economy of which say a rise to $1 for carbong tas is only $111.

If I am doing it tough and I deem to cook Good Wife a meal (don't laugh I can cook good) I buy fruit and veggies then I don't pay GST.

Which of the two experiences uses more carbon?

The first one, I have to drive there, restaurant is light, and heated, it advertises, in the press, its staff drive there, there is much more wastage, the cooking is all night, not 1 hr. I can cook in the dark with oven. They cannot.

It is shame, why we cannot accept a 15% GST with removal of stamp duty, carbon tax, fuel levies, etc... would be a easier proposition?

Why can, be .... bipartisan.

Regards Peter 14.7

 

[Aaron_C]

Peter,

We as self-employed people don't mind the GST because we don't really pay it as we get refunds if we spend more than we earn. But the entire premise of a GST is that the consumer is paying for it - after all, someone has to pay!

 

[tcocaro]

Really? This really made no sense... GST doesnt doesnt bother anyone BUT the self-employed and business. You say "we don't really pay it as we get refunds if we spend more than we earn" which is completely right but for most of us in business who generally enjoy spending less than what we earn (i.e. making a profit) GST is a tax like any other and if it goes up less goes in our pocket. Your comments make it sound like theres a way to claim GST till eternity there isnt.

Peter,

We as self-employed people don't mind the GST because we don't really pay it as we get refunds if we spend more than we earn. But the entire premise of a GST is that the consumer is paying for it - after all, someone has to pay!

 

[Aaron_C]

Really? This really made no sense... GST doesnt doesnt bother anyone BUT the self-employed and business. You say "we don't really pay it as we get refunds if we spend more than we earn" which is completely right but for most of us in business who generally enjoy spending less than what we earn (i.e. making a profit) GST is a tax like any other and if it goes up less goes in our pocket. Your comments make it sound like theres a way to claim GST till eternity there isnt.

You are right that we do have to end up paying GST but my point is that we see the benefit of the GST being refunded because it's not a tax on business but on consumers. I'm not trying to imply that it's a net benefit for the self-employed.

 

[Ideo]

You are right that we do have to end up paying GST but my point is that we see the benefit of the GST being refunded because it's not a tax on business but on consumers. I'm not trying to imply that it's a net benefit for the self-employed.

My concern from a property development point of view is that this argument (wider Carbon tax rather than just this) is just increasing uncertainty.

I know from our perspective we can manage Carbon Tax as it is a largely known quantity so the costs can be modelled and worked out, and, obviously, passed on to the purchaser where possible.

Keep in mind that the market does tend to find its own level. If the impacts of the Carbon Tax are too great there will be a slump in the economy. But all modelling I have seen indicate that it is manageable from my end. For consumers for electricity etc that is possibly a different story.

The arguments over whether or not it will be repealed do put a big strain on forward planning - do we hold or do we absorb the costs now?

 

[Peter 14.7]

You are right that we do have to end up paying GST but my point is that we see the benefit of the GST being refunded because it's not a tax on business but on consumers. I'm not trying to imply that it's a net benefit for the self-employed.

And my point is consumers can choose to not spend and in doing so, save money, not incur costs, and not use carbon so not pay tax. I think that is fairer.

As a business I an pass GST on to clients but the final price reflects what people are wiling to pay inc GST. If I price my self at $100 inc GST and client says no, only $80 inc GST then I have to lower my price to win the job.

Peter

 

[Tony3008]

... Keep in mind that the market does tend to find its own level. If the impacts of the Carbon Tax are too great there will be a slump in the economy. But all modelling I have seen indicate that it is manageable from my end. For consumers for electricity etc that is possibly a different story....

If the carbon tax is bringing in loads of money in two or three years, it will have failed. If, when people are looking for a new fridge, washing machine, TV etc, increased electricity prices cause them to pay a little more attention to energy usage and this influences their purchasing (which in turn will feed back to what manufacturers produce) then it will have succeeded.

In the UK company car tax was reworked c.2001 to be on a CO2 basis. The popular press was full of lurid stories as to how people with particular cars (selected to suit the agenda of course) would be financially crippled by the change. What actually happened is that car manufacturers changed what they were offering so as to put their cars into lower tax bands and a couple of years later the exchequer was collecting less in company car tax than before the change.

 

[Belbo]

Can't go past Peter Costello - that man could manage the economy better than anyone.

A bit of a hypothetical question for you, Dazz, in light of what you say above -

If you had to choose between Costello or Abbott as leader of the federal Liberal Party, right now, which one would you choose?

(As it sounds like Michael Kroeger for one is quite prepared to go past his old buddy Peter C!)

 

[Aaron_C]

Isn't it obvious Belbo? Tony Abbott. Costello never had the support of the party room nor was he gutsy enough to challenge in his own right. That's not leadership material.

 

[Dazz]

Well, just on the subject of the Carbon Tax and it's removal, I had a very interesting conversation with someone yesterday who couldn't possibly be any closer to the process.

I contended that the Liberal led Govt after the next election would struggle to get it's Bills thru a Senate, and it would depend on the numbers, and if they changed enough (by up to 4) to pass the Bill.

The person said it'll be a piece of cake, there would be no resistance at all, and any Bill put to the Senate to remove the Carbon Tax would fly thru and be approved instantly.

I asked why they held that level of confidence.

The response was, that after being annilihated at the election, the Labor Party would drop its support for the Carbon Tax like a dead rat.....they couldn't possibly defend it. The landscape will be totally different.

• Julia will be gone.
• Labor will be crushed.
• No Greens in the lower house
• Both houses over-run with Liberal and National members

I didn't share their confidence, but we made a bet and shook on it. I took the stance, being removed from the action, that the coalition would struggle to get rid of it. They, being at the very heart of the action, took the stance it would be a walk in the park.

I suppose we'll see.....I hope I lose the bet !!!

 

[Peter 14.7]

Good Point Dazz and you insider may be right.

We assume Labor wants CT because it is policy. No... it was price they paid to get Gov. Considering it affects Labor voters jobs (factory) most, they probably really hate it. Dead Rat exactly...

But if they do oppose, a double dissolution of Parliament based on CT would be "manna from heaven" for Abbott. He could campaign they have no authority. We have the mandate, which by the way would probably be 100% true.

I mean, CT really is a stupid policy to serious issue.

I am green. And I don't want our planet to die but blind freddy can see the CT will make no affect on the planet unless applied across the planet and that is not going to happen because AUS say it should be.

China is laughing, South America ready to cut us out, the Japanese thinking time to pull out of Aus for Thailand, Europe is too busy and the USA does care what the %^$ we do.

Try telling some illiterate 50 year old redundant forklift driver, who left school at year 10, never uses a computer, don't worry about being sacked......we are going to train you to build solar panels in a clean room, and pay you AUS wages when the world can do the same in China for 10% of what you will cost. He is not stupid.

Rant over, Peter 14.&

 

[cu@thetop]

I suppose we'll see.....I hope I lose the bet !!!

Depends what the stakes were!