Wow! SEVERAL scientists!!
Well we better throw out all that research by THOUSANDS of scientists believe that CO2 gases are harmful to the future of the planet.
Several scientists have spoken. Give me a break.
Last edited:
The Biggest Tax EVER in Australia
- Thread starter josko
- Start date
Wow! SEVERAL scientists!!
Well we better throw out all that research by THOUSANDS of scientists believe that CO2 gases are harmful to the future of the planet.
Several scientists have spoken. Give me a break.
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/live-blog-the-carbon-tax-debate-20111012-1ljtf.html
9.37am: Much applause, hand shaking and congratulations all round as the Clean Energy Future bills pass the lower house. The government secured the passage of the 18 bills with the support of key crossbench MPs, winning the vote 74 to 72.
The lower house also passed the government's $300 million steel transformation plan bill.That vote was won 75 to 71 with Queensland independent Bob Katter joining fellow independents Rob Oakeshott, Tony Windsor and Andrew Wilkie, and Greens MP Adam Bandt, in backing Labor
9.37am: Much applause, hand shaking and congratulations all round as the Clean Energy Future bills pass the lower house. The government secured the passage of the 18 bills with the support of key crossbench MPs, winning the vote 74 to 72.
The lower house also passed the government's $300 million steel transformation plan bill.That vote was won 75 to 71 with Queensland independent Bob Katter joining fellow independents Rob Oakeshott, Tony Windsor and Andrew Wilkie, and Greens MP Adam Bandt, in backing Labor
That ridiculous Mirabella was booted out of parliament for 24 hours, just to make the passage easier.
She got all hysterical - not surprising considering shes Liberal - and her party lost her vote.
Wouldn't have made any difference tho.
She got all hysterical - not surprising considering shes Liberal - and her party lost her vote.
Wouldn't have made any difference tho.
Well said Joe.
This is a great day for Australia and the World but a bad day for selfish ignorant people!
One would think anyone with more than 1% of topend grey matter,and a bit of foward thinking would think that,to establish a reputation "OS" for financial and economic stability,and "POLITICAL INTERGRITY",in the leaders of the overseas investing countries how can a carbon tax do that.
Good job Gillard government, ETS, here we come....
Your a banker in Zurich, Switzerland.
You forgot to put some LOL and
smilies in your post.See ya's.
Dan, his sources are Professor Bolt, double degree in Stupidity.
His mentor was Alan Jones, taught by Monckton, financed by Gina. (So on, follow their trail of lies)......Likes bees to the honey, stupidity and ignorance gathers them around...
Indeed it is interesting the human differences Dazz.
And most people have opinions on this in the degree that they will be effected. '
Depreciator claims it will hardly effect him. I wouldn't doubt it. Depreciator lives in an inner city suburb, and works in finance or something like that?
Joe Expats a banker in Zurich. He will probably make a killing from this. I'd think it was marvelous too if I did what he did.
A lot of those negative about this tax know it will effect them. It will mean tens of thousands more costs for my business. A typical dairy farmer or irrigation farmer who uses 50k worth of electricity per year will get hammered. And thats with agriculture being excluded from an ETS.
Some sort of tax that took an equal share from everyone would have been much fairer. As it is now, exporting business's, especially mining, manufacturing business's, are going to take most of the pain. Anyone competing with overseas, where they won't have the tax. If your in a service industry in the city, who cares, especially when all the cash starts to get thrown back.
See ya's.
Last edited:
Short Term it is not such a big deal, is it?
I think people have to look at the long term around this tax and the purpose of our local ETS.
Short term as others have said, the income produced from the tax is put right back into the economy minus the administration costs. Presumably this will have only a limited effect. We still get our comparitive advantage around cheap energy now we just share it around the economy rather than giving the edge to our businesses. I would not say I am happy with the idea, but it could be worse, and this comes later...
Exporters for the most part will recieve concessions initially also so should not be going out of business from this in isolation.
But what is on the agenda next?
What seems to have been forgotten however is that in the longer term we are doing this to drive change around the world. To go about bringing in a global ETS. I assume this is still on the agenda, if not Australia moving unilaterally is pointless? This is not mentioned much, I suspect because we are told we get it all back as tax cuts for now.
I don't see this working in a global ETS system, we will be paying tax here for other countries. Nothing wrong with that but it needs to be made clear in my opinion as when the world moves to this Australia will have no choice. It just seems strange we are at the cutting edge of pushing for it.
What happens with a global ETS is that we then have to pay to economies that are developing and have not had the advantage of 200 years of rapid economic growth using coal (only fair really) and to those countries who do not have coal anyway and rely on nuclear or other sources, we become less competitive against.
Australia of all countries gets a considerable economic kick out of using coal energy. The big question really is assuming the world does warm 2 degrees over the next 50 years is it actually better for Australia we allow this unfettered but continue to reap the rewards of our edge around coal? Or is it better to mitigate this by the world moving together by half a degree or whatever that might be.
Why be included in the countries pushing this (like European ones with little coal) when other coal rich countries are not?
In this we seem to tally up all the costs of sticking with our economy (bye bye reefs etc, bye bye some infrastructure) as is and then sell the costs of moving green as wins as well (creatinng green jobs). My trouble with this is even Keynesians will tell you creation of jobs for the sake of it is a "wastefull mitigation". their are costs on the other side of the ledger for Australia of all places.
I guess my question is around the long term? Perhaps Australia is better off with an internal ETS. Are we better off with a global one though, the thing we are trying to achieve? If we are not happy with the idea of a global ETS than why are we trying to drive the world in this direction? Surely we should be doing a USA and going in precisely the opposite direction?
It appears to me in all this some turkeys do vote for christmas...
Edit: Added headings, though a wall of text is still a wall of text.
I think people have to look at the long term around this tax and the purpose of our local ETS.
Short term as others have said, the income produced from the tax is put right back into the economy minus the administration costs. Presumably this will have only a limited effect. We still get our comparitive advantage around cheap energy now we just share it around the economy rather than giving the edge to our businesses. I would not say I am happy with the idea, but it could be worse, and this comes later...
Exporters for the most part will recieve concessions initially also so should not be going out of business from this in isolation.
But what is on the agenda next?
What seems to have been forgotten however is that in the longer term we are doing this to drive change around the world. To go about bringing in a global ETS. I assume this is still on the agenda, if not Australia moving unilaterally is pointless? This is not mentioned much, I suspect because we are told we get it all back as tax cuts for now.
I don't see this working in a global ETS system, we will be paying tax here for other countries. Nothing wrong with that but it needs to be made clear in my opinion as when the world moves to this Australia will have no choice. It just seems strange we are at the cutting edge of pushing for it.
What happens with a global ETS is that we then have to pay to economies that are developing and have not had the advantage of 200 years of rapid economic growth using coal (only fair really) and to those countries who do not have coal anyway and rely on nuclear or other sources, we become less competitive against.
Australia of all countries gets a considerable economic kick out of using coal energy. The big question really is assuming the world does warm 2 degrees over the next 50 years is it actually better for Australia we allow this unfettered but continue to reap the rewards of our edge around coal? Or is it better to mitigate this by the world moving together by half a degree or whatever that might be.
Why be included in the countries pushing this (like European ones with little coal) when other coal rich countries are not?
In this we seem to tally up all the costs of sticking with our economy (bye bye reefs etc, bye bye some infrastructure) as is and then sell the costs of moving green as wins as well (creatinng green jobs). My trouble with this is even Keynesians will tell you creation of jobs for the sake of it is a "wastefull mitigation". their are costs on the other side of the ledger for Australia of all places.
I guess my question is around the long term? Perhaps Australia is better off with an internal ETS. Are we better off with a global one though, the thing we are trying to achieve? If we are not happy with the idea of a global ETS than why are we trying to drive the world in this direction? Surely we should be doing a USA and going in precisely the opposite direction?
It appears to me in all this some turkeys do vote for christmas...
Edit: Added headings, though a wall of text is still a wall of text.
Well, there goes another $1K /yr to be squandered by the government. Yay, let's all celebrate yet another tax rip-off.
If anyone honesty thinks that the tax raised from this sham will have any real impact on "global warming" other than a "feel good about ourselves vibe", then they are utterly delusional.
How about some population control??? That is one of the most meaningful ways to reduce human CO2 generation..... control the outrageous population growth. Ok, so 22 million is not much, but what about the countries with 1.7 & 1.9 billion...... I am sure that won't be a popular view though. The truth often hurts.
Whilst I agree that we can meet our energy needs far more effectively with far less CO2 emissions, I do not believe that a TAX is the answer or any part of the answer. If the government was serious about CO2 emissions they would have implemented a raft of measures to promote self sufficiency, efficient transport networks, lower corporate power consumption and stop raping the land for coal..... Imagine the CO2 reduction from making large CBDs bicycle & pedestrian friendly, with efficient Mass Transit and genuinely promoting decentralized power generation, water collection & reticulation, and controlling consumer product waste at the SOURCE....... Oh my, now I am using common sense...... that will never do any good.
Honestly, does anyone truly believe a TAX is the best path towards a cleaner future? What a load of political crap!
If anyone honesty thinks that the tax raised from this sham will have any real impact on "global warming" other than a "feel good about ourselves vibe", then they are utterly delusional.
How about some population control??? That is one of the most meaningful ways to reduce human CO2 generation..... control the outrageous population growth. Ok, so 22 million is not much, but what about the countries with 1.7 & 1.9 billion...... I am sure that won't be a popular view though. The truth often hurts.
Whilst I agree that we can meet our energy needs far more effectively with far less CO2 emissions, I do not believe that a TAX is the answer or any part of the answer. If the government was serious about CO2 emissions they would have implemented a raft of measures to promote self sufficiency, efficient transport networks, lower corporate power consumption and stop raping the land for coal..... Imagine the CO2 reduction from making large CBDs bicycle & pedestrian friendly, with efficient Mass Transit and genuinely promoting decentralized power generation, water collection & reticulation, and controlling consumer product waste at the SOURCE....... Oh my, now I am using common sense...... that will never do any good.
Honestly, does anyone truly believe a TAX is the best path towards a cleaner future?
What a load of political crap!Your a banker in Zurich, Switzerland.
You forgot to put some LOL and
See ya's.
Hmm, comparing Land sector contributions to emissions vs Zurich bankers and Depreciator living in an inner city suburb, (working in finance)
Well, maybe Joe does have vegie patch back in Oz TC...you may have a point there.
How about:
LOL.... whilst I see your angle here, I can't help but laugh. Why?
Well, if they were REALLY serious about this then we would already be at 10+ stars or the scale would have to be redefined. Why is that? Well you see, one of the biggest energy costs in a household is heating/cooling. They have not even scratched the surface of efficient passive home design because the most efficient low energy consumption designs are...... NOT allowed in urban areas..... yep, you read that right.
Try getting approval to build a rammed earth, earth berm, underground, partially underground, straw bale, mud-brick or nearly any other organic natural material home in suburbia..... LOL. Fix that problem, and CO2 home generated emissions per capita start to take a nose dive. 6 stars is a joke compared with where we really could be.
http://www.garnautreview.org.au/update-2011/update-papers/up4-transforming-rural-land-use.html
Not all farming/agricultural people believe Andrew Bolt, Alan Jones, Monckton, nor worry pants, Mr No, (Tony Abbott) as St Gospel.
Farming has never been at a more opportune time. If the kitchen gets a bit too hot for some farmers, I'm sure others will be happy to buy them out, just as it's happening around here. Little worriers/wingers get sucked up, (bought out) by shrewd and progressive operators.
Not all farming/agricultural people believe Andrew Bolt, Alan Jones, Monckton, nor worry pants, Mr No, (Tony Abbott) as St Gospel.
Farming has never been at a more opportune time. If the kitchen gets a bit too hot for some farmers, I'm sure others will be happy to buy them out, just as it's happening around here. Little worriers/wingers get sucked up, (bought out) by shrewd and progressive operators.
I agree - but this is what pushes house prices up. Any building can become 6+ stars all you need to do is spend money on things like double glazed windows, solar panels etc. If we put it up to 10 stars average-joe couldn't even afford to build a new house even if the land cost $0.
Similar threads
