What about all the black roof homes with no eves that I still see being built? That's just nuts unless it's in southern Tassie or the Snowy Mountains.
See ya's.
The Biggest Tax EVER in Australia
- Thread starter josko
- Start date
What about all the black roof homes with no eves that I still see being built? That's just nuts unless it's in southern Tassie or the Snowy Mountains.
See ya's.
Exactly!!! Government rules & regulations force us down that path in urban areas. It is utterly nuts!
Nope. Doesn't necessarily cost more. It just means doing things differently, such as urban planning, building codes and meaningful incentives, not more taxes. Many countries use double glazing (US, UK, Canada...) they also have far less land per capita, but their property prices are far lower than in Aust. Their build costs are lower.... I don't swallow the economy of scale thing either, due to the far less land offset and greater weather extremes to cater for in much of the northern hemisphere.
Yes, I reckon smart operators like TC are going to have the last laugh on us city people.
This issue was first debated in the House of Representatives in 1988. Finally legislation passes the House in 2011. I've been watching the debate carefully all of this time - it has been a very long road to taking the first step. One can only hope the next steps won't be quite so difficult... no doubt now the ball is actually rolling the momentum will pick up by itself.
That type of effect can already be seen in transport where per capita car use has been dropping in Australia since 2004. Economic changes drive social change which feeds back into economic change and the wheel turns (or in this case, fewer wheels turn!
). And our cities become better places to live in the process...
That type of effect can already be seen in transport where per capita car use has been dropping in Australia since 2004. Economic changes drive social change which feeds back into economic change and the wheel turns (or in this case, fewer wheels turn!
yes, because the market was left to it's own devices to become more efficient in a fiscally sustainable way.
government intervention always screws things up - even Keating recognised this.
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?
Hi. There are basically three ways a government can go about reducing CO2 emissions.
#1. Direct intervention. This is what you are proposing, and what the Liberal Party wants. The trouble with direct intervention is that the public (taxpayers and the government) bear most the risk of failure. Think pink batts. Not only is the cost and risk socialised, but because there is little market feedback, it is generally inefficient and susceptible to corruption and/or incompetence. If you think pink batts was bad, the Liberal Party will deliver worse with more "direct action".
#2. Carbon "tax". In truth, the tax is more of a licence to pollute. You only pay when you need to emit CO2. If you don't emit, you don't pay. The risk is partially transferred from taxpayers to polluters. The biggest risk to the public is in determining the appropriate tax rate. Charge too little, and CO2 emissions won't fall. Charge too much, you kill trade.
#3. An ETS or "cap n trade" scheme. A national (or global) CO2 emission cap is set, with a limited number of permits available to the market to purchase. The market determines the price of these permits. The risk to the public is minimised - all the government does is set the CO2 cap and let the market figure out a solution. Because the market sets the price of CO2 permits, the permits will find their way to those firms who will make the most efficient use of them.
The Labor Party is implementing policy #2 (carbon tax) as a transition to policy #3 (an ETS). You must bear in mind that Howard and Turnbull both support an ETS. Most economists agree that an ETS is much preferable than direct intervention. Just something to think about.
Ha, ignorant, that's hilarious.
If the ignorant people of this country bothered to do some homework instead of feeling all "warm and fuzzy" about doing "something" about "Global Warming"....then perhaps we wouldn't have the world class idiot Bob Brown forcing the Prime Minister to introduce a tax that will:
INCREASE EVERY YEAR FROM JULY 1ST 2012.
or didn't you know that....
Seriously.
Regards JO
Yes, we must all really give so much weight to these people who make numbers up for a living. Never before have I seen a "profession" which is so revered whilst being wrong all the time.
Nice first post KingKai, welcome to the forum
And in the end, the whole damn thing is pointless because we are the only country taking such extreme measures, with the highest price per capita.
Regards JO
Hiya Evan,
19 or 18...do a Google and it was conflicting. I'd only just heard it was 19 on the radio. Not really the issue. It's the tax itself that is the issue.
Like it or not, we are stuck with it.....but not the current Government.
Regards JO
You have hit the nail on the head, the devil is in the detail and the level of the tax.
For it to be sustainable it has to apply equally on a global scale so no specific country is advantaged or disadvantaged.
There is also one underlying fact, living standards as expressed in financial standards will drop because we are forcing the market to use less productive means through altering the markets natural pricing mechanism. ie the ETS is distorting the natural opportunity cost allocation of resources.
In order for productivity to remain constant productivity increases by other means will have to be achieved.
And its productivity that leads to long term increases in living standards.
Were the Libs voted in on that particular mandate?
YES!
it was an election issue o thou of short memory!
the Aussie people VOTED for the GST.
then the states decided not to repeal some of their taxes it was meant to replace.
i see the same happening here.
Ha, ignorant, that's hilarious.
If the ignorant people of this country bothered to do some homework instead of feeling all "warm and fuzzy" about doing "something" about "Global Warming"....then perhaps we wouldn't have the world class idiot Bob Brown forcing the Prime Minister to introduce a tax that will:
INCREASE EVERY YEAR FROM JULY 1ST 2012.
or didn't you know that....
Seriously.
Regards JO
it WAS a set price ($23/t) from 2012 to 2015 - after 2015 the price was to go to the world stage where bidding is likely to hit similar prices to the EU - $400/t.
wait till that "flow on effect" is passed onto consumers - all the while the govt has non-indexed their "tax relief" post 2015, ala the pension.
suck it up greenies - you've just been assimilated.
Hey Aaron,
That's even worse!
I have read and even heard today that it would increase every year, did they change the bill? Sorry under time management here..
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/money...l-rise-each-year/story-e6fredkc-1226058753952
Regards JO
That's even worse!
I have read and even heard today that it would increase every year, did they change the bill? Sorry under time management here..
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/money...l-rise-each-year/story-e6fredkc-1226058753952
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mo...on-tax-questions/story-fn7x8me2-1226091830525
Regards JO
Nice first post KingKai, welcome to the forum
And in the end, the whole damn thing is pointless because we are the only country taking such extreme measures, with the highest price per capita.
Regards JO
Completely wrong. Read the Productivity Commission report. Seriously - just read it. It won't bite!
Someone said $400/tonne? That would make solar panels (one of the most expensive forms of carbon mitigation) economic in the shade! Seriously, where do people get these numbers?
I stand corrected. Well, that's one example.
YES!
it was an election issue o thou of short memory!
the Aussie people VOTED for the GST.
then the states decided not to repeal some of their taxes it was meant to replace.
i see the same happening here.
Similar threads
