carbon tax bull

Discussion in 'Markets & Economies' started by radiobirdman, Jun 30, 2012.

  1. Dogmatix

    Dogmatix Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    1,730
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Gaul (Australia)
    This is a good point.

    I think it is also worth considering that the scientists that actually are climate scientists will have a slight bias towards climate change - simply because it increases their employment prospects.

    If climate change is not real, then what are all the climate scientists going to do? How will they get their climate experiments paid for? People might even stop buying their books. Science and funding go hand-in-hand. Always look at who is doing the funding and what their agenda is.

    Surely the 'scientists' that work for big pharma have taught us that the field of science is certainly capable of producing results tailored to a desired outcome.
     
  2. JulieW

    JulieW Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Messages:
    13,064
    Likes Received:
    3,292
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/voters-desert-carbon-tax-20120701-21b4d.html


    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...-carbon-tax-20120701-21b4d.html#ixzz1zO7vN6vK
     
  3. Ozboy

    Ozboy Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,935
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Australia
    On a somewhat related topic, and before the lock, can someone shed some light in the proposed penalties the govt. was threatening people and buissnessess with if they blamed price hikes on the c tax.
    I'd heard some outlandish figures being discussed but more to the point, it really has a Stalinist feel about it; " comrade, you are guilty of speaking the truth, and therefore guilty of defaming the party. As such your sentenced to a financial gulag".
    There will be those who support this { both the tax and the anhialation of free speech}, but what does it say about your position or beliefs when you don't have the guts to face your critics comments ?
     
  4. tozak

    tozak Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 6, 2011
    Messages:
    1,956
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Australia
    This has become a problem more recently and that is exactly why, people "learn" by what they are "told is true" not what seems more logical. By "interpreting" rather than "reading" the Constitution many unjust laws have been written and only by the publics conditioning and acceptance to these new laws are they actually enacted. If the general consensus of the public was that this is truly in contradiction to the Constitution then it cannot take effect.

    Anyone who refuses to cooperate with the new law would be charged and summons as to the associated offenses but would trialed by Jury

    The Australian Constitution provides that: "80. The trial on indictment of any offence against any law of the Commonwealth shall be by jury, and every such trial shall be held in the State where the offence was committed, and if the offence was not committed within any State the trial shall be held at such place or places as the Parliament prescribes."

    If the general consensus of the public was that this was unjust then the Jury would execute their powers of Jury nullification to judge the law its self invalid and this would be the test case to overthrow the law regardless of the High Courts ruling

    Well this is all of course in a perfect world, in reality (1) I don't think majority of the population even understand what is going on and (2) Most people find it easier to go with the flow and make the best out of a bad situation than dedicate a lifetime to challenging a system that will throw everything they have at them
     
  5. Shaddam IV

    Shaddam IV Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,298
    Likes Received:
    7,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    House Corrino
    The purpose of the threat is to make business owners so afraid of letting people know about cost increases due to the Carbon Tax that they will simply not risk saying it. They know that even if their calculations and price variation is true and accurate they will not risk attracting the attention of a Big Government Department with an agenda. It is a standover tactic. Better to be silent and not risk being singled out and made an example of.
     
  6. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,278
    Likes Received:
    186
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Sydney
    It obviously depends how much the tax is.

    At the current rate of $23/tonne with the scheduled future increases it will probably hit the target of a 5% reduction in CO2 emissions on what they were in 2000 by 2020. Given that our emissions have actually been rising since 2000, that actually equates to a 22% reduction on what our CO2 emissions would be if we just did nothing and kept polluting at the same rate we have been since 2000.

    Will our carbon tax stop climate change in its tracks? No. It's a global issue and we'll just be playing our part.

    However, the carbon tax will be significantly more effective at reducing the effects of climate change than doing nothing.
     
  7. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,278
    Likes Received:
    186
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Sydney
    No.

    Every single thing we do has an effect on businesses' decisions in how to make the most money possible. The fact that we have a relatively high minimum wage has definitely caused some businesses to move some or all of their operations offshore, yet I wouldn't necessarily call that a bad outcome when the alternative is people being nominally employed yet living in poverty. The same goes for employing (or not employing) child labor, the application of OH&S standards and basic rights for workers like not being sacked because you take a day off to get over a nasty case of flu.

    At the end of the day, we have to make decisions about what we do and do not find to be acceptable behavior in this country. That means making choices between enjoying the benefits of certain practices and enjoying the benefits of a healthy, civilized society.

    If China wants to allow businesses to pollute, or sell milk contaminated with plastic, or make children's' toys with lead paint, or drive cars that explode when running over small potholes, or knowingly expose workers to toxic chemicals then those are decisions for China, as unfortunate and tragic as those decisions might be.

    But you can't do that s*** here and I'm fine with it.
     
  8. Shaddam IV

    Shaddam IV Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,298
    Likes Received:
    7,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    House Corrino
    By .004 of 1% according to the IPPC. I would bet that this tiny amount will be swamped by the movement offshore of Australian manufacturing to China as relatively clean Australian businesses go under due to the tax (ie: any company or business employing non-union workers who therefore will not receive bailouts) and the production is taken up by China who build more coal fired power stations each year that Australia has in the entire country.

    If Gillard really believed in the truth of the Carbon Tax she would let Alcoa fold. This would reduce our energy usage massively. Instead she gives it a 95% bailout with taxpayers money. Because she fears what the Unions would do to her when they lose their members jobs. Corruption and lies from end to end.
     
  9. Willow

    Willow New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Messages:
    474
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Sydney
    If you ask these scientists, they would say there was an ice age and the planet warmed out of it. Human induced Co2 emissions were not responsible for that..
     
  10. hussman

    hussman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2011
    Messages:
    511
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Adelaide
    Did everyone forget that in 2009 the president of the EU (Van Rompuy) announced that "a world government will be established and funded by world carbon taxes."

    And Julia Gillard announced that the revenue from our carbon taxes will be going to the UN.

    Her path was there would be no carbon tax

    There will be carbon tax and it will be refunded to you

    There will be carbon tax and part of it will be paid to the UN

    There will be carbon tax and 10% will be paid to the UN

    There will be carbon tax and 20% will be paid to the UN

    All were waiting for is There will be carbon tax and 95%+ will be paid to the UN. But chances are you wont hear it announced. It will just be paid to the UN and a few lower class families will get a couple hundred bucks in their bank account and Today Tonight will do a segment on how the carbon tax is helping the 'battling Australians'.

    How do people have such trouble joining the dots? I think there is a strong sense of denial in this thread.
     
  11. spannermonkey

    spannermonkey Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    15,802
    Likes Received:
    2,589
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    here there everywhere
    Very simple question
    HOW will paying tax/levy fix the so called climate problem .:rolleyes:
     
  12. Shaddam IV

    Shaddam IV Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,298
    Likes Received:
    7,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    House Corrino
    The carbon tax is not about climate. It is about politics and money.
     
  13. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,278
    Likes Received:
    186
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Sydney
    The same way that fining people for dumping crap on the nature strip outside their house fixes the "dumping crap on the nature strip" problem.

    If you fine people for doing something, they don't do it as much.
     
  14. hussman

    hussman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2011
    Messages:
    511
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Adelaide
    And that there is my very point. We know what the carbon tax is meant for. Its going to be used to send more money to off-shore private interest who have announced that they are going to create a global government funded with world carbon taxes. Its all been announced as I have pointed out earlier.
     
  15. hussman

    hussman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2011
    Messages:
    511
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Adelaide
    Your theory is all well and good, but its just a theory at the end of the day. I have given you the facts about why they are implementing a carbon tax. If you choose to ignore it and be a sheep then do it at your own perril, stop clogging up the thread with stupid analogies of dumping on the side of road etc.
     
  16. wrcmad

    wrcmad Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2012
    Messages:
    6,644
    Likes Received:
    1,502
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Northern NSW
    This analogy is also rubbish (pardon the pun).
    The nature strip dumper can't pass on their fine to the consumer.
    If fines could be passed on, then this would be no deterrent, and no net benefit to the nature strip, just more revenue for the council.... oh, going round in circles? :rolleyes:
     
  17. thatguy

    thatguy Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    Messages:
    5,805
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Brisbane
    At the end of the day will the oil/coal be left in the ground? A) NO!
    The only thing a carbon tax will do is slightly reduce the consumption rate at significant expense to the Australian economy.

    Reducing rate of consumption will have little or no effect on eventual outcome
     
  18. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,278
    Likes Received:
    186
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Sydney
    Just think about that for a minute.

    If increasing the rate of consumption causes the problem to begin with, what is likely to happen if you reduce the rate of consumption?
     
  19. wrcmad

    wrcmad Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2012
    Messages:
    6,644
    Likes Received:
    1,502
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Northern NSW
    You get to the same outcome a tiny bit slower, but at great cost to the consumer?
     
  20. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,278
    Likes Received:
    186
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Sydney
    Of course you can pass fines on to the consumer.

    You run a small corner store. You dump your garbage in the gutter. The council starts fining you $10 for every kilo of rubbish you dump. You increase the prices of the items in your store. Your customer pay the higher prices. You use the extra money to pay the fines and continue dumping garbage in the gutter.

    The store on the corner opposite yours was also dumping their garbage in the gutter. When the fines were introduced, they started selling products with less packaging and more recyclable/reusable material. They still dump a little bit of rubbish in the gutter but they dump way less than you do. They only increase their prices by a fraction of what your increases were. The products on their shelves are now cheaper than yours and more customers go to their store because their prices are cheaper than yours.
     

Share This Page