if the carbon tax does go thru , how is this gonna help reduce pollutants ?
ummmmm IT WONT !!!
what ever businesses are making now , they are gonna continue to make , and there fore make the same amount of pollutants.its just a scam for the government to get more money .
isnt it funny ?// you can make as much pollution as you want as long as you pay for it..
Marky, since the cost of electricity has increased substantially do you turn your lights off more or only run your a/c when its really necessary?
This last 1/4 our bill read practically the same amount yet rose 17% guess what I said and then realised the carbon tax wont help us part from charging more than it should for sfa performance , 10% more power bill does not happy me make Labor will fail again and again and again whilst in office , time for an election
-- X-No-Archive: Yes
**The carbon tax will go through. It SHOULD reduce the amount of CO2 emitted by Australian industry, because industry will attempt to lower their costs of doing business, by choosing lower emission technologies, processes and power sources. Do you have your head permantly up your arse? **Prove it. Prove that Abbott's, discredited, taxpayer funded system will be better. That's your choice, after all. **Clearly, you have no idea.
**If the government has chosen the numbers correctly, then business will choose lower emissions methods and CO2 pollution will fall.
-- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Yeah... as though the Libs will remove the tax when in a position to do so. LOL. Wake up!! Abbott is simply being opportunistic and getting a free and easy ride opposing this at the moment.
I hate Labor as much as I hate the Libs and Greens. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM. THEY ARE NOT THERE TO SERVE THE VOTING PUBLIC.
It never ceases to mystify me why so many ppl think the 'opposition' parties will save the day on any given issues such as this one. Just looks at the last, say, 30 years in Australia. I've never seen any evidence to support the notion that voting for the opposition has ever done anything to the contrary.
Nobody with a brain would trust the MAD MONK anyway. Anyone who believes in imaginary god(s) and wants to implement any religious policy whatsoever should be automatically excluded from any public office in Australia.
Similar schemes have gathered a lot of support in Europe. Not in the USA however, the voters there are far to self-centered and mostly ignorant of the rest of the world..,,,,
Prove that it will ? oH the right you can't just as the govco has failed
Prove that Abbott's, discredited, taxpayer funded system will be
No need to , help will gain office on the promise of removal
Oh wake up twevy
Historically they don't and it wont
-- X-No-Archive: Yes
Like 80% of australia you are planning to vote against labour for costing you a few cents. The interesting thing is that everyone complains about pollies having no backbone but when they show some they get punished by the voters.
>yes , if no ones in the room, light is of. and yes , only use a/c only when necessary.
ha, !! not that it WILL, you say it SHOULD....
CLEARLY , YOU HAVE NO IDEA....
Hey, don't lump The Greens with LIB/LAB .
The ALP & NLP are in lock step appeasing the wants of the corporate world.
There is a BIG difference between The Greens and the rest.
The Greens oppose,
ummmm people against the carbon tax is 69% !! theres no way it gonna go thru !!
No I vote agasint labor for lack of honest policy and no fiscal ability , and them being reds doesn't help Hence by default they lose The interesting thing is that everyone
strawman We don't need another tax but we do need some fiscal management that doest piss away billions on replacing a perfectly viable communications system
>-- X-No-Archive: Yes
Some related things regarding Australians, tax and opinions are here:
E.g.
Table 2: If the Government had a choice between reducing taxes or spending more on social services, which do you think it should do? 1987 1990* 1993 1996 1998 2001 % % % % % % Strongly favour less tax 43.7 35.0 37.5 40.8 33.3 27.1 Mildly favour less tax 21.6 22.5 18.5 16.3 13.5 14.8 Favour less tax 65.3 57.5 56.0 57.1 46.8 41.9 Depends 19.8 31.3# 26.8 26.1 27.5 28.5 Mildly favour social services 7.6 7.1 10.0 9.4 12.4 14.5 Strongly favour social services 7.2 4.1 7.3 7.4 13.3 15 Favour social services 14.8 11.2 17.3 16.8 25.7 29.5
-- Scientists are always changing their story and as a Conservative, I have no tolerance for ambiguity. It proves that all science is lies and the only thing we can trust is right wing rhetoric. -- BONZO@27-32-240-172 [100 nyms and counting], 14 Jan 2011 14:46 +1100
**The carbon tax will go through. It SHOULD reduce the amount of CO2 emitted by Australian industry, because industry will attempt to lower their costs of doing business, by choosing lower emission technologies, processes and power sources. Do you have your head permantly up your arse? **Prove it. Prove that Abbott's, discredited, taxpayer funded system will be better. That's your choice, after all. **Clearly, you have no idea.
**If the government has chosen the numbers correctly, then business will choose lower emissions methods and CO2 pollution will fall.
-- Trevor Wilson
o
and
ng as
ll
The problem is people have no right to vote on this - we do not have citizen initiated referendums, or other mechanisms to stop or remove unpopular legislation Only the politicians vote they do NOT have to listen to you.
Many would have voted for gillard for saying "There will be no tax on carbon under any government I lead"
If she had promised a carbon tax instead, Its very unlikely she would have been elected.
nts ?
nd
g as
It isn't meant to stop pollution, and has nothing to do with the environment (most environmental legislation is not about the environment) It is about grabbing money, and removing competition for favoured big businesses and powerful multi-national corporations.
You will find that certain big businesses that are in bed with the Government will be granted exemptions, and their competition won't. This will wipe out the competition and deliver all the business to the Government favoured multi-national.
you are 100% correct !!!!!!!!!!!
It isn't meant to stop pollution, and has nothing to do with the environment (most environmental legislation is not about the environment) It is about grabbing money, and removing competition for favoured big businesses and powerful multi-national corporations.
You will find that certain big businesses that are in bed with the Government will be granted exemptions, and their competition won't. This will wipe out the competition and deliver all the business to the Government favoured multi-national.
In practice, though, industry's scope for doing that is limited. In the power sector, we will perhaps see some movement from brown coal to black coal.
Beyond that, the question is whether the tax is high enough to cause a shift from coal to natural gas (in combined cycle gas turbines) for baseload generation. I'm inclined to doubt it, particularly as any move away from coal towards natural gas will cause the price of the latter to rise.
There may be a modest move towards CCGT for peak loads, as the tax makes it somewhat beneficial to build CCGT plant despite its sitting idle for more of each day than current economics dictate.
The tax won't directly increase the use of solar power or wind because both of those remain hopelessly uneconomic. Some of the Greenie fund may end up being converted into those useless systems.
Hot rocks become more attractive, as evidenced by Geodynamics 31% rise today (and I kind of anticipated that, and could have made a tidy profit if I hadn't assumed the tax had already been discounted :( ).
Sylvia.
I thought it was largely a pretext for redistributing wealth from Liberal voters to Labor voters while placating the latte-set greenie vote in the hope that they'll vote Labor next time.
The environment? What's that?
Sylvia.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.