Australian Politics Forum - The Carbon Tax

Equitist

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW

Re: The Carbon Tax
Reply #30 - Sep 23^rd, 2010 at 12:36pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2010 at 12:28pm:

So we put a tax on bills and then you suggest we give people money to pay for the increased bills?

Grin

Goodness me this is sounding like a good idea?

Got any more good ones like that?

Oh wait a minute you're probably suggesting we just help out the deadbeats again?

For some more context, perhaps you could explain why you and your well-heeled wife felt entitled to claim the Baby Bonus and that you support the Libs' Paid Parental Leave scheme over that of the Labs...!?

Then, you could again try to justify the costly and reverse-means-tested 30% Private Health Insurance Rebate...!?

Oh, and why is it that the relatively (and mostly absolutely) impoverished populations of China and India must jointly and severally cut back on their relatively meagre energy (and resource) consumption and pollution - before relatively prosperous Westerners should be required to cut back on their obscene levels of energy (and resource) consumption and pollution...!?

Back to top

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!

IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23818
Carlsbad, CA
Gender: male

Re: The Carbon Tax
Reply #31 - Sep 23^rd, 2010 at 12:48pm

1) My 'well heeled' wife (she's like that one!) and I claimed the baby bonus because we were entitled to it, were contributing to the population of Australia, spent the money on all sorts of things related to our little arrival and were the ideal candidates for it.
Just as a side issue in 2007, before tax return time, we paid into Australia through PAYE over $140,000 in tax. Some families don't even earn that, so you don't feel we kinda paid for it???

2) I believe the parental scheme is helpful for families to drop down a wage. It is a big deal. We saw over $200k go out of the door with my wife stopping working. Not exactly smooth sailing losing that is it?
Families need help and they deserve it.

3) The environment is everyone. The world is not destroyed by emissions PER CAPITA. It is destroyed by emissions FULL STOP. Your answer would be for a country to be able to avoid its part by simply increasing its population??
Madness.
You cannot have the rest of us reducing our emissions and India & China growing theirs.

Little fact - All the emissions reductions achieved by Kyoto were wiped out by just Chinese emissions increases FIVE TIMES OVER.

Been to Hong Kong lately? See if you can see more than 5 feel in front of your face? Their emissions are a joke. You want to hinder Australians to counter this do you?
Yeah - good idea.

Back to top

Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde

IP Logged

Equitist

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW

Re: The Carbon Tax
Reply #32 - Sep 23^rd, 2010 at 1:00pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2010 at 12:48pm:

1) My 'well heeled' wife (she's like that one!) and I claimed the baby bonus because we were entitled to it, were contributing to the population of Australia, spent the money on all sorts of things related to our little arrival and were the ideal candidates for it.
Just as a side issue in 2007, before tax return time, we paid into Australia through PAYE over $140,000 in tax. Some families don't even earn that, so you don't feel we kinda paid for it???

2) I believe the parental scheme is helpful for families to drop down a wage. It is a big deal. We saw over $200k go out of the door with my wife stopping working. Not exactly smooth sailing losing that is it?
Families need help and they deserve it.

3) The environment is everyone. The world is not destroyed by emissions PER CAPITA. It is destroyed by emissions FULL STOP. Your answer would be for a country to be able to avoid its part by simply increasing its population??
Madness.
You cannot have the rest of us reducing our emissions and India & China growing theirs.

Little fact - All the emissions reductions achieved by Kyoto were wiped out by just Chinese emissions increases FIVE TIMES OVER.

Been to Hong Kong lately? See if you can see more than 5 feel in front of your face? Their emissions are a joke. You want to hinder Australians to counter this do you?
Yeah - good idea.

So, you were bullshitting, when you were bragging about having over $5K free every month - and/or that you are now down around $12K nett every month!?

PS How strange, that you wife likes being likened to a canine!? (Only joking!?)

Back to top

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!

IP Logged

Kat Gold Member Offline Socialism IS the answer. Posts: 17709 Everywhere and no-where Gender:	Re: The Carbon Tax Reply #33 - Sep 23^rd, 2010 at 1:06pm Tacks don't work very well with carbon. A good epoxy-based adhesive is far superior.
Back to top	IP Logged

vegitamite

Ex Member

Re: The Carbon Tax
Reply #34 - Sep 23^rd, 2010 at 1:32pm

Seems the idea of taxes can work..

off topic BUT making the point...that people will act.

Tax hike forcing smokers to kick habit
Posted September 23, 2010 11:05:00

Two new Galaxy polls reveal more people have been trying to quit smoking since the Government increased tobacco taxes in April.

The research found that in the two months after the 25 per cent tax hike, nearly 40 per cent of all smokers tried to quit.

That is 10 per cent more people than the three months before the increase

Back to top

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: The Carbon Tax
Reply #35 - Sep 23^rd, 2010 at 3:04pm

Quote:

Seems the idea of taxes can work..

off topic BUT making the point...that people will act.

Tax hike forcing smokers to kick habit
Posted September 23, 2010 11:05:00

Two new Galaxy polls reveal more people have been trying to quit smoking since the Government increased tobacco taxes in April.

The research found that in the two months after the 25 per cent tax hike, nearly 40 per cent of all smokers tried to quit.

That is 10 per cent more people than the three months before the increase

So if they put a 25% tax on food, lighting, heating and cooling....then 40% of people will quit using food,lighting, heating and cooling??

Not sure that's good idea.....Although it would solve the population problems wouldn't it???

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

gizmo_2655 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 16010 South West NSW Gender:	Re: The Carbon Tax Reply #36 - Sep 23^rd, 2010 at 5:03pm Given that the oceans absorb Co2 during cool periods and release Co2 during warm periods.......then 'reducing Co2 to combat global warming' is sort of like turning the heater on to cool the house in summer.... It appears to be the exact opposite of what we should be doing...
Back to top	"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition. It's similar to a strawman fallacy" Bobbythebat IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49380 At my desk.	Re: The Carbon Tax Reply #37 - Sep 28^th, 2010 at 10:42pm mellie wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2010 at 1:16am: It's experimental, deceptive and dicey, No it isn't. It has been done plenty of times before. It works. It is mainstream economics. If you want to reduce GHG emissions, it is the safest bet.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

BobH

Full Member

Offline

Posts: 174

Re: The Carbon Tax
Reply #38 - Sep 29^th, 2010 at 12:29am

No one I've heard advocating carbon taxes or any sort of carbon reduction scheme has convinced me it will solve anything. It seems to me, from what I gather on the causes of global warming (and I may be wrong because I'm not a climatologist), that even if we reduced our carbon emissions to zero it probably wont address global warming if global warming is even something we need to worry about. Because what I'm hearing scientists say now is that carbon dioxide is not the thing we need to worry about so much as methane. It seems to me that a more effective solution than carbon reduction is for McDonald's to start using kangaroo meet instead of beef and convert all our cattle farms to kangaroo farms. Because kangaroos don't fart, apparently. So why are we set on carbon reduction when all indications are that any carbon reduction scheme will be too little, too late?

Back to top

IP Logged

Verge Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6329 Gender:	Re: The Carbon Tax Reply #39 - Sep 29^th, 2010 at 8:23am Great post Bob, but dont expect the Unaustralian Labor Party to care, they have the economic vandles in the Greens to lie in bed with now. Carbon tax will hurt ordinary australians, and the GALP are anti australia.
Back to top	And why not, if you will permit me; why shouldn’t I, if you will permit me; spend my first week as prime minister, should that happen, on this, on your, country - Abbott with the Garma People Aug 13 IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49380
At my desk.

Re: The Carbon Tax
Reply #40 - Sep 29^th, 2010 at 9:00am

Quote:

Because what I'm hearing scientists say now is that carbon dioxide is not the thing we need to worry about so much as methane.

They have been saying that since the beginning, which is why so many refer to GHG's rather than just CO2.
Quote:

It seems to me that a more effective solution than carbon reduction is for McDonald's to start using kangaroo meet instead of beef and convert all our cattle farms to kangaroo farms.

If you include a tax on cows that is representative of their contribution to GHG emissions, then this sort of thing will happen when it becomes a cost effective solution. There is no need for direct government intervention, if that is what you are suggesting.

Quote:

Because kangaroos don't fart, apparently.

It is belching. Methane is produced in the rumen. All animals produce some of it, but ruminants far more.

Quote:

So why are we set on carbon reduction when all indications are that any carbon reduction scheme will be too little, too late?

That is not a rational argument. Even if we were 'too late', that is not a good reason to make the situation worse.

Quote:

Carbon tax will hurt ordinary australians

Nowhere near as much as Abbott's alternative appraoch, or an ETS.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

BlOoDy RiPpEr Gold Member Offline aussie-patriot.com Posts: 2475 Sydney Gender:	Re: The Carbon Tax Reply #41 - Sep 29^th, 2010 at 9:09am freediver wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 9:00am: Nowhere near as much as Abbott's alternative appraoch, or an ETS. So your saying planting more trees is going to hurt us more? how so?
Back to top	host of the aussie-patriot.com site IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49380 At my desk.	Re: The Carbon Tax Reply #42 - Sep 29^th, 2010 at 9:41am It would be more expensive.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Please delete Gold Member Offline Please delete this smacking PROFILE Posts: 2936	Re: The Carbon Tax Reply #43 - Sep 29^th, 2010 at 10:23am "So your saying planting more trees is going to hurt us more?" How many trees, and where?
Back to top	IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: The Carbon Tax
Reply #44 - Sep 29^th, 2010 at 10:33am

BobH wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 12:29am:

No one I've heard advocating carbon taxes or any sort of carbon reduction scheme has convinced me it will solve anything. It seems to me, from what I gather on the causes of global warming (and I may be wrong because I'm not a climatologist), that even if we reduced our carbon emissions to zero it probably wont address global warming if global warming is even something we need to worry about. Because what I'm hearing scientists say now is that carbon dioxide is not the thing we need to worry about so much as methane. It seems to me that a more effective solution than carbon reduction is for McDonald's to start using kangaroo meet instead of beef and convert all our cattle farms to kangaroo farms. Because kangaroos don't fart, apparently. So why are we set on carbon reduction when all indications are that any carbon reduction scheme will be too little, too late?

Yes. The main problem is methane emanating from politicians who don't have a clue Cheesy

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged