Australian Politics Forum - "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax"

azulene

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 701
Gender: male

Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax
Reply #60 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 5:46pm

Maqqa wrote on Sep 4^th, 2011 at 9:32am:

The one question that no one on the left can answer is - how much do humans contribute (in percentage terms) to total carbon emissions

I said to freediver yesterday that the focus on carbon tax and the likes are about focusing on a single tree in the forest

ie we can't see the forest for the trees

so if we use total carbon emissions on Earth as a forest of 100 trees - how many belongs to humans?

This question keeps getting answered Maqqa, humans are responsible for 40 of those trees (more accurately 40% but if "trees" is easier for you to understand....)

Back to top

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap."&& -- Napoleon Bonaparte

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49458 At my desk.	Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax" Reply #61 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 5:50pm Don't answer Maqqa'a questions for him. It spoils his day. Then he has to think up another one that he can pretend is unanswerable.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

azulene

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 701
Gender: male

Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax"
Reply #62 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 5:51pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 4^th, 2011 at 2:15pm:

I support action on climate change - however I do not support tax which makes cost of living for an everyday family rise by over $1,000 per year.

All it does is make Aussie families poorer - it does nothing to resolve the environmental issues.

Meanwhile China is building more coal-fired power plants and readily admits their emissions are planned to increase.....

See the folly?

Yes. China announced that it's emissions will only go up 25% instead of 500% in the next 10 years and you are dumb enough to keep using an excuse which is no longer applicable. Actually it is applicable but it argues against you, so keep going...

And the carbon tax will reduce emissions, as inadvertently admitted by the coal lobby, and "direct action" will make Australian families even poorer, so none of your arguments hold.

Back to top

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap."&& -- Napoleon Bonaparte

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49458
At my desk.

Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax
Reply #63 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 5:52pm

stryder wrote on Sep 4^th, 2011 at 5:13pm:

Quote:

but I'm just pointing out the facts.

By freediver

Me too, freediver

No stryder. All you are pointing out is that you did not see it coming because you did not understand the bombardment of messages telling you that it was coming, nor can you appreciate the very real changes that were made to stop you getting yourself in too deep. So you seek to blame others.

You still have not even bothered to ask me what these loud and clear messages were. What does that say?

Back to top

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

IP Logged

stryder

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4545
Gender: male

Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax
Reply #64 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 5:56pm

Quote:

can you please tell us how you know what the majority of economists were seeing around that time - much less what they were thinking!?

by Equitists

Well Equitist, can you tell us of any newspaper that had anything close to a warning that some level of global economic calaymity would hit us by late 2007, 2008, 2009 even if the timing was off, but the event itself, the majority of these economists didnt see it coming in the the late 2008 economic crisis in the way it did and the way it came, and freediver is basing his arguments on such people HAS LEFT HIS ARGUMENT FLAWED, SO WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO, if economists get it wrong more often than not in projections, especially concerning mixing economics and science over a carbon tax !

Back to top

IP Logged

azulene

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 701
Gender: male

Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax
Reply #65 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 6:00pm

Quote:

Let start to discuss one of Abbotts Direct action options, giving money to farmers to give up some of their land for Carbon Storage in the ground.

Positives and negatives anyone?

come on libs, you all seem to know so much about Gillards 'failed price on carbon' that you must be experts?

Australian scientists from the CSIRO say the plan is unlikely to work due to the quality of soil in Australia and more CO2 may get produced than get stored. Also there is no practical way of measuring carbon in soil over large areas so no way of reimbursing the farmers.

If CSIRO were corrupt like the right whingers say, then wouldn't they be saying "great plan, we can make loads of money off this"? It's a massive opportunity for scientists to make huge of money off this carbon in soil plan, but they are saying no, the plan is crap. Why is this so?

Back to top

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap."&& -- Napoleon Bonaparte

IP Logged

azulene

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 701
Gender: male

Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax"
Reply #66 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 6:05pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 4^th, 2011 at 2:44pm:

Gillard's carbon tax on a family of 4 -

Increase cost of living groceries - $996

Tax cut benefits - ($3)

Overall - $993 worse off.

Source - Australian Treasury.

Great idea isn't it????

Isn't this for families that make over the compensation threshold? These families are in a minority and making over $200k per year, maybe they can afford it?

Abbott's plan has no compensation to any tax payers and will cost close to $2000 for EVERY family even those on less than $100k. Great idea isn't it?

Back to top

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap."&& -- Napoleon Bonaparte

IP Logged

Equitist

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW

Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax
Reply #67 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 6:12pm

stryder wrote on Sep 4^th, 2011 at 5:56pm:

Quote:

can you please tell us how you know what the majority of economists were seeing around that time - much less what they were thinking!?

by Equitists

Well Equitist, can you tell us of any newspaper that had anything close to a warning that some level of global economic calaymity would hit us by late 2007, 2008, 2009 even if the timing was off, but the event itself, the majority of these economists didnt see it coming in the the late 2008 economic crisis in the way it did and the way it came, and freediver is basing his arguments on such people HAS LEFT HIS ARGUMENT FLAWED, SO WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO, if economists get it wrong more often than not in projections, especially concerning mixing economics and science over a carbon tax !

Just as I suspected, Stryder: you are claiming that there were no warnings from economists, when you can't really recall!

I can recall debating it back on Yahoo - in the months leading up to the 2007 Federal Election - and posting a range of articles at the time...

I was one of those who were being dismissed at the time as one of the 'prophets of doom'!

The simple fact, Stryder, was that the entire Western World had been riding a debt-fuelled stock bubble - and much of it had also been riding a debt-fuelled housing bubble - at a time when the shareholders share of national production was going up exponentially and the wages share of national production was going down!

With the lower real wages, increased consumerism and rising house prices, there was increasing debt - both consumer credit and mortgages - and much of that debt was being written under dodgy contracts which were being repeatedly-onsold for a premium at each stage!

Only a fool could think that such trends were sustainable!

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

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49458
At my desk.

Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax
Reply #68 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 6:12pm

stryder wrote on Sep 4^th, 2011 at 5:56pm:

Quote:

can you please tell us how you know what the majority of economists were seeing around that time - much less what they were thinking!?

by Equitists

Well Equitist, can you tell us of any newspaper that had anything close to a warning that some level of global economic calaymity would hit us by late 2007, 2008, 2009 even if the timing was off, but the event itself, the majority of these economists didnt see it coming in the the late 2008 economic crisis in the way it did and the way it came, and freediver is basing his arguments on such people HAS LEFT HIS ARGUMENT FLAWED, SO WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO, if economists get it wrong more often than not in projections, especially concerning mixing economics and science over a carbon tax !

It was mainstream economics and front page news Longy. If the reserve bank actions were not wanring enough then what is?

Back to top

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

IP Logged

azulene

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 701
Gender: male

Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax
Reply #69 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 6:17pm

stryder wrote on Sep 4^th, 2011 at 5:56pm:

Well Equitist, can you tell us of any newspaper that had anything close to a warning that some level of global economic calaymity would hit us by late 2007, 2008, 2009 even if the timing was off, but the event itself, the majority of these economists didnt see it coming in the the late 2008 economic crisis in the way it did and the way it came, and freediver is basing his arguments on such people HAS LEFT HIS ARGUMENT FLAWED, SO WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO, if economists get it wrong more often than not in projections, especially concerning mixing economics and science over a carbon tax !

Boo hoo.

Economists get it right when talking about factors controlling the market. They can effectively predict on how to make less coal be sold. That's what they can say about the carbon tax and that bit works just fine.

Scientists can say that burning less coal results in less CO2. That bit is just fine.

If this adds up to insurmountable mind boggling voodoo magic to you, tough luck, you have disqualified yourself from rational argument.

Back to top

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap."&& -- Napoleon Bonaparte

IP Logged

Equitist Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 9632 NSW	Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax" Reply #70 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 6:19pm As a matter of interest, Stryder, have you noticed that there have been similar warnings of impending global economic calamity in recent months!? If you haven't noticed, then, you haven't been paying attention this time around either - and will doubtless be expressing more surprise and shock in the near future!
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

stryder

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4545
Gender: male

Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax
Reply #71 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 6:49pm

Quote:

As a matter of interest, Stryder, have you noticed that there have been similar warnings of impending global economic calamity in recent months!?

As a matter of interest Equitist the past five years has seen market jitters to the extreme, so its obvious in the 3 years since the GFC that negativity and jittery is rampant in the market

But prior to the GFC there was a global economic boom so amongst that the majority of economists didnt see the GFC coming in late 2008, and now people like you and freediver want us to believe the same people in CARBON POLICY WHICH INVOLVES FUTURE PROJECTIONS ???

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49458
At my desk.

Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax
Reply #72 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 7:03pm

stryder wrote on Sep 4^th, 2011 at 6:49pm:

Quote:

As a matter of interest, Stryder, have you noticed that there have been similar warnings of impending global economic calamity in recent months!?

As a matter of interest Equitist the past five years has seen market jitters to the extreme, so its obvious in the 3 years since the GFC that negativity and jittery is rampant in the market

But prior to the GFC there was a global economic boom so amongst that the majority of economists didnt see the GFC coming in late 2008, and now people like you and freediver want us to believe the same people in CARBON POLICY WHICH INVOLVES FUTURE PROJECTIONS ???

Stryder, again you only reveal your inability to understand or even hear what economists are telling you. The fact that there was a boom does not mean that economists were not predicting a bust. Simply repating that they didn't see it coming, despite everyone explaing to you the warnings that were given, only shows that you are unable or unwill to see what is front of you. You need to understand what economists are saying before you are in any position to make claims about what they said.

Back to top

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

IP Logged

stryder

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4545
Gender: male

Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax
Reply #73 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 7:18pm

Quote:

The fact that there was a boom does not mean that economists were not predicting a bust. Simply repating that they didn't see it coming, despite everyone explaing to you the warnings that were given, only shows that you are unable or unwill to see what is front of you. You need to understand what economists are saying before you are in any position to make claims about what they said.

By freediver

Dont you crap me, freediver, THERE WASNT A MAJORITY OF ECONOMISTS THAT WAS PRESSING THAT AN ECONOMIC CALAMITY WAS AROUND THE CORNER IN 2008 I said a majority not a few economists or a minority, BUT THE MAJORITY AND YET YOU CANT PROVE THAT TO ME THAT IT WASNT SO !,

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49458 At my desk.	Re: "Direct Action" vs "Carbon Tax" Reply #74 - Sep 4^th, 2011 at 7:19pm Yes there was stryder. As I keep telling you, it was middle of the road economics and was repeatedly on the front page. Do you have any argument besides repeating yourself?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged