Australian Politics Forum - Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price.

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price.
Reply #15 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 2:34pm

freediver wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 1:36pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 12:19pm:

MOTR wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 12:15pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 12:02pm:

Do you not think you are just a tad obsessed with Australia's tiny total emissions??

The reality is that both major parties have accepted that we have a moral responsibility to reduce our emissions. Abbott is making us pay more and is effectively shifting the burden from the polluters to the taxpayer. What's worse, is that he's also destroying the price signal that will make future reductions so much cheaper.

It's just dumb policy.

You're so good at demonstrating how little you understand of this issue! Grin

MOTR is right. A carbon tax is the best mechanism. Abbott may tell you what you want to hear, but it will cost you an arm and a leg.

or the most likely scenario is that as the rest of the world is beginning to discover that ACC is a massive con, he will do nothing at all which is even CHEAPER than either alternative.

Just as the world refuses to get warmer in its now 17th year, even formerly diehard ACC scientists are starting to realise they were wrong.

So while you might ahve mocked Abbotts 'climatae change is crap' comment. He was right, after all!

Back to top

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price.
Reply #16 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 2:35pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 2:14pm:

MOTR wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 2:12pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 1:57pm:

A carbon tax is telling me how I should live my life.

If people feel strongly in this carbon footprint lark then fine live your life how you wish.

Just don't interfere and tell others how to live.

Andrei, you are such a free rider.

I work in the oil industry.
It's us who do the most to resolve this issue.

My company is more influential than countries.

you are quite possibly the worst possible apologist for the sceptic position.

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price.
Reply #17 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 2:54pm

gold_medal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 2:34pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 1:36pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 12:19pm:

MOTR wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 12:15pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 12:02pm:

Do you not think you are just a tad obsessed with Australia's tiny total emissions??

The reality is that both major parties have accepted that we have a moral responsibility to reduce our emissions. Abbott is making us pay more and is effectively shifting the burden from the polluters to the taxpayer. What's worse, is that he's also destroying the price signal that will make future reductions so much cheaper.

It's just dumb policy.

You're so good at demonstrating how little you understand of this issue! Grin

MOTR is right. A carbon tax is the best mechanism. Abbott may tell you what you want to hear, but it will cost you an arm and a leg.

or the most likely scenario is that as the rest of the world is beginning to discover that ACC is a massive con, he will do nothing at all which is even CHEAPER than either alternative.

Just as the world refuses to get warmer in its now 17th year, even formerly diehard ACC scientists are starting to realise they were wrong.

So while you might ahve mocked Abbotts 'climatae change is crap' comment. He was right, after all!

So why does Abbott have exactly the same emission reduction target as the ALP?

Are you saying that Abbott is lying about his emission reduction target?

Back to top

IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 23818 Carlsbad, CA Gender:	Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price. Reply #18 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 2:55pm I am not a sceptic. I believe humans have caused the world to warm.
Back to top	Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49032
At my desk.

Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price.
Reply #19 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 2:56pm

gold_medal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 2:34pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 1:36pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 12:19pm:

MOTR wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 12:15pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 12:02pm:

Do you not think you are just a tad obsessed with Australia's tiny total emissions??

The reality is that both major parties have accepted that we have a moral responsibility to reduce our emissions. Abbott is making us pay more and is effectively shifting the burden from the polluters to the taxpayer. What's worse, is that he's also destroying the price signal that will make future reductions so much cheaper.

It's just dumb policy.

You're so good at demonstrating how little you understand of this issue! Grin

MOTR is right. A carbon tax is the best mechanism. Abbott may tell you what you want to hear, but it will cost you an arm and a leg.

or the most likely scenario is that as the rest of the world is beginning to discover that ACC is a massive con, he will do nothing at all which is even CHEAPER than either alternative.

Just as the world refuses to get warmer in its now 17th year, even formerly diehard ACC scientists are starting to realise they were wrong.

So while you might ahve mocked Abbotts 'climatae change is crap' comment. He was right, after all!

For once I agree with you GM. I also think it is highly likely that Abbott is deliberately lying about this.

Back to top

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

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price.
Reply #20 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 2:57pm

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 12:19pm:

MOTR wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 12:15pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 12:02pm:

Do you not think you are just a tad obsessed with Australia's tiny total emissions??

The reality is that both major parties have accepted that we have a moral responsibility to reduce our emissions. Abbott is making us pay more and is effectively shifting the burden from the polluters to the taxpayer. What's worse, is that he's also destroying the price signal that will make future reductions so much cheaper.

It's just dumb policy.

You're so good at demonstrating how little you understand of this issue! Grin

Can't you respond to MOTR?

Why do you want to pay more under Abbott to achieve exactly the same target as the ALP?

How does that make sense?

Back to top

IP Logged

gold_medal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 3897 Gender:	Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price. Reply #21 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:18pm Well given the increasing evidence that ACC is crap then we will end up doing nothing about these emissions and reap the economic benefit for it.
Back to top	IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23818
Carlsbad, CA
Gender: male

Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price.
Reply #22 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:25pm

gold_medal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:18pm:

Well given the increasing evidence that ACC is crap then we will end up doing nothing about these emissions and reap the economic benefit for it.

That isn't true, I think the evidence suggests quite the opposite.

Where I disagree with MOTR is in the mechanics of handling it.

Having Australia subjected to a carbon tax but placing no restrictions on the increases in China and India total emissions is like watching your house go up in flames but deciding to fix the hole in the fence.

Back to top

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

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49032
At my desk.

Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price.
Reply #23 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:27pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:25pm:

gold_medal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:18pm:

Well given the increasing evidence that ACC is crap then we will end up doing nothing about these emissions and reap the economic benefit for it.

That isn't true, I think the evidence suggests quite the opposite.

Where I disagree with MOTR is in the mechanics of handling it.

Having Australia subjected to a carbon tax but placing no restrictions on the increases in China and India total emissions is like watching your house go up in flames but deciding to fix the hole in the fence.

We are not doing that Andrei. Both labor and liberals have emissions targets that are dependent on the actions of foreign countries.

Back to top

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

IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 95778 Gender:	Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price. Reply #24 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:28pm THERE WILL BE NO PRICE FOR CARBON UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD.
Back to top	IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23818
Carlsbad, CA
Gender: male

Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price.
Reply #25 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:31pm

freediver wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:27pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:25pm:

gold_medal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:18pm:

Well given the increasing evidence that ACC is crap then we will end up doing nothing about these emissions and reap the economic benefit for it.

That isn't true, I think the evidence suggests quite the opposite.

Where I disagree with MOTR is in the mechanics of handling it.

Having Australia subjected to a carbon tax but placing no restrictions on the increases in China and India total emissions is like watching your house go up in flames but deciding to fix the hole in the fence.

We are not doing that Andrei. Both labor and liberals have emissions targets that are dependent on the actions of foreign countries.

Why are we not insisting all countries are tied to a % of total 1990 emissions?
You know China and India are refusing to do their fair share right?

And we're worrying about Australia's 0.1% contribution?

You know China represents one third of global pollution on its own yet bizarrely people want to give them LOOSER targets????

Back to top

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

IP Logged

Innocent bystander Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 4220 Gender:	Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price. Reply #26 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:34pm Thankfully global warming is over now and we no longer need to fret over nothing.
Back to top	IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price.
Reply #27 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:39pm

freediver wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:27pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:25pm:

gold_medal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:18pm:

Well given the increasing evidence that ACC is crap then we will end up doing nothing about these emissions and reap the economic benefit for it.

That isn't true, I think the evidence suggests quite the opposite.

Where I disagree with MOTR is in the mechanics of handling it.

Having Australia subjected to a carbon tax but placing no restrictions on the increases in China and India total emissions is like watching your house go up in flames but deciding to fix the hole in the fence.

We are not doing that Andrei. Both labor and liberals have emissions targets that are dependent on the actions of foreign countries.

what rubbish is that? what are you drinking/smoking today? there is NO dependence at all.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49032
At my desk.

Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price.
Reply #28 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 5:17pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:31pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:27pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:25pm:

gold_medal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:18pm:

Well given the increasing evidence that ACC is crap then we will end up doing nothing about these emissions and reap the economic benefit for it.

That isn't true, I think the evidence suggests quite the opposite.

Where I disagree with MOTR is in the mechanics of handling it.

Having Australia subjected to a carbon tax but placing no restrictions on the increases in China and India total emissions is like watching your house go up in flames but deciding to fix the hole in the fence.

We are not doing that Andrei. Both labor and liberals have emissions targets that are dependent on the actions of foreign countries.

Why are we not insisting all countries are tied to a % of total 1990 emissions?
You know China and India are refusing to do their fair share right?

And we're worrying about Australia's 0.1% contribution?

You know China represents one third of global pollution on its own yet bizarrely people want to give them LOOSER targets????

Andrei, the only position that is justifiable is a per capita, basis. Assuming countries should be treated equally regardless of population is absurd. We are making demands of other countries. We are just not making stupid demands.

Quote:

what rubbish is that? what are you drinking/smoking today? there is NO dependence at all.

Yes there is. Pleading ignorance doesn't count GM.

www.climatechange.gov.au/government/reduce/national-targets/factsheet.aspx

Back to top

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

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Abbott's $62 a tonne carbon price.
Reply #29 - Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 5:19pm

freediver wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 5:17pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:31pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:27pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:25pm:

gold_medal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2013 at 3:18pm:

Well given the increasing evidence that ACC is crap then we will end up doing nothing about these emissions and reap the economic benefit for it.

That isn't true, I think the evidence suggests quite the opposite.

Where I disagree with MOTR is in the mechanics of handling it.

Having Australia subjected to a carbon tax but placing no restrictions on the increases in China and India total emissions is like watching your house go up in flames but deciding to fix the hole in the fence.

We are not doing that Andrei. Both labor and liberals have emissions targets that are dependent on the actions of foreign countries.

Why are we not insisting all countries are tied to a % of total 1990 emissions?
You know China and India are refusing to do their fair share right?

And we're worrying about Australia's 0.1% contribution?

You know China represents one third of global pollution on its own yet bizarrely people want to give them LOOSER targets????

Andrei, the only position that is justifiable is a per capita, basis. Assuming countries should be treated equally regardless of population is absurd. We are making demands of other countries. We are just not making stupid demands.

Quote:

what rubbish is that? what are you drinking/smoking today? there is NO dependence at all.

Yes there is. Pleading ignorance doesn't count GM.

well it is like this... your word is not evidence. if you wish to make a plausible case then make it. repeating yoru position ad nauseum only makes it look weaker.

Back to top

IP Logged