Australian Politics Forum - Abbott & the mining/carbon taxes

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Abbott on carbon tax
Reply #135 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:14pm

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 6:27pm:

Nice dancing Maqqa.

Rabbit, a carbon tax is a type of price on carbon - the other common type being a trading scheme.

Quote:

However, a "carbon tax" as Tony proposes with his "Direct Action" scheme will be paid to the big emitters and paid for by ALL tax payers.

No idea what you are talking about here. If it was Abbot talking about a carbon tax he probably has it deliberately backwards.

Abbott proposes a GREAT BIG TAX on carbon.

Except he calls it "Direct Action" so he doesn't have to use the "T" word.

the Coalition plans to tackle carbon emissions by paying industry to pollute less, through an Emissions Reduction Fund. As the Direct Action policy document states:

The Fund will commence operation in 2011-12 with an initial allocation of $300 million, increasing to $500 million in 2012-13, $750 million in 2013-14 and $1 billion by 2014-15. It is envisaged that the Fund will invest an annual average of around $1.2 billion in direct CO2 emissions reduction activities through to 2020.

The Coalition will also spend another billion or so on policies such as its $400 million "one million solar roofs" program.

Totalling those numbers up gives a total spend of $9.22 billion out to 2020.

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2804206.html

9.2 billion straight from the tax payer.

A GREAT BIG TAX.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49439 At my desk.	Re: Abbott on carbon tax Reply #136 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:19pm He uses direct action because that is the appropriate term for what he currently proposes. It would be absurdly confusing if he (or anyone else) were to start referring to that as a carbon tax.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: Abbott on carbon tax
Reply #137 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:39pm

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:19pm:

He uses direct action because that is the appropriate term for what he currently proposes. It would be absurdly confusing if he (or anyone else) were to start referring to that as a carbon tax.

He's using direct action because it's the best way to fix the Kyoto mess Rudd got us into

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49439
At my desk.

Re: Abbott on carbon tax
Reply #138 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:43pm

Maqqa wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:39pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:19pm:

He uses direct action because that is the appropriate term for what he currently proposes. It would be absurdly confusing if he (or anyone else) were to start referring to that as a carbon tax.

He's using direct action because it's the best way to fix the Kyoto mess Rudd got us into

Abbot seems to disagree with you:

Abbott : "A tax on carbon is the simplest, fairest and cheapest way of combating carbon pollution and the coalition would give it some serious thought if we win the next election"

Maqqa, you still haven't said whether you agree with Abbott that it would be a great idea to tax people then give all the money back at the end of the year provided all the paperwork is in order. What do you think of that idea? Do you agree with Abbott that it would not be a burden?

Back to top

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

IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: Abbott on carbon tax
Reply #139 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 8:28pm

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:43pm:

Maqqa wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:39pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:19pm:

He uses direct action because that is the appropriate term for what he currently proposes. It would be absurdly confusing if he (or anyone else) were to start referring to that as a carbon tax.

He's using direct action because it's the best way to fix the Kyoto mess Rudd got us into

Abbot seems to disagree with you:

Abbott : "A tax on carbon is the simplest, fairest and cheapest way of combating carbon pollution and the coalition would give it some serious thought if we win the next election"

Maqqa, you still haven't said whether you agree with Abbott that it would be a great idea to tax people then give all the money back at the end of the year provided all the paperwork is in order. What do you think of that idea? Do you agree with Abbott that it would not be a burden?

If you don't give reference and context then you can get stuffed freediver

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49439 At my desk.	Re: Abbott on carbon tax Reply #140 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 8:36pm Maqqa, you still haven't said whether you agree with Abbott that it would be a great idea to tax people then give all the money back at the end of the year provided all the paperwork is in order. What do you think of that idea? Do you agree with Abbott that it would not be a burden?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: Abbott on carbon tax
Reply #141 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 8:43pm

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 8:36pm:

Maqqa, you still haven't said whether you agree with Abbott that it would be a great idea to tax people then give all the money back at the end of the year provided all the paperwork is in order. What do you think of that idea? Do you agree with Abbott that it would not be a burden?

Only in context of the Abbott's whole interview I posted at the beginning of this thread

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Abbott on carbon tax
Reply #142 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 8:57pm

Maqqa wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:39pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:19pm:

He uses direct action because that is the appropriate term for what he currently proposes. It would be absurdly confusing if he (or anyone else) were to start referring to that as a carbon tax.

He's using direct action because it's the best way to fix the Kyoto mess Rudd got us into

Tony Abbott's carbon plan more expensive

TONY Abbott's direct action plan to reduce pollution would be more expensive than a carbon tax and emissions trading scheme, Treasury estimates show.

The Coalition policy, which includes planting trees and giving solar panel rebates to a million homes, could cost the equivalent of having a $62 a tonne carbon price by 2020, the modelling says.

A summary of the Coalition policy's economic and fiscal impacts has been released on Treasury's website via Freedom of Information.

The government has seized on the modelling, saying it meant Mr Abbott's policy would lead to a $48billion hit on the Budget by 2020.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/tony-abbotts-carbon-plan-more-expensiv...

Why do you want Tony's GREAT BIG TAX?

Why do you want your tax money to go to paying the large emitters?

Back to top

IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: Abbott on carbon tax
Reply #143 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 9:05pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 8:57pm:

Maqqa wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:39pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:19pm:

He uses direct action because that is the appropriate term for what he currently proposes. It would be absurdly confusing if he (or anyone else) were to start referring to that as a carbon tax.

He's using direct action because it's the best way to fix the Kyoto mess Rudd got us into

Tony Abbott's carbon plan more expensive

TONY Abbott's direct action plan to reduce pollution would be more expensive than a carbon tax and emissions trading scheme, Treasury estimates show.

The Coalition policy, which includes planting trees and giving solar panel rebates to a million homes, could cost the equivalent of having a $62 a tonne carbon price by 2020, the modelling says.

A summary of the Coalition policy's economic and fiscal impacts has been released on Treasury's website via Freedom of Information.

The government has seized on the modelling, saying it meant Mr Abbott's policy would lead to a $48billion hit on the Budget by 2020.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/tony-abbotts-carbon-plan-more-expensiv...

Why do you want Tony's GREAT BIG TAX?

Why do you want your tax money to go to paying the large emitters?

So what!!

The plan is there to fix Labor's mistake when it ratified Kyoto

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49439
At my desk.

Re: Abbott on carbon tax
Reply #144 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 9:35pm

Maqqa wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 8:43pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 8:36pm:

Maqqa, you still haven't said whether you agree with Abbott that it would be a great idea to tax people then give all the money back at the end of the year provided all the paperwork is in order. What do you think of that idea? Do you agree with Abbott that it would not be a burden?

Only in context of the Abbott's whole interview I posted at the beginning of this thread

Interesting. Can you explain how the context makes his remarks any less stupid?

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 on carbon tax
Reply #145 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 9:39pm

Maqqa wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 9:05pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 8:57pm:

Maqqa wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:39pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:19pm:

He uses direct action because that is the appropriate term for what he currently proposes. It would be absurdly confusing if he (or anyone else) were to start referring to that as a carbon tax.

He's using direct action because it's the best way to fix the Kyoto mess Rudd got us into

Tony Abbott's carbon plan more expensive

TONY Abbott's direct action plan to reduce pollution would be more expensive than a carbon tax and emissions trading scheme, Treasury estimates show.

The Coalition policy, which includes planting trees and giving solar panel rebates to a million homes, could cost the equivalent of having a $62 a tonne carbon price by 2020, the modelling says.

A summary of the Coalition policy's economic and fiscal impacts has been released on Treasury's website via Freedom of Information.

The government has seized on the modelling, saying it meant Mr Abbott's policy would lead to a $48billion hit on the Budget by 2020.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/tony-abbotts-carbon-plan-more-expensiv...

Why do you want Tony's GREAT BIG TAX?

Why do you want your tax money to go to paying the large emitters?

So what!!

The plan is there to fix Labor's mistake when it ratified Kyoto

How was ratifying Kyoto a "mistake"

Do you trying to deny that anthropogenic global warming is a problem?

Back to top

IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: Abbott on carbon tax
Reply #146 - Mar 4^th, 2013 at 1:07am

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 9:35pm:

Maqqa wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 8:43pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 8:36pm:

Maqqa, you still haven't said whether you agree with Abbott that it would be a great idea to tax people then give all the money back at the end of the year provided all the paperwork is in order. What do you think of that idea? Do you agree with Abbott that it would not be a burden?

Only in context of the Abbott's whole interview I posted at the beginning of this thread

Interesting. Can you explain how the context makes his remarks any less stupid?

Asking that question makes you look even worse than him - in context

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49439 At my desk.	Re: Abbott on carbon tax Reply #147 - Mar 4^th, 2013 at 9:58pm You don't understand the question do you Maqqa?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Abbott on carbon tax
Reply #148 - Mar 4^th, 2013 at 10:03pm

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 8:36pm:

Maqqa, you still haven't said whether you agree with Abbott that it would be a great idea to tax people then give all the money back at the end of the year provided all the paperwork is in order. What do you think of that idea? Do you agree with Abbott that it would not be a burden?

Is that with having a new tax? If it is, then it cant be answered as Abbott wouldn't go with a new tax, but labor would. So if you are going to have an ETS or carbon tax, both new taxes, then I would agree with Abbott.

But thank goodness Abbott is not going to have either.

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 17029	Re: Abbott on carbon tax Reply #149 - Mar 4^th, 2013 at 10:12pm Gillards track record of the climate change. Doesnt give much confidence in her to use the carbon tax well. http://www.kellyodwyer.com.au/assets/12-10-18-Labors-top-20-climate-change-bungl...
Back to top	IP Logged