Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 2
nd, 2015 at 9:34am:
Australians paid $14b to reduce global emissions by 0.004%.
A silly argument straight out of CRA Mining's 1989 songbook.
One person on the dole is claiming less than 0.000005% of consolidated revenue each year, so it doesn't matter if they look for work or not, right?
Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 2
nd, 2015 at 9:34am:
Australia's emissions dropped by a paltry 1.4% - hardly something to be proud of, especially when you look at how much money was spent doing it.
Under DA, we're spending nearly as much for a RISE in emissions because over 75% of the 144 projects funded by this crap corporate welfare policy were pre-existing. DA is ineffective. We're still paying for it: the only difference is a transparent direct cost on polluting companies has been converted into a hidden cost buried within consolidated revenue that everyone else pays for.
Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 2
nd, 2015 at 9:34am:
So if we want to achieve even a 50% reduction, we only have to fork out around $700bn to do it!
Rubbish.
Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 2
nd, 2015 at 9:34am:
Besides, emissions were already falling before the carbon tax came into effect. So it's true effect is probably even less than this.
Emissions have started RISING as soon as DA came in.
DA is a FAILURE.