Carbon Tax - Thoughts ?!

[ben351]

Prime Minister Julia Gillard and former Labor leader Kevin Rudd embraced on the floor of parliament after the House of Representatives passed the government's controversial carbon tax.

Mr Rudd was close to introducing an emissions trading scheme (ETS) in 2009 but hit a roadblock in the form of an unco-operative Senate and then, later, opposition from the then new coalition leader Tony Abbott.

But this time around, the government knows the 19 carbon tax bills will sail through the upper house by November 21, with the support of the Australian Greens.

So the celebrations - with Ms Gillard and Mr Rudd sharing a peck on the cheek - this morning would have to be heartfelt.

"It's been a difficult debate but the debate is now concluded," Ms Gillard said before participating in the historic vote.

"Today, is a significant day for Australians and the Australians of the future who want to see a better environment."

Conservation and climate groups urged the speedy progress of the bills through the Senate and into law.

The Climate Institute chief executive John Connor said the legislation could create a "win-win" for a cleaner and more competitive Australian economy and support international efforts to tackle climate change.

"This has been an ugly and very long debate, and we congratulate those who backed this legislation in the House of Representatives," he said in a statement.

The $23-a-tonne carbon tax will start in mid-2012 before transforming into a true ETS in mid-2015.

But Mr Abbott insists Wednesday's vote doesn't create the certainty Labor and many in the business community want.

He has pledged a coalition government will repeal the carbon price no matter how long it takes - even if that means calling a double-dissolution election down the track.

"This is a pledge in blood - this tax will go," Mr Abbott told ABC Radio on Wednesday.

"We can get rid of it, we will get rid of it, we must get rid of it."

But the prime minister says she believes that's not true.

She says half of the parliamentary Liberal Party believe in putting a price on carbon and wiser heads will prevail.

"For Tony Abbott this is all about the politics and political theatre," she told ABC Radio.

"People should not take his assertions about repeal seriously. They don't deserve to be believed."

Meanwhile, Australian Greens leader Bob Brown said his party could take "a great deal of credit" for the carbon price passing parliament because it made its support of the minority government contingent on Labor taking action to tackle climate change.

"The greening of Australia is well under way," Senator Brown said.

Labor won the vote on the 18 carbon tax bills 74 to 72 with the support of independents Rob Oakeshott, Tony Windsor and Andrew Wilkie, and Greens MP Adam Bandt.

Mr Bandt, who won his seat from Labor at the 2010 election said the voters of his electorate in Melbourne had made the legislation possible.

"By voting Green, they kick-started action on climate change," he said in a statement.

The lower house also passed the government's $300 million steel transformation plan bill 75 to 71 with Queensland independent Bob Katter getting on board.



Open for discussion !!

I have heard lots of views on this from both sides of the fence ... Twiggy Forrest reckons under this new tax FMG would never had gotten off the ground ... it seems to tax the smaller companies at the same rate as teh giants ... do you think this is a way to slow down the resource sector and try to sustain it for a longer period ?

I have noticed dozens of new resource companies pop up over the last 18 months ... and i wondered how long we could sustain such growth.

anyways i know a lot of you guys are in the industry so your thoughts ?

[MadDocker]

Has the potential to damage and kill off a lot of Aussie manufactured products. In my industry we are up against China & Malaysia constantly. We make a superior product and are priced just over the competition so we do alright.

With the new tax, freight increases, manufacturing costs increase, raw products increase etc. etc. etc. & unless something is done the plants will close down or go overseas.

The 3 Australian manufactured products we distribute employ probably ~1500 people. Sending manufacturing overseas to compete with the competition will cost probably ~1200 of those jobs and will send a lower quality product into the Australian market place.

Government needs money, carbon may or may not be a problem but we should probably do something. Hammering us with this tax in the current economic climate is probably not the answer. We'll see soon I guess.

[ben351]

Yeah mate i feel your pain - your industry has taken a beating over the years with a lot of companies outsourcing to China and the likes for the cheap way out - that needs to stop there needs to be legislations put in place that state X % of each project needs to have a % of the products produced in australia.

With Chevrons LNG projects on the north west shelf there is potentially 150+ billion dollars of work over the next 40 years to come back to australia and at their peak probably 30,000 jobs - but how much of that do you reckon will go overseas .. a lot of it !!

It was nice to see BHP offered 1200 jobs to the 1500 people that were recently laid off by Bluescope Steel but the focus needs to be on Australia improving the manufaturing industry not outsourcing it !!

[Ryan1080]

I work for a small iron ore miner that's planning a massive expansion. Our ore is mostly magnetite, which means it needs to go through a lot of energy intensive processing before we can sell it. This will hurt a lot, and depending on how low management/shareholders will consider our NPV to be as acceptible, considering the risk, there's a chance that it will make the $10B project unfeasible.

Fuck you Labor!

[-Luke-]

IMHO it wont help the environmental cause at all. The Govt should be rewarding development and innovation rather than punishing normal operation. I can see a lot of marginal projects and/or new developments in the resource sector being shelved until a change of Govt.

[d1mitch]

i dont see how it is making anything "greener", if big companies can pass down the tax they get in the form of price rises in the product they produce then they have no incentive to do anything any different. the people who end up paying the tax are the consumers, but wait you will get tax cuts.... yer sure! i get nothing yet garunteeed i will be paying more for everyday products unde this new scheme. Typical LP we will support the dole bludgers and low income earners with 20 kids

it just seems like we are going to tax big companies who will inevitably put prices up then subsiding those prices rises with the money we originally taxed from the big companies. no one has gotten any greener, no less carbon has been produced.

in regards to nternational business it needs to be a worldwide scheme, that is uniform across the whole world with everyone paying their share otherwise the global market will not be a fair playing field. especially if we a paying a huge carbon tax and we produce some minute amount of the total worldwide carbon.

a better way would be to offer tax incentives for companies to get "green" this way they would have the incentive of either increasing volume or profit by lowering production cost.

[Ryan1080]

a better way would be to offer tax incentives for companies to get "green" this way they would have the incentive of either increasing volume or profit by lowering production cost.

Let's be clear about the real intentions behind this. Carbon tax will not make any difference to the climate at all, but will raise a nice chunk of revenue for the govt. Providing tax incentives to "green" companies will cost them money, and they need a cashcow to pay for their financial incompetence, so that's out of the question.

[shifted]

Wealth redistribution.

Pointless tax.

Muppets in power.

Think there is a thread on here already that went into length over this topic?

[d1mitch]

Let's be clear about the real intentions behind this. Carbon tax will not make any difference to the climate at all, but will raise a nice chunk of revenue for the govt. Providing tax incentives to "green" companies will cost them money, and they need a cashcow to pay for their financial incompetence, so that's out of the question.

exactly my point, this is a load of shit tax/wealth redistribution trying to fly under the guise or making australia greener. they arent commited to getting greener at all

[duste]

What I lol at whenever the ad's come on is that "we recognise these big companies will pass on these costs to you, so we're giving half of it back to you" - then why the hell not simply halve the tax, so it would be less of an initial burden on companies so they are less likely to pass on the costs...

[Jumanji]

IMHO it wont help the environmental cause at all. The Govt should be rewarding development and innovation rather than punishing normal operation. I can see a lot of marginal projects and/or new developments in the resource sector being shelved until a change of Govt.

QFT.

I think something should be done but they are going the wrong way about it. And said previously in this current Economic Climate. I cant see it doing any good.

One question i do have though is that for all the money that the government is going to make off of this tax, what do they plan to do with it? Re-emburse the environment, or use that money specifically to pay for more innovative ways to create less emissions.

I'f the money goes towards new speed and red light cameras, I'll fucking neck myself.

[Joe]

IMHO it wont help the environmental cause at all. The Govt should be rewarding development and innovation rather than punishing normal operation.

THIS.

[crabman]

Have the pack of useless pingpingpingpings even come out and stated who the biggest 500 poluters are and how they have been calculated to be so.

Wealth redistribution on this scale actually kinda makes me sad to be an Australian with all Labour/Greens recent doings. Forcing uni students to pay union fee's is digusting and tipped me over the edge to becoming "unproud"

[Ryan1080]

LOL @ biggest 500 polluters!

Sounds like a bullshit even number plcked out of their asses.

They'd have to know who the "500" polluters are. Otherwise how else would they have come up with the amount of tax they will collect to fill up their coffers. And how would they have known how much to 'compensate' the public by etc...

[[SPESHAL]]

It's anyone with a facility that emits more than 25,000 tonnes of carbon equivalent a year - of which there must be about 500 companies who meet this criteria.

If you are that interested they publish emissions data on the internet, by company, not by facility. It will give you a good idea of who will be paying the tax.

[Ryan1080]

http://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/NGER-greenhouse-energy-information-2009-10.pdf

[eaglesfandavid]

Wealth redistribution on this scale actually kinda makes me sad to be an Australian with all Labour/Greens recent doings. Forcing uni students to pay union fee's is digusting and tipped me over the edge to becoming "unproud"

Why are you unproud? If you believe that uni students should be looked after then wouldn't you support this "wealth distribution"? I am a low earning uni student and results from the online carbon tax calculator (which im sure probably ignores a number of key variables) show im entitled to a nice little payout!

[Ryan1080]

Why are you unproud? If you believe that uni students should be looked after then wouldn't you support this "wealth distribution"? I am a low earning uni student and results from the online carbon tax calculator (which im sure probably ignores a number of key variables) show im entitled to a nice little payout!

Unless you're going to be a uni student all your life, I'd rather be better off after uni. If I had a choice to be better off for just three years, or better off forever onwards, I'd choose the latter :)

[MadDocker]

You will also be paying more for everyday goods. If you think you are going to end up better off when all is said and done you are deluded.

The tax is there to make money for the government.

[duste]

You will also be paying more for everyday goods. If you think you are going to end up better off when all is said and done you are deluded.

The tax is there to make money for the government.

Precisely. The concept of taxing companies on their carbon output in an attempt to influence them to seek more efficient, sustainable and environmentally-friendly energy solutions is GOOD, but the way in which the government is going about it is WRONG.

Again, it's the same argument we have with speed cameras, etc. Government/police force say they're doing it for the purposes of increasing safety, but it's quite clear they're just profiting immensely, and it's the same deal with this carbon tax - the government is saying they're doing it for the purposes of decreasing carbon footprints, but it's quite clear they're just profiting immensely.

That's how I understand it at least.

[Ryan1080]

Even if we cut down our pollution down to zero (which will never happen, more like single digit percentage reduction realistically), our total pollution contributes to only 1% of global pollution. ANd we have the biggest carbon tax in the world. So much pain, for fuck all gain.

[Tre-Cool]

Why are you unproud? If you believe that uni students should be looked after then wouldn't you support this "wealth distribution"? I am a low earning uni student and results from the online carbon tax calculator (which im sure probably ignores a number of key variables) show im entitled to a nice little payout!

you know what your entitled to as an australian?

FUCK ALL! just like the rest of us. You want something, earn it!

[[SPESHAL]]

Even if we cut down our pollution down to zero (which will never happen, more like single digit percentage reduction realistically), our total pollution contributes to only 1% of global pollution. ANd we have the biggest carbon tax in the world. So much pain, for fuck all gain.

Yes, but if you look at large emitters (i.e. greater than 50 million tonnes of carbon a year), on a per person basis, we are the fourth largest emitter in the world. We need to be doing something.

Interesting point - analysis indicates that with a carbon tax emissions in Australia will stay pretty stable across the next 40 years. The reduction that the government is talking about will essentially all be sourced from international carbon offsets.

[eaglesfandavid]

you know what your entitled to as an australian?

FUCK ALL! just like the rest of us. You want something, earn it!
get fucked :p

uni student life: pay money to study + not get payed whilst at uni = farked

wouldnt you rather your taxes fund uni students, not centerlink scum.

money ends up on piss either way haah :D

[crabman]

If that was the case yes but the centerlink scum will always get money it will never stop


Why are you unproud? If you believe that uni students should be looked after then wouldn't you support this "wealth distribution"? I am a low earning uni student and results from the online carbon tax calculator (which im sure probably ignores a number of key variables) show im entitled to a nice little payout!

LOL you on drugs?? Where did I say I believe in them being looked after at the expense of higher income earners having their money sent to the lower clases?? I don't think ANYONE should be forced to paying union fee's and care of the current government in power that is now the case, makes you wonder about how many other union big wigs will push this sort of agenda.


you know what your entitled to as an australian?

FUCK ALL! just like the rest of us. You want something, earn it!

This, too many fucking handouts for pingpingpingpings that dont believe in earning a dollar

[Ryan1080]

;910173']Yes, but if you look at large emitters (i.e. greater than 50 million tonnes of carbon a year), on a per person basis, we are the fourth largest emitter in the world. We need to be doing something.

Interesting point - analysis indicates that with a carbon tax emissions in Australia will stay pretty stable across the next 40 years. The reduction that the government is talking about will essentially all be sourced from international carbon offsets.

Per capita basis would be a valid reason if our population numbers were also significant on a global scale. However you have to look at it from the total pollution perspective, not some dodgy statistics.

If we're gonna use this statistics as the reason for doing this carbon tax nonsense, I think a better solution to reducing our carbon footprint impact (measured with this per capita statistic) would be to encourage more immigration. Simply by increasing our population numbers will reduce our per capita emissions, making us more environmentally friendly. Of course this reasoning is retarded, just like using this statistic to justify this tax.

I might dig up a graph I've seen earlier about the per capita pollution for all countries... you know who the biggest polluters are per capita in the world? Little Oceania and third world countries... All the big industrialised nations, including the biggest global polluters like China and India are on the bottom, simply because they have the population numbers.

The per capita reasoning for this tax is simply wrong. But it's a great propaganda to convince clueless John Public.

[Buckets]

I work for a small iron ore miner that's planning a massive expansion. Our ore is mostly magnetite, which means it needs to go through a lot of energy intensive processing before we can sell it. This will hurt a lot, and depending on how low management/shareholders will consider our NPV to be as acceptible, considering the risk, there's a chance that it will make the $10B project unfeasible.

Fuck you Labor!

This !!! Do you work for Citic Ryan ? The site I work at is a Magentite operation the first large scale one in Australia. The current Carbon Tax and proposed Mining Tax are huge burdens on our operation. CPM has injected billions of dollars of foreign money in to the Australian economy and has yet to ship a tonne of ore. We have a clean combined cycle gas fired power plant to undertake the "value adding" to the raw materials in Australia something basically no one else does. Because it's energy intensive we are a big polluter but compared with shipping the raw (extremely low grade) material to China and processing it there we actually save huge amounts of greenhouse gases. In effect we are being punished for trying to be green.

The mining tax (on a tangent here but oh well) hurts Magnetite players like us because Mag Fe is around 20% grade not the higher grade 60+% Hematite that Rio & BHP mine (which is why we have to process it before it becomes a sell able product) but we get taxed the same as if every tonne we pull out of the ground goes on the ship to China.

Seriously I'm not the kind of bloke that get riled up but if I ever had a chance to have a quiet word with that pingpingpingping Gillard or one of her minions they'd know about it. But it would seem that many other before me have tried and the majority of the Australian electorate will be ignored to maintain the political objectives of the ruling coalition. Proper democracy has been dying for years and the quality of debate and of Australian politics at the moment (on both sides) confirms it's probably dead. I'm surprised Gillard hasn't been shot yet.

[pazza]

Well, looks like the cost of live`n will go up and Australia will have even more work`n poor.

[Ryan1080]

This !!! Do you work for Citic Ryan ? The site I work at is a Magentite operation the first large scale one in Australia. The current Carbon Tax and proposed Mining Tax are huge burdens on our operation. CPM has injected billions of dollars of foreign money in to the Australian economy and has yet to ship a tonne of ore. We have a clean combined cycle gas fired power plant to undertake the "value adding" to the raw materials in Australia something basically no one else does. Because it's energy intensive we are a big polluter but compared with shipping the raw (extremely low grade) material to China and processing it there we actually save huge amounts of greenhouse gases. In effect we are being punished for trying to be green.

The mining tax (on a tangent here but oh well) hurts Magnetite players like us because Mag Fe is around 20% grade not the higher grade 60+% Hematite that Rio & BHP mine (which is why we have to process it before it becomes a sell able product) but we get taxed the same as if every tonne we pull out of the ground goes on the ship to China.

Seriously I'm not the kind of bloke that get riled up but if I ever had a chance to have a quiet word with that pingpingpingping Gillard or one of her minions they'd know about it. But it would seem that many other before me have tried and the majority of the Australian electorate will be ignored to maintain the political objectives of the ruling coalition. Proper democracy has been dying for years and the quality of debate and of Australian politics at the moment (on both sides) confirms it's probably dead. I'm surprised Gillard hasn't been shot yet.

Nah, Crosslands, we're in the mid west, not the pilbara, so we gotta build a port and rail too. Our production will be roughly half yours. We're gonna build a gas plant too, 350 megawatt I believe, to improve the product. The stuff that comes out of the ground is just shit, but once processed it's heaps better than hermatite. In fact it takes less energy to make something out of a processed magnetite, than hermatite, at China's end. I agree with you, on a global scale it will be 'cleaner' to process it here, yet we'll get punished for that.

I hate Gillard. I always have some tolerance towards politicians, after all, they're all pingpingpingpings. But this is beyond a joke! Yes, surprised she's still around...

[duste]

Politicians are all puppets anyway.

[Mad_Aussie]

I'd be happy to put down ten bucks on Abbott not reversing this in 2013/2014.
It's a policy that every politician in the last two decades has wanted to push through, but haven't had the political willpower to do it. It lost Howard the election, Turnbull his position, got Rudd the boot, and now will probably see Gillard disappear into the sands of time and be only remembered as the most unpopular PM in history... But I'm almost certain that the government will see so much revenue from it and so little actual real-world impact on families that it'll just stay in place.
And in saying that, the real people who will benefit from this are the people who sit at the back pulling the strings. It wouldn't have gotten this far if there wasn't big interests behind it, and both sides of the government will be sharing slices of that pie.

At the end of the day, the figures show some 0.7% increase in the costs of living... Normal inflation on things will affect us all far more over the duration of this tax than the tax will. Like the GST or the resources tax, we'll all forget about it when it becomes apparent that it's not really impacting anything.

Of course, if in 24 months you've lost yer jerb directly because of this, I'll back up on that position. But like every bit of opposition hyperbole either party has spread about reform policies over the years, this one won't end the world like Abbott is claiming it will.

[Satan]

Why are you unproud? If you believe that uni students should be looked after then wouldn't you support this "wealth distribution"? I am a low earning uni student and results from the online carbon tax calculator (which im sure probably ignores a number of key variables) show im entitled to a nice little payout!

there is no payout

the calculator shows how much you might* be better off each year







* as if

[Ryan1080]

I'd be happy to put down ten bucks on Abbott not reversing this in 2013/2014.
It's a policy that every politician in the last two decades has wanted to push through, but haven't had the political willpower to do it. It lost Howard the election, Turnbull his position, got Rudd the boot, and now will probably see Gillard disappear into the sands of time and be only remembered as the most unpopular PM in history... But I'm almost certain that the government will see so much revenue from it and so little actual real-world impact on families that it'll just stay in place.
And in saying that, the real people who will benefit from this are the people who sit at the back pulling the strings. It wouldn't have gotten this far if there wasn't big interests behind it, and both sides of the government will be sharing slices of that pie.

At the end of the day, the figures show some 0.7% increase in the costs of living... Normal inflation on things will affect us all far more over the duration of this tax than the tax will. Like the GST or the resources tax, we'll all forget about it when it becomes apparent that it's not really impacting anything.

The way the carbon tax legislation has been written, will make it very hard and costly for future govt to get rid of it.

GST was a replacement for the old and complicated 22.5% Sales Tax. It's actually a good thing. And don't trust the govt's claimed 0.7% increase on cost of living... for someone so distrusting of govt's stories (aka conspiracies) I would have thought you'd question that too. ;)

[MadDocker]

I'd be happy to put down ten bucks on Abbott not reversing this in 2013/2014.

I am no political expert but how easy is it for the next PM to come in and reverse this once it's in? Would have to go through everything all over again, get the votes, get it through a senate controlled by the Greens etc?? Not only this but as you say, it's a massive cash cow so motivation to ditch it probably wouldn't be too high.

[Jumanji]

I am no political expert but how easy is it for the next PM to come in and reverse this once it's in? Would have to go through everything all over again, get the votes, get it through a senate controlled by the Greens etc?? Not only this but as you say, it's a massive cash cow so motivation to ditch it probably wouldn't be too high.

And for the party to put it in to place is comitting Political Suicide.

[Mad_Aussie]

The way the carbon tax legislation has been written, will make it very hard and costly for future govt to get rid of it.

GST was a replacement for the old and complicated 22.5% Sales Tax. It's actually a good thing. And don't trust the govt's claimed 0.7% increase on cost of living... for someone so distrusting of govt's stories (aka conspiracies) I would have thought you'd question that too. ;)

This is true - which makes Tony look like even more of a knob when he's reeling off the "first think Liberals will do is abolish the carbon tax" crap... Any and all revenue raised from it in that time - possibly in the order of millions - will have to be spent reversing it. It's all just wing-flapping IMO.

I'm also not arguing against the GST - I'm just pointing out that Labor declared that it would be the end of days and that Armageddon would happen if the GST came into effect... And it didn't. Just as the Libs were saying that an $8bn fibre network would destroy our economy, and it didn't.. Or that the mining tax would make Rio and BHP leave our shores.. and they didn't. It's all just about the point-scoring.

And don't worry - I don't believe this tax has the environments best interests in mind, but I also don't think that it will do absolutely nothing to help. I just don't see the value in still winging about it now. The big issue is beyond the sides of government, both parties ultimately push the same agenda at the end of the day, it's just the short-term policies that people get the opportunity to whinge about.


And for the party to put it in to place is comitting Political Suicide.

That's just the way Aussie politics work. Whenever a party makes big reforms, they get the boot because our blind populus doesn't like change. The Libs will get in next time, propose some big reform either in their first or second term in office, and the same thing will happen. I just hope they choose a better leader to do it.

[fourseven]

It lost Howard the election

Bollocks. Where do you think Rudd got his initial climate change policies, and where do you think the "me too" joke began.

WorkChoices lost Howard the election, because suddenly the rednecks in this country realised they were going to get kicked in the pingpingpingping for being lazy slobs without any possibility of holding their boss hostage. And before you go off on your 3000 post conspiracy theories, I currently work for a union (your fucking Labor mates) and I've seen the dollars, blood and sweat invested from unions all over the country to oust Howard because of WorkChoices alone.


for someone so distrusting of govt's stories (aka conspiracies) I would have thought you'd question that too. ;)

He'd only question it if it was a Liberal policy.

[Mad_Aussie]

The hypocrisy of you clowns complaining about me and conspiracy theories in a thread about governments telling lies is truly astounding.
I've got nothing to say in support of the government over this, nor do I have anything against it. Because it's not a Labor policy, and it's not a Liberal policy. It's a long-term internal government policy that finally found an expendable scapegoat to launch it.

[Ryan1080]

This is true - which makes Tony look like even more of a knob when he's reeling off the "first think Liberals will do is abolish the carbon tax" crap... Any and all revenue raised from it in that time - possibly in the order of millions - will have to be spent reversing it. It's all just wing-flapping IMO.

Not as simple as that. The actual legislation has been 'booby-trapped'. Mark Dreyfus QC, Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change said that once the carbon change legislation is in place, repeal would amount to an acquisition of property by the commonwealth, as holders of emissions permits would be deprived of a valuable asset. As a result, the commonwealth would be liable, under s.51(xxxi) of the Australian Constitution, to pay compensation, potentially in the billions of dollars. A future government would therefore find repeal prohibitively costly. That consequence is anything but unintended. The clean energy legislation specifically provides that “a carbon unit (its generic term for a right to emit) is personal property”.

And internationally, governments have generally ensured pollution permits are not treated as conventional property rights, precisely so as to be able to revise environmental controls as circumstances change. Rather, this provision serves one purpose only: to guarantee any attempt at repeal triggers constitutional requirements to pay compensation, shackling future governments. If anything, the main reason why Tony Abbott may not be able to reverse is not due to the revenue the gov will miss out on, but due to the high cost of compensation that the govt will have to pay to the big polluters who have paid for their permits.

This is scary, and it's what shits me off the most! Gillard and her cronies have broken the general principle of sovereignty, in that a future govt should NEVER be bound on what past governments have legislated. All legislation shoud be reversible if circumstances change.

I'm honestly surprised why the media has been rather quiet on this...




I'm also not arguing against the GST - I'm just pointing out that Labor declared that it would be the end of days and that Armageddon would happen if the GST came into effect... And it didn't. Just as the Libs were saying that an $8bn fibre network would destroy our economy, and it didn't.. Or that the mining tax would make Rio and BHP leave our shores.. and they didn't. It's all just about the point-scoring.

You're a bit unifomred there. GST was a replacement tax, like I said before. That was just pure scaremongering without any basis. The fibre network is more like 50 odd billion. And the mining tax was negotiated with and in favour of Rio and BHP etc.

[crabman]

This is scary, and it's what shits me off the most! Gillard and her cronies have broken the general principle of sovereignty, in that a future govt should NEVER be bound on what past governments have legislated. All legislation shoud be reversible if circumstances change.


Is this not the sort of event where the GG should be standing up and saying something along the lines of "Hey, that shit's not on."

I hate it how the member for Dobell fiasco has disapeared.

[Ryan1080]

Is this not the sort of event where the GG should be standing up and saying something along the lines of "Hey, that shit's not on."


I'm not a constitutional lawyer so I'm not 100% sure what can trigger GG to step in. Keep in mind that this is actually done by stealth. There is nothing specifically written in the legislation that prevents its reversal as such, it's the reality of having to compensate polluters big money later, that realistically prevents the reversal. Liberals are free to reverse it, no worries (if they can get the upper house, i.e. the greens to agree), but it will cost the nations a fuckload to do so. We may not be able to afford to dump this legislation.

[eaglesfandavid]

LOL you on drugs?? Where did I say I believe in them being looked after at the expense of higher income earners having their money sent to the lower clases?? I don't think ANYONE should be forced to paying union fee's and care of the current government in power that is now the case, makes you wonder about how many other union big wigs will push this sort of agenda.



Not on drugs, could you explain what you mean about people believing "no one should be forced to pay union fee's and care of the government" ?

Unions are an organized association of workers formed to protect and further their rights and interests, therefore they provide a service with the goal of actually looking after workers. Perhaps it is unfair to be forced to support them IF there rates are too high, or believe that they are not of any benefit to yourself, but it is obvious to say that without funding they could not exist.

Where do you draw the line between paying taxes so that government can make shit happen and "taking care of the government"? The line where perhaps you don't support the current government? That's okay, suck it up a bit longer and vote them out.


This, too many fucking handouts for pingpingpingpings that dont believe in earning a dollar
The problem is not in the notion of handouts but is the fault of "pingpingpingpings that don't believe in earning a dollar". Ideally no one would be on handouts for long and they would use that money (assuming its sufficient) to lift themself into a better class of living.

I am a supporter of wealth distribution, (to a reasonable extent), though actually claim sweet fuck all myself (*think one family payment made to parent when i moved from split custody to living with single parent). When i finish my degree (mech eng) i will no doubt be a higher income earner and will be paying taxes to support useless "pingpingpingpings that dont believe in earning a dollar" and whilst that seems shit that's the way it is. It would be preferable if everyone was thrifty and wise with the money but that's dreaming.

Also one thought; living in a world where drug addicts exist, is it better to pay taxes to support the users habit than have them rob you for drug money?

[[SPESHAL]]

Per capita basis would be a valid reason if our population numbers were also significant on a global scale. However you have to look at it from the total pollution perspective, not some dodgy statistics.

If we're gonna use this statistics as the reason for doing this carbon tax nonsense, I think a better solution to reducing our carbon footprint impact (measured with this per capita statistic) would be to encourage more immigration. Simply by increasing our population numbers will reduce our per capita emissions, making us more environmentally friendly. Of course this reasoning is retarded, just like using this statistic to justify this tax.

I might dig up a graph I've seen earlier about the per capita pollution for all countries... you know who the biggest polluters are per capita in the world? Little Oceania and third world countries... All the big industrialised nations, including the biggest global polluters like China and India are on the bottom, simply because they have the population numbers.

The per capita reasoning for this tax is simply wrong. But it's a great propaganda to convince clueless John Public.

We are inefficient when it comes to emissions. This is primarily due to our dirty coal power generation on the east coast. The per capita reasoning for this tax is not wrong. Will we make a significant reduction in global emissions? No, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do something.

By the way - I am against the carbon tax, just playing devils advocate. I think its a poorly timed, short sighted policy. :)


This is scary, and it's what shits me off the most! Gillard and her cronies have broken the general principle of sovereignty, in that a future govt should NEVER be bound on what past governments have legislated. All legislation shoud be reversible if circumstances change.

+10000

[mehow2g]

Carbon tax is just an accuse for I need money, if they were truly serious about cutting the carbon emissions they will use other resources like Hemp for an example.

But no that will never happen people will lose money.

We are taxed on everything nothing is free.

[dmwill]

To put it quite simple, the Government seems to think the air over Australia is static. Their actions will make no difference to the climate, nor our planet.

No point in a carbon tax unless every other country is willing to take action as well, especially considering Australia generates fuck all pollution compared to other countries...2% or something isn't it?

[crabman]

Not on drugs, could you explain what you mean about people believing "no one should be forced to pay union fee's and care of the government" ?

Unions are an organized association of workers formed to protect and further their rights and interests, therefore they provide a service with the goal of actually looking after workers. Perhaps it is unfair to be forced to support them IF there rates are too high, or believe that they are not of any benefit to yourself, but it is obvious to say that without funding they could not exist.

Where do you draw the line between paying taxes so that government can make shit happen and "taking care of the government"? The line where perhaps you don't support the current government? That's okay, suck it up a bit longer and vote them out.


The problem is not in the notion of handouts but is the fault of "pingpingpingpings that don't believe in earning a dollar". Ideally no one would be on handouts for long and they would use that money (assuming its sufficient) to lift themself into a better class of living.

I am a supporter of wealth distribution, (to a reasonable extent), though actually claim sweet fuck all myself (*think one family payment made to parent when i moved from split custody to living with single parent). When i finish my degree (mech eng) i will no doubt be a higher income earner and will be paying taxes to support useless "pingpingpingpings that dont believe in earning a dollar" and whilst that seems shit that's the way it is. It would be preferable if everyone was thrifty and wise with the money but that's dreaming.

Also one thought; living in a world where drug addicts exist, is it better to pay taxes to support the users habit than have them rob you for drug money?

1.) Why should a student be forced to pay a union fee when they do distant learning and would see no benefits, same goes for students that are independent and have jobs and thus also can't make the most of any of these "benefits". The concept and precedence set by enforced union fee paying is what worries me the most.

2.) Wealth distribution is needed to an extent, disabled people, the elderly, "some" students all need helping out. Plain cash to old mate johny that doesnt want to work cause he doesnt have to is wrong, I know food stamps etc will never happen but these sorts of people require a handout system that allows for the absolute minimum chance of the money being spent on luxuries.

3.) Its better he doesnt get tax money paid to him to support his habit and that money is spent on hospitals/schools etc, but if I am also allowed to defend my property how I see fit. Which isnt allowed these days for some stupid reason.

Back on topic, with the east coast running some of the dirtiest brown coal fire stations known to man, has it been announced how these will be made greener with the $10 billion handed back to people :P

[Ryan1080]

Instead of handing it back to people, they should hand it back to polluters and ask them to spend it only on carbon reducing shit...

[swan]

Don't know what to say about gillard ... what a great mark for our 1st female prime minister to leave behind :(
I would have thought that if 80% of the population was against it she might pay attention to them. Heck I didn't like the gst but I could see the tax system needed work.....

As for the greens my dad always said they were too extreme .... I always said if they ever changed voting to be fair ( 1 vote to the party I vote for, none of this preference voting rubbish ) that I would vote for the greens. After seeing how they act in power ( or close to ) that is VERY unlikely to ever happen.

I must admit I am more often than not a liberal supporter ... I even watch and agree with andrew bolt on sunday nights. I am not a large income earner so there is a very good chance I will be better off finacially according to the govt ... but I always thought policy was about doing the best for our country :(

/rant

[SircatmaN]

Don't know what to say about gillard ... what a great mark for our 1st female prime minister to leave behind :(
I would have thought that if 80% of the population was against it she might pay attention to them. Heck I didn't like the gst but I could see the tax system needed work.....

As for the greens my dad always said they were too extreme .... I always said if they ever changed voting to be fair ( 1 vote to the party I vote for, none of this preference voting rubbish ) that I would vote for the greens. After seeing how they act in power ( or close to ) that is VERY unlikely to ever happen.

I must admit I am more often than not a liberal supporter ... I even watch and agree with andrew bolt on sunday nights. I am not a large income earner so there is a very good chance I will be better off finacially according to the govt ... but I always thought policy was about doing the best for our country :(

/rant

The greens would let people die, if it meant saving a few trees.

[mys1]

Well this Passed today through the Senate

goodbye shiny dollars

[Ryan1080]

pingpingpingpings!

[cplagz]

*shrug*

It was always going to pass Senate, not much we could do about it. Hopefully people will think a little harder next time the Federal Election is held.

[crabman]

If only the preference system is fixed aswell, a minority government in power, awesome democracy.

[Buckets]

*shrug*

It was always going to pass Senate, not much we could do about it. Hopefully people will think a little harder next time the Federal Election is held.

+1. Dumb pingpingpingpings who didn't vote Liberal have a lot to answer for.

[Fukushima]

Cant wait for my $4 a year compensation

[cplagz]

If only the preference system is fixed aswell, a minority government in power, awesome democracy.

What ever do you mean? 3 people deciding the fate of a countries government isn't true democracy? Lies!

[nicecar]

the economy was too strong, we needed a change for the sake of change

[Ryan1080]

Don't forget the Greens, a party which got less than 5% national vote, yet realistically is in charge of the country (Labor are just puppets)... as shown by this carbon tax. Democracy definately needs a bit of fixing up...

[Mad_Aussie]

Democracy definately needs a bit of fixing up...

Wouldn't it be nice if some people started publicly protesting for exactly this?
Although the way people protest in this country, anyone barking about democratic reform would be drowned out by people whinging about aboriginal rights or animal welfare, or any number of other irrelevant topics. Nothing will change, since more people have louder voices concerning bullshit than people with opinions concerning change.

It'll be interesting to re-visit these threads in 12 months - when the sky hasn't fallen and the economy hasn't imploded - to look back and see how badly the scare-mongering influenced everyones opinions on the subject.

[newbie101]

Wouldn't it be nice if some people started publicly protesting for exactly this?
It'll be interesting to re-visit these threads in 12 months - when the sky hasn't fallen and the economy hasn't imploded - to look back and see how badly the scare-mongering influenced everyones opinions on the subject.

damn straight.


PS - the greens got 12.5% of the national vote, not 5%

[Brockas]

Carbon Tax = I'm getting rich bitches. This shit is great for business (green energy consulting).


PS - the greens got 12.5% of the national vote, not 5%
Statistically, 1/8th of the general population are idiots.

Sounds about right.

[j3rk]

Wealth re-distribution at it's purest form. Need more tax breaks!

[Ryan1080]

LOL Brockas!


PS - the greens got 12.5% of the national vote, not 5%

Whatever... a party that only got 12.5% of votes gets to call the shots, whereas the other 87.5% that didn't vote for these useless pingpingpingpings has no say in this. Something is seriously wrong!

[newbie101]

Yep, but thats what happens when 87.5% of the population are mouth breathing window lickers that cant make their mind up one way or the other.

[Georgina]

Cost of electric is going up by 7%... synergy have estimated a $240 million cost from the carbon tax that'll be paid for by customers... And the government fund synergy, which means our normal tax and carbon tax will be paying the government

[Tocchi]

im making about $90 bi-monthly (in spring), via solar panels, does this mean ill earn more?

[Georgina]

im making about $90 bi-monthly (in spring), via solar panels, does this mean ill earn more?

You'll earn the same but the price goes up on your standard home plan so you'll be paying more for the electricity that your solar energy doesn't cover... You wont be too affected if you're generating more power than your using.. Your rebate amount per k/w will stay at 47c or 27c depending on when you got rebs/fit

[Torquen]

Wouldn't it be nice if some people started publicly protesting for exactly this?
Although the way people protest in this country, anyone barking about democratic reform would be drowned out by people whinging about aboriginal rights or animal welfare, or any number of other irrelevant topics. Nothing will change, since more people have louder voices concerning bullshit than people with opinions concerning change.

It'll be interesting to re-visit these threads in 12 months - when the sky hasn't fallen and the economy hasn't imploded - to look back and see how badly the scare-mongering influenced everyones opinions on the subject.

THIS.


Carbon Tax = I'm getting rich bitches. This shit is great for business (green energy consulting).

x2


Whatever... a party that only got 12.5% of votes gets to call the shots, whereas the other 87.5% that didn't vote for these useless pingpingpingpings has no say in this. Something is seriously wrong!

DEY TOOOOOOOOOOOOK OUR JERBS. Our election system is the best system, it's not perfect but it's a shite load better than any of the others out there.