So what's going on with the Carbon Tax?

chris_stoffa

4x4 Earth Contributer
Millsy,

They do it because they are allowed to, they can , it's legal and it's permitted so until it isn't then it exactly the same as Murdoch........... he can , so he does . And while it exists I don't see a problem with it. Its legal !

I claim my max deductions and I will use my influence in what I do when and where I can , in my sphere of influence, to my advantage - therefore I must be corrupt :rolleyes:

Cheers

But as you say, everyone uses their powers to minimize their taxes. So why shouldn't Murdoch use his powers to destroy the planet. He has the power. Nothing wrong with him using it you say (in a previous post). Well I disagree.

Whilst i didn't say that it is ok for Murdock to destroy the planet , it is not , what I did say that it was legal for him to use his influence to get what he wants and as we all use our influence in some way to achieve aims or outcomes apart from money there is no fundamental difference between him and us.

If it was so wrong to do so it would be totally outlawed by our politicians at our behest, but they don't and we don't make them do it either.

So are we as implicitly at fault as Mr Murdoch.......... after all , he is but one person ;)

He it seems can get his syhte together to get what he wants whereas we millions of voters couldn't organize a physical act of intercourse in a house of ill repute with a fist full of fifties because we pursue our own agendas rather than what is best for the country.

Either way it is human nature :rolleyes:

Cheers
 

dno67

Well-Known Member
Drop the carbon tax, and start taxing the church's, tonight they were saying the seventh day mob that own Sanitarium turned a 300mil profit without paying a cent.
At the end of the day politicians are just miners of the pocket and don't really give a stuff about anything that can't be taxed.
 

millsy

4x4 Earth Contributer
Yeah cool, looking forward to what you come up with.

Looks like there is no clear cut answer to the feasibility of setting up nuclear power in Australia. So many opposing views. Two big factions - the environmentalists Vs the miners.

My feelings are that since we, Australia, struggles to manufacture very much of great complexity anymore, except maybe things like submarines and warships, I would think the building of a nuclear power plant would probably need to be done by the experts from overseas, who have the proven track record.

And then the problem of the cost to build these power stations, and the long time needed to build them. I think solar energy is a lot cheaper per kWhr than nuclear. But I would need to confirm that. And can be installed in far less time than nuclear.

I wonder how many jobs for Australians would be involved in that scenario, except for truck drivers and concrete workers. We have no experience at all in this field of nuclear power! And once the power station is completed, then I guess it would be owned by a foreign company, and so all profits would be siphoned off overseas. Not good for the national debt!

I am thinking renewable energies, on both small and large scales, might offer more opportunities for local workers, both in the manufacture of systems and in the operation of the large systems, like the one about to be opened in Canberra. Although that one may have been built by a foreign company.

One of the points made in one of the responses in the link below, was that Australia is in the fortunate situation of being situated close to the equator, but not too close, and so has many days of clear blue skies. Ideal for solar voltaics, or solar using mirrors and molten salt energy storage. And we have a huge coastline to harvest the wind.

So we obviously need a government body to be set up to work it all out. Unless they have done that already!

This provides a sample of opposing views; The question: should nuclear energy power our future?
 

Stupid Flanders

New Member
Most of the talk about renewables and the carbon tax go around in circles until the reality of what is happening is galvanised in peoples brains.

Smoking is a good example. It took like 40 yrs to get it into our thick skulls that smoking causes cancer and leads to early death not only on the smoker but those who suffer from passive smoke. If anyone today was to state that smoking does not harm your health is held out as a denialist or just plain stupid. Humans make excuses to continue doing what they like doing.

So for me the debate needs to get back to the very beginning so that the population actually understands and accepts the science and what needs to be done. I dont know of anyone who understands science, or can be bothered trying to understand it, who has spent the time reading the actual scientific reports that has come to any other conclusion that this is gunna be bad.

Sadly though most people dont bother to find out and dont want their lives to change even a small amount and therefore use snippets of what they hear that support the status quo. So you have the average Joe who enjoys his current lifestyle based around fossil fuels and hears a clown like Monckton or Carter and goes - "See, the science is wrong, its all a scam".

You then get the ones that will take you on about it and rabbit the ramblings from these fools and then once you spend a few minutes explaining the science behind climate change they have no answer and walk away.

Very few will stay and debate the facts and even if you bring it to a base line of;

Whats worse is the likes of our current govt know the reality yet mortgage theirs and our childrens futures so they can get power.

More than 95% of climate scientists agree that burning fossil fuels will critically impact our future.
There is no peer reviewed paper from a scientist that disproves this view.
Are you smarter than all of them? Why not write a paper and submit it disproving it?

My morning rant.
 

dno67

Well-Known Member
Funny 30 odd years ago at school in history we where tought we are on the brink of the next ice age, then it was the end of the world due to a hole in the ozone and then global warming and now it's climate change. All I know is, it's all impacted my pocket and done very little to improve the country we live in.
 

dno67

Well-Known Member
With all the scientists and economists in the world why can't they come up with an acceptable average
KWh usage figure per person and then tax excess usage at a sliding rate ? The same could be done with
travel/transport in regards to carbon production . This would put an end to cheap imports while supporting local manufacturing. Those that use more pay more those that prefer to support OS manufacturing also pay for the privilege being taxed more on the distance the product has traveled. This would also be fairer as those that contribute to destroying the planet faster pay more than those that make the effort to conserve.
We already have a goods & services tax and by adding a carbon tax is effectively double taxing
most things we use daily, but ha it'll produce a heap of seat polishing non productive jobs for the educated.
 

millsy

4x4 Earth Contributer
Whilst i didn't say that it is ok for Murdock to destroy the planet , it is not , what I did say that it was legal for him to use his influence to get what he wants and as we all use our influence in some way to achieve aims or outcomes apart from money there is no fundamental difference between him and us.

If it was so wrong to do so it would be totally outlawed by our politicians at our behest, but they don't and we don't make them do it either.

So are we as implicitly at fault as Mr Murdoch.......... after all , he is but one person ;)

He it seems can get his syhte together to get what he wants whereas we millions of voters couldn't organize a physical act of intercourse in a house of ill repute with a fist full of fifties because we pursue our own agendas rather than what is best for the country.

Either way it is human nature :rolleyes:

Cheers

You talk about what is legal, and what is not. You talk about human nature, and roll the eyes. As if we can't fight human nature. But there is more to how humans behave than that which is governed by laws. And there are many sides of human nature, the good and the bad. e.g. on the good side - love, egalitarianism, fairness, diligence, compassion, . . . and on the bad side - hate, bias, selfishness, greed, etc etc.

Just because Murdoch, and the 'man in the street', can get away with actions that are not governed by any particular law, does not mean that I will turn my head and say 'it cannot be that important, don't worry, its not illegal'.

Murdoch is a fellow human, is subject to laws and has many traits, some good some not so admirable. But he is a lot different than the ordinary 'man in the street'. He wields great power. He has the power to influence the way the world works. He has great influence not just in one country, but in several - Australia, Britain and the United States.

He uses his influence to shape the governments of those countries, both in the way he presents the news, and the opinions on the news. He has personal relationships with certain prime ministers. No doubt this continues today in the case of Tony Abbott.

So, I don't think it is right that such a person, one person, should be able to over-ride the sane, level headed, reasoning of entire populations, and hence affect the way they vote. The anti-climate change messages being reinforced in his newspapers, both conventional and on-line, have no doubt done that in the case of the recent Federal election in Australia, maybe others too, and also in at least one election in Britain that I know of.

As a result of these elections, and also as a result of the doubt put into the minds of people with political power, about the validity of man-made climate change, it could well be that certain important decisions to alleviate climate change are not made. Or useful decisions that were made previously are reversed. As is happening now in Australia.

Just as scientists say that you cannot point to one particular extreme event and blame it on climate change, then it is impossible to point at any one decision made, or not made, and say that is the one that caused the 'destruction of Earth as we knew it'.

Also something to do with the 'flap of a butterfly's wing'! One wrong decision, or one missed 'action deadline', (both being the equivalent of the flap of the wings of a butterfly) and both due to the effects of Murdoch's international anti-climate change stand, could cause the Earth to go past one of many imminent tipping points that scientists have highlighted. Then the finely balanced 'house of cards', the Earth's ecosystems, suddenly become chaotic and collapse. Basically we have destroyed what we have known as normal for the last 100,000 years!

We are not playing with some-one's ill gotten tax return windfall. We are playing with something of much more importance - our climate, our ability to grow food, our ability to live in a house and have a reasonable expectation that it will still be standing in 10 years time, our ability to communicate and travel, and have all the things that we take for granted in a modern industrial civilization.

I, and many others, believe that the battle to 'save the planet' is entering a critical 5 or 10 years. The last thing we need is for one man, Murdoch, who obviously treats scientists with disdain, to affect the outcome of this battle.

If we did have to put our trust in a certain person, with the power of Murdoch, then I hope that person has all the good traits of humanity and none of the bad ones! But from what we have seen of how he manages his phone tapping newspaper empire, and his biased journalists, then I think we may have chosen the wrong man. We really need to vote for some-one who has a much higher moral standing than Murdoch next time lol.
 
Last edited:

Stupid Flanders

New Member
Funny 30 odd years ago at school in history we where tought we are on the brink of the next ice age, then it was the end of the world due to a hole in the ozone and then global warming and now it's climate change. All I know is, it's all impacted my pocket and done very little to improve the country we live in.

I gotta say dno that you hit the nail I was holding......

The hole in the ozone layer was stopped from expanding and has been able to reduce due to our accepting the issue and acting on it. Here is one of the latest reports;

Hole In Ozone Layer Expected To Make Full Recovery By 2070: NASA

I cant find the link however just last week there was a new release saying how well it was going since the Montreal Protocol stopped the use of products that was causing the damage. The interesting thing was that had we not acted 2015 was the year that 15 minutes exposure without sunscreen would have burnt you sufficient to cause permanent damage. We were that close.

Global Warming and Climate Change are the same thing. The earth is warming up causing the glaciers and arctic snows to reduce which further causes warming as the snow / ice reflect sunlight and heat.

The Climate Change refers to the fact that the climate will change as a result of the warming. The major problem resulting from this is that the mass of cold water from the Arctic and Antarctic may cause the Gulf Stream and other streams that feed the thermohaline circulation around the globe to stop. The result of this would be the world would plunge into a new ice age. We only came out of the last ice age due to the isthmus between north and sth america rising due to plate movement which created the gulf stream moving cold and warm water around warming the planet.

They were right about the ozone layer.
They are right about the globe warming.
They will probably be right about the ice age.
 

rogerazz

4x4 Earth Contributer
Whew! some heaving reading here.
Let me just put in some logic and common sense.
1.Smoking.... I started smoking at 18 years of age, maybe smoked leaves in newspapers before then.:) I found then at twenty three years of age that I could not run well for my sports, I coughed a lot, had bad breath, which my girlfriend (now wife of 47 years) hated and I was spending ( wasting, a lot of money), Doh!
So I gave it up cold Turkey because it was a bad thing.
2.Electricity/ Gas/ Petrol..... I started using this stuff after growing up with Kerosene lamps, gas lamps and then one day over fifty years ago ago I drove back towards the city after time in the country and driving over Pretty Sally ( other side of Kilmore) I noticed a great smog cloud over Melbourne. Since then I have breathed fresh air in the country and foul air in metropolitan Melbourne.
I am not a scientist, Rhodes Scholar ( like Tony Rabbit), Nobel Prize Winner, I am just an old bloke who has lived on this earth for near on seventy years.
Yep, the petrol , gas and especially diesel get right up my nose and I reckon lots of young blokes/ sheilas have never smelt real fresh air.
So pollution from our natural resources is not only killing the planet but killing us.
And you wonder why we see more cancer and other serious illness today????
Oh yes, I do live in Melbourne, but I never ever go to the city nor to Industrial areas. Did drive through Altona or close to it on my way to the shooting range down Werribee way the other week and I started to cough and gasp real bad. Doh!
Hurry up and bring on clean renewable energy if not for me then for my kids and grand kids.
 

chris_stoffa

4x4 Earth Contributer
Millsy

You missed one important point

Whilst i didn't say that it is ok for Murdock to destroy the planet , it is not ,

I don't agree with all he does, seems you think that I do. Hence your lengthy reply and obvious ongoing dislike for TA and MMurdock, yet you forget that the Labour Party has been sucking up to Murdock for as many years for all the same reasons as the Liberals have. They are all media whores.

Cheers
 

millsy

4x4 Earth Contributer
Millsy

You missed one important point

Whilst i didn't say that it is ok for Murdock to destroy the planet , it is not ,

I don't agree with all he does, seems you think that I do. Hence your lengthy reply and obvious ongoing dislike for TA and MMurdock, yet you forget that the Labour Party has been sucking up to Murdock for as many years for all the same reasons as the Liberals have. They are all media whores.

Cheers

Yes, sorry Chris. I thought you were defending Murdock. I HATE HIM! But I try not to get too emotional about it.
Sorry about the long spiel too. I do get carried away sometimes! As you know lol.

Was just trying to explain the "destroying the Earth" bit. And a bit more too . . .

But what a circus going at the moment in the senate. Clive Palmer is my hero now. I reckon he is doing a better job of bashing Abbott around the head than I will be ever able to do! (But he still has to pay his carbon taxes for the last two years!)

I am pretty sure Abbott conned the Australian public for the last three years about how much the carbon tax will/has cost the average consumer. Especially regarding electricity prices. If he had put as much effort in discovering that the really big price rises were due to 'gold plating' of infrastructure, and the government hand-outs to the big generators that were doing this gold plating, we all would have been better off. Including the generators I reckon.

At the same time he would have seen that so many businesses and households were reacting to the carbon tax/climate change message, by installing renewables, and that maybe he should be fighting for gold plating to be stopped by the previous government. Instead we got this constant rant about the evil carbon tax, and important parliamentary time and discussions were shortened, or overlooked completely!

So I will be very interested in how Palmer's amendments work out in the end.

I am looking forward to getting my power bills with information showing exactly how much was actually due to the carbon tax. And of course the effect of their 20% increase that they have already advertized. Wonder if they will produce any explanation?!

Either way, the numbers should make it clear to everyone what a con job Abbott did on us over the last three years, as to him claiming it was the carbon tax responsible for the huge power hikes. Go Clive!
 
Last edited:

chris_stoffa

4x4 Earth Contributer
But what a circus going at the moment in the senate. Clive Palmer is my hero now. I reckon he is doing a better job of bashing Abbott around the head than I will be ever able to do! (But he still has to pay his carbon taxes for the last two years!)

Don't idolise him too much just yet, Clive is up to something , he too has an agenda , I somehow don't think that he is as altruistic as he want to have you believe.

Don't don't you worry about, about that, yes sirree ( if you get my drift )

The jury is still out on Clive and the PUP in my neck of the woods as of now, it will be interesting to see either what they achieve or what damage they do.

I do hope its not the latter

Cheers
 

millsy

4x4 Earth Contributer
Yes, I love going to the circus. Went to see the Mother Africa circus performance a few weeks ago. It was great!

Well now we have one in Canberra. Clive would look good in a clown outfit, as he has been painted by most people. But he is now having his moment in the spot light, after all serious observers wrote him off, and poked fun at him, about 12 months ago. Maybe he could be the Master of Ceremonies, controlling the show.

But he also seems to have them hanging on strings at the end of his finger tips. Maybe the puppeteer?

Ricky is doing his bit too, based on his segment a couple of days ago. Clive's pups are jumping around, all excited. Clive trying to get them to jump through the hoops. But Ricky bringing a laugh when he (deliberately) went around it. What a hoot.

Wonder what the next act will be? Can't wait. I love the contortionist man. Usually very skinny and wearing not much at all. There was a beauty in Mother Africa. Unbelievable! I reckon Abbott would look good squeezed into a little bottle, with just his budgie smaugglers lol. Abetz was doing some great back flips on the tele tonight too.

We need to re-paint the Houses of Parliament I think. A few red and white stripes would be just right.

Anyway I have just set up my spreadsheet, waiting for Clive's amendment to help me fill in the question marks;
 

Attachments

  • elec price changes 2014.zip
    2.9 KB · Views: 176
Last edited:

tankbloke

4x4 Earth Contributer
Don't idolise him too much just yet, Clive is up to something , he too has an agenda , I somehow don't think that he is as altruistic as he want to have you believe.

Don't don't you worry about, about that, yes sirree ( if you get my drift )

Surely you would not be alluding to the fact Mr Palmer is running candidates in the upcoming Victorian elections, and that he may be showing in his strange way what a great bloke he is looking after us all.
Keeping the party in the spotlight leading up to the election would have little to do with it.:rolleyes:
Probably, Monday, after the tax is repealed with amendments in place, the PUP will garner a lot more support from the public, but don't you worry about that, yes siree.:D
 
Last edited:

chris_stoffa

4x4 Earth Contributer
Yep I think you are on the money. Would be an extremely close election though PUP would struggle if the bogan from Tasmania keeps opening its mouth....

That bogan does confirm the axiom "We get the politicians we deserve"

Sorry Taswegians, you got no one else to blame for that one :D
 

millsy

4x4 Earth Contributer
This chap, Tristan Edis, explains very well how Clive Palmer is delighting at showing up Abbott's big con job, with his latest amendment to the repeal of the Carbon Tax.

Could the end of the carbon tax spell the end of Abbott? | Business Spectator

And as far as Jacqui Lambie is concerned, I have some admiration for her too. She is a 'little Ausie battler' who is not going to just be a pretty little flower on the wallpaper of parliament house. Like a lot of other members. Go Jaqui.

Even though I might disagree with quite a lot she has to say lol. What a bundle of energy and a breath of fresh air! I reckon she summed up Abbott pretty well too! Kick him in the nuts for me too Jaqui, next time you say g'day to him lol. Clive might need a big chain round her neck to keep her in line. Trouble is he will never catch her.
 
Last edited:

millsy

4x4 Earth Contributer
And Palmer and Gore had the right idea in safe-guarding the renewable energy agencies. Also how important to maintain the RET. I think he has ammendments for them in the carbon repeal process. Or that was what he promised. Will just have to hope that is what will happen before this circus finishes.

Abbott (and Hockey) claim that renewable energies are a threat to our economies. Hockey hates the look of those 'ugly' wind turbines. (Be interesting to see what he, or anyone else, thinks about the idea of a nuclear power station being built next to their town!)

Pathways to a climate-contained, affluent 2050 | Business Spectator
 

rogerazz

4x4 Earth Contributer
Hockey hates the look of those 'ugly' wind turbines. (Be interesting to see what he, or anyone else, thinks about the idea of a nuclear power station being built next to their town!)]

Well, I do feel a little sorry for Shrek.
I am going to see if he would be interested in relocating down to Yallourn Power Station Area.
The views of the Open cut mines, Generators, smog, haze is such a beautiful sight. I reckon he would absolutely love raising his children down there. Actually we may be able to convince, Abbot, Abetz, Morrisson, even all the coalition Party members to relocate away from those horrible looking wind turbines and down to beautiful Yallourn.
 
Top