Carbon Tax

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

Well, who knows? I think if you look at it policy area by policy area it gets kind of scary. Abbott is getting away with what is essentially gibberish because people are so p'ed off with the current mob that they're not thinking straight.

Abbott is simultaneously going to abolish the carbon tax and let everyone keep their compensation.

Abbott is going to give everyone tax cuts/ reduce the deficit/ and spend billions on a climate change scheme funded by the taxpayers.

Abbott is opposed to new taxes on the biggest polluters to fund carbon reduction (which he is going to do anyway) but in favour of new taxes on the biggest employers to fund his parental leave scheme.

Abbott is going to abolish the mining tax but not the infrastructure spending it is paying for.

Etc etc.

I could go on and on. The current government might be hopeless in several key respects but they are making actual decisions about to prioritise scarce resources in the actual real world. Abbott is basically governing a fantasyland where you don't actually have to make any choices at all and you can have everything. You may or may not agree with the decisions the current government is making but i'd like to think that we're better off with a government that actually makes them.

Sure, the carbon tax is stupid. It is a hard choice, but it is also a very real choice and this is not an issue that can be neglected by inaction for countless more years. Something needs to be done, and I applaud the fact that a foundation has been laid out for change in the future. Investments needs to be made for the future; ones that are flexible enough to adapt to any uncertainties. Governments who only care about short term local issues are as selfish as they are ignorant.

Unfortunately the society we live in is a democracy and thus we need to cater for the likes of all the voters out there. Especially those who thought it was funny to vote Greens....
Can I dream that voters are no longer ignorant/oblivious for upcoming elections?
 
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

this is not an issue that can be neglected by inaction for countless more years.

Do you really think what Australia does can have any significant impact on the environment?
China population: 1.3 billion
Australia population: 22 million

For any carbon tax policy to work, it would need to be done as a worldwide policy. With Gillard's policy, Australia is just shooting itself in the foot.
 
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

In all the government advertising on the carbon tax I have not heard them recently claiming any reduction in carbon emissions because of our tax.
As to fuel efficient aircraft that was happening anyway due to fuel cost-not from any carbon tax.
And why do we have the world's highest carbon tax.NZ has a tax of ~$nz10 per tonne.Yet~85% of NZs electricity is from hydro power so the population are no where near affected as Australians.
 
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

[video=youtube;ckcH0Wrmy74]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckcH0Wrmy74[/video]
 
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

I was able to read it before, now it's part of the paywall.... Interesting

I find it helps deleting the heraldsun cookie, as I think there is limit of 5 articles you can look at behind the paywall from links.
 
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

I would encourage you to take a look at the current state of Victoria. While Mr Baillieu inherited an extremely strong economy, he and his Minister's have done absolutely nothing as we see jobs, investment and quite possibly our AAA credit rating go down the gurgler; especially hurting country Vic.Yep, sound economic management from the Libs and Nats here..

You have to be joking!!!

There was nothing at all strong about the mess that Brumby & Bracks left in Victoria

Every single time the ALP get's in power, they spend far too much and screw everything up

Cain/Kirner, then Kennett fixed the mess
Brumby/Bracks, then Baillieu is trying to work out the mess still

etc etc
 
and abbott will remove the tax? roll eyes. despite his jumping up and down he will not get rid if it ... mark this post.
 
Whilst Abbott is not the best liberal leader we have seen (far from it), at least the liberal party has a history of sound economic management. Lets pray he gets in and rips up this stupid carbon tax.

Fraser government, including treasurer Howard = extremely poor economic management.

Hawke/Keating Governments created the conditions that have given us continuous growth since the 1990s recession - the recession we had to have. I hated the man at the time, but in hindsight he was right. Howard and Costello managed to not stuff it up to badly. (sorry but non-means tested middle class welfare is a stuff up)

Once and for all you can stop this equine excrement that only the liberal party can manage the economy. Our greatest economic reforming party in recent history is the ALP. If you also care to look at history, the country always turns to the ALP when things are bad. The ALP has always been given the difficult situations to manage. History makes the Liberals look like good fair weather sailors.


Sent from the Throne
 
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

At least Gough Whitlam can now rest in peace knowing he wasn't the worst PM of the worst Government Australia ever had;)
 
Last edited:
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

and abbott will remove the tax? roll eyes. despite his jumping up and down he will not get rid if it ... mark this post.

Of course not. It's intertwined with a set of tax cuts that compensate people. There will be hell to pay if he tries to remove my $3 per year tax cut :rolleyes:
 
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

Of course not. It's intertwined with a set of tax cuts that compensate people. There will be hell to pay if he tries to remove my $3 per year tax cut :rolleyes:

Tony Abbott is not going to take away your tax cuts, he is going spend even more money on carbon reduction, he is going to abolish the mining tax and give the money back to the miners, spend more money on infrastructure and he is going to bring the budget to record surplus. Abbott is going to be the best Prime Minister that fantasyland has ever had.
 
At least Gough Whitlam can now rest in piece knowing he wasn't the worst PM of the worst Government Australia ever had;)

He has always been able to rest thusly. He never said "all the way with LBJ".


Sent from the Throne
 
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

Do you really think what Australia does can have any significant impact on the environment?
China population: 1.3 billion
Australia population: 22 million

For any carbon tax policy to work, it would need to be done as a worldwide policy. With Gillard's policy, Australia is just shooting itself in the foot.
You forget to mention that Australia has a much bigger emission and GDP per capita (though China still is one of the major polluters)
A worldwide policy ... can you suggest how to achieve it? If it can't be done globally, perhaps if everyone ignored the issue maybe it'll just disappear.

Australia will have a minor impact. But hey everyone has to do their bit right?
If everyone person had the mentality that they are just one person in a world of billions so could do as much environmentally unethical things as they pleased ... well ...
 
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

He has always been able to rest thusly. He never said "all the way with LBJ".


Sent from the Throne
You could have done better than that.Mr.Askin then NSW Premier when demonstrators lay down in front of LBJ's car is quoted as saying-"run over the coughs".
 
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

You forget to mention that Australia has a much bigger emission and GDP per capita (though China still is one of the major polluters)
A worldwide policy ... can you suggest how to achieve it? If it can't be done globally, perhaps if everyone ignored the issue maybe it'll just disappear.

Australia will have a minor impact. But hey everyone has to do their bit right?
If everyone person had the mentality that they are just one person in a world of billions so could do as much environmentally unethical things as they pleased ... well ...

Having a look into some actual numbers on the pollution (remember what people used to worry about in the 1970s before the impending ice age came up?) rather than carbon dioxide (not a pollutant under any scientific definition btw) incrementally produced by China since 2009 is revealing.

Also is the fact that western companies have been shifting "expensive" industry into China for over two decades now. Why expensive? Well the treatment of the by-products (carcinogens etc) is expensive in any OECD and some transitioning countries but not in China curiously enough.

Take the inventor of Soy sauce, Ajinomoto - a truly obnoxious chemical process that produces several different carcinogens as waste products (now you know why it tastes so good!). They moved their main plant to China over a decade ago. The capital equipment, inputs etc all top quality (Japanese, German equipment) so no cost saving there. It is not a labour intensive process (no major cost saving there to justify JPYBillions cost). The land was cheap (confiscated from local farmers if Western NGOs can be believed - as has happened numerous times since btw) but the clincher is they "allegedly" discharge the untreated by-products by the millions of litres straight into the river. Curiously enough in the region up to 30km downstream the incidence of rare cancers such as thyroid, liver and brain are reportedly between 100 to 300x higher than anywhere else in the world.

That was the initial findings published around 2002/3 before the Western NGO had its accreditation rescinded by China and kicked out of the country. Subsequently the main road into the village where the plant is located has had a check point ever since. Hence why the analysis only got to 30km downstream.

Long way round to say - Carbon Scheme in Aust is making a few investment bankers, consultants and future consultants (ex-Fed & State Politicians soon looking for jobs- was that why they wanted Bob in Canberra to give out-placement advice?) significantly richer, creating new Depts in the public service and forecasting losses of $750m on the $10bn Green Fund (Budget papers). Well Treasury has a good track record of never foreseeing falls in GDP, let alone a recession in its history. Their ability to forecast "losses" is nearly as good.

China is pulling in as much coal as they can trans-ship. Internally their river network and train system (freight) cannot shift the coal internally in the amounts required so they are taking inferior coal (brown...) from whoever such as India. Similarly with iron ore (what Australian producers would not even report to the ASX) from India.

The pollution from the coal fired power stations (adding more each year than virtually exist in Australia) was so bad in 2002/3 (yes before their economy really took off) that the early form work for the Olympics had to be replaced as the steel was corroding faster than it could be covered. Who'd guessed it - someone tried to pass off slightly lower grade steel in the construction but cut the alloy too much.

Due to the pollution 70% of the ground water is estimated to be unusable for agriculture - forget about drinking. So the North/South and West/East canals and pipelines have been built (and still are) to bring the relatively clean water from the west to the polluted east.

Have a guess how many coal power stations were required to power the pumping of the water?

Vicious circle this pollution - but our Carbon tax (consultant get rich quick) will solve the problems like our energy intensive desalination plants solve the water problem.


Enjoy the Soy Sauce!
[h=3]San-J® Soy Sauces - AJINOMOTO[/h]www.ajiusafood.com/products/san-j-specialty-sauces/san-j.aspx
 
You could have done better than that.Mr.Askin then NSW Premier when demonstrators lay down in front of LBJ's car is quoted as saying-"run over the coughs".

I think I was more focused on the worse PM bit. If we want to extend that to premiers I'd hold up Joh and Mike Rann as firm contenders for the worse title.


Sent from the Throne
 
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

Having a look into some actual numbers on the pollution (remember what people used to worry about in the 1970s before the impending ice age came up?) rather than carbon dioxide (not a pollutant under any scientific definition btw) incrementally produced by China since 2009 is revealing.

Also is the fact that western companies have been shifting "expensive" industry into China for over two decades now. Why expensive? Well the treatment of the by-products (carcinogens etc) is expensive in any OECD and some transitioning countries but not in China curiously enough.

Take the inventor of Soy sauce, Ajinomoto - a truly obnoxious chemical process that produces several different carcinogens as waste products (now you know why it tastes so good!). They moved their main plant to China over a decade ago. The capital equipment, inputs etc all top quality (Japanese, German equipment) so no cost saving there. It is not a labour intensive process (no major cost saving there to justify JPYBillions cost). The land was cheap (confiscated from local farmers if Western NGOs can be believed - as has happened numerous times since btw) but the clincher is they "allegedly" discharge the untreated by-products by the millions of litres straight into the river. Curiously enough in the region up to 30km downstream the incidence of rare cancers such as thyroid, liver and brain are reportedly between 100 to 300x higher than anywhere else in the world.

That was the initial findings published around 2002/3 before the Western NGO had its accreditation rescinded by China and kicked out of the country. Subsequently the main road into the village where the plant is located has had a check point ever since. Hence why the analysis only got to 30km downstream.

Long way round to say - Carbon Scheme in Aust is making a few investment bankers, consultants and future consultants (ex-Fed & State Politicians soon looking for jobs- was that why they wanted Bob in Canberra to give out-placement advice?) significantly richer, creating new Depts in the public service and forecasting losses of $750m on the $10bn Green Fund (Budget papers). Well Treasury has a good track record of never foreseeing falls in GDP, let alone a recession in its history. Their ability to forecast "losses" is nearly as good.

China is pulling in as much coal as they can trans-ship. Internally their river network and train system (freight) cannot shift the coal internally in the amounts required so they are taking inferior coal (brown...) from whoever such as India. Similarly with iron ore (what Australian producers would not even report to the ASX) from India.

The pollution from the coal fired power stations (adding more each year than virtually exist in Australia) was so bad in 2002/3 (yes before their economy really took off) that the early form work for the Olympics had to be replaced as the steel was corroding faster than it could be covered. Who'd guessed it - someone tried to pass off slightly lower grade steel in the construction but cut the alloy too much.

Due to the pollution 70% of the ground water is estimated to be unusable for agriculture - forget about drinking. So the North/South and West/East canals and pipelines have been built (and still are) to bring the relatively clean water from the west to the polluted east.

Have a guess how many coal power stations were required to power the pumping of the water?

Vicious circle this pollution - but our Carbon tax (consultant get rich quick) will solve the problems like our energy intensive desalination plants solve the water problem.

You left out the bit about deadly vaccinations.
 
Re: Qantas sticking to charging passengers for carbon tax

Many Japanese people think that nuclear power can be quite polluting though.

i'm sure they don't think that at all. I'm sure they are more concerned about the risks when things go wrong not the "pollution" from normal operations. I also think they are more concerned about the information they are given rather than the risks themselves. Certainly the reports from those involved with Fukushima have very much been about the confusion caused by having different limits depending on the product involved, eg the contamination limit for fruit juice (a food) was apparently 10 times higher than the limit for water. In any case those are not concerns about pollution, they are concerns about one incident.

Having a look into some actual numbers on the pollution (remember what people used to worry about in the 1970s before the impending ice age came up?) rather than carbon dioxide (not a pollutant under any scientific definition btw) incrementally produced by China since 2009 is revealing.

Also is the fact that western companies have been shifting "expensive" industry into China for over two decades now. Why expensive? Well the treatment of the by-products (carcinogens etc) is expensive in any OECD and some transitioning countries but not in China curiously enough.

Take the inventor of Soy sauce, Ajinomoto - a truly obnoxious chemical process that produces several different carcinogens as waste products (now you know why it tastes so good!). They moved their main plant to China over a decade ago. The capital equipment, inputs etc all top quality (Japanese, German equipment) so no cost saving there. It is not a labour intensive process (no major cost saving there to justify JPYBillions cost). The land was cheap (confiscated from local farmers if Western NGOs can be believed - as has happened numerous times since btw) but the clincher is they "allegedly" discharge the untreated by-products by the millions of litres straight into the river. Curiously enough in the region up to 30km downstream the incidence of rare cancers such as thyroid, liver and brain are reportedly between 100 to 300x higher than anywhere else in the world.

Thyroid cancer can be a rather common cancer, top 4 for females aged 15 to 44 in Australia, as such I wouldn't think it was a rare cancer. It might be more useful if you quoted actual incidence figures. This sounds like typical greens propaganda that usually selective throws out a number with a certain spin to lead people to draw a conclusion that might very well be totally incorrect. In this case the inference is that the cancer is caused by this factory. However, what other factors are at play? Is there a change in lifestyle due to increase affluence because of the factory. This affluence leading to increased consumption of alcohol and tobacco along with the health effects of those things. Is there increased health surveillance in the region because of the factory? It is well documented that increased health surveillance, i.e. from just about nothing to normal, will result in about a 30% increase in incidence for cancers and other problems. That is this is disease that existed previously but went undetected.

It is also interesting that you've only focussed on coal power expansion but haven't mentioned that China's nuclear power program is expanding just as quickly as it's coal power.
 
Read our AFF credit card guides and start earning more points now.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

Status
Not open for further replies.

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.
Back
Top