Printable View
Most "big polluters" are a private enterprises even the state owned facilities someone has to to pay for the shortfall, if they can't pass the costs on they will most likely be unviable and in the case of a private enterprise the facility will simply shut down. Then the doomsayers would actually have something to whinge about.Quote:
Originally Posted by pfillery
Of course that's based on running data from 20 odd years ago which discounts brand new precipitators, turbine efficiency increase upto 20% alone on some units, 2 sides to every story and all that:pQuote:
Originally Posted by Slunnie
I don't see the sense in increasing tax and creating more government departments along with the plethurer of public servants to run it when we need only to legislate for the big polluters to cut their emmissions to a particular level by a given time and if they don't they pay the penalty.
As argued by many including the CEO of the ANZ this is just a redistribution of wealth. Gillards cut off of $150000 P/A income is too low as well. This combined income is easily reached this day and age when both partners have proffesional jobs (studied and worked hard over many years to get there I might add).
Gillard has left herself open to people saying lower income families carbon is good and higher income families carbon is bad.
A couple other things concern me:
- This will likely put Australias industries at a disadvantage to the rest of the world. Limiting carbon must be a world wide effort.
- Once Australian companies start buying carbon offsets from overseas i.e. sending Aussy $'s OS, where is the money going to come from to fund tax cuts and reimbusements to low and middle income families and some industry sectors, you guessed it Tax hikes.
My rant for now and yes this thread should be moved.
Nuclear power??? - not if the Greens stay in the political equation. I hope the next election is more decisive one way or another and the greens are relegated back to being fairies at the bottom of the garden.Quote:
Originally Posted by pfillery
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slunnie
I do not care how much energy the others use or waste, I just do my bit for the next generations and if I have to go with $40 a week less for pleasure so bi it. I have 4 grandchildren.Quote:
Originally Posted by rovercare
My electricity bill is less than $800 a year and we designed our home to be energy efficient like Slunnie.
We have to tax the big polluters because they spoil the planet regardless if we save energy or not.
We have to good here, less do our bit for our children grandchildren and more
Looks like that what happens in Japan do not have much effect on you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferret
In 5 years time the water with radiation and fish will reach USA.
I rather be a faire in the garden that eating contamited food.
We are spoiled here and do not whant to sacrifice a bit our life for the good of next generations :(
They presented about the continued upgrades.Quote:
Originally Posted by rovercare
Ok, first off, is there any proof that we are causing the environmental damage that is being touted. I sure as hell haven’t seen anything that proves or disproves that we are responsible for the temperature changes.
The temperature started rising between 400 and 1000 years ago so who was responsible for causing the charges before the industrial revolution?
Next, if the whole world stopped polluting tomorrow, would the temperature stop rising?
China is the worlds biggest polluter and is going to get even worse before they get their pollution under control, if they ever do. So tell me, how does making Australian manufacturing less competitive and forcing companies to source cheaper products from bigger polluting countries like China help the likes of Bob ( go suck a tree ) Brown make the world “CLEANER”
As for the redheaded mutt’s carbon tax offset will be paid to a large proportion of families BUT only a very small percentage of those to receive to offset will get the full amount and most people will still be considerably worse off.
Last but not least, as the so called top 500 polluting companies are just simply going to pass this tax on and ultimately it will fall on the end user to pay ( guess who ) and the redheaded mutt is actually going to be paying out $4.7 Billion more than she expects to collect, how the hell is this going to work, without sending the country broke.
Here is a quote from an e-mail sent to Sky news over the weekend and I think it says it all.
“Julia meant to say ‘There will be no Country under my Government’”
Well here we are going again, for sure to the soapbox because people start going agains the present government,
Give me a break!! both parties are shocking, Howard was thinking about carbon tax in 2007 and run out of time to bring it forward and Abbot plan will cost us a bloody fortune and his promises regarding taxes and pensions will bring the country to the gutter.
Both are hopeless so refrain to talk about them and do something for the environment ;)
Yep, no sensible debate against unresearched arguements.