Abbott's carbon tax confusion
- Thread starter nioka
- Start date
IFocus
You are arguing with a Galah
- Joined
- 8 September 2006
- Posts
- 7,672
- Reactions
- 4,764
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion.
Abbottliars "Great Big Tax" is all that needs to be said I think
Still it must have been years ago...... oh hang on 2 years ago Tisk Tisk
Funny I looked in The Australian for the article, they must have missed it some how found it in SMH
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/c...ged-by-old-carbon-comment-20110607-1fprb.html
Abbottliars "Great Big Tax" is all that needs to be said I think
Still it must have been years ago...... oh hang on 2 years ago Tisk Tisk
Funny I looked in The Australian for the article, they must have missed it some how found it in SMH
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/c...ged-by-old-carbon-comment-20110607-1fprb.html
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion.
Lol did you hear penny wong comment on their carbon tax pre election, or swan or gillards
According to todays news Abbott is on record with an interview on the ABC in 2009 spruiking in favour of a carbon tax. Where does it leave HIS credibility now?.
Lol did you hear penny wong comment on their carbon tax pre election, or swan or gillards
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion.
Well I watched Q&A last night and I can ensure that's not what he said : "in reference to how the tax and rebate could be applied."
He said "If you WERE to have a carbon tax", then you could apply an additional cost to fuel etc., then take you receipts to the tax office at tax time and claim the rebate.
He was making suggestions how to make it easier on family costs. How it could be audited if you like. Keep the receipt from fuel, take them to the ato. pretty simple.
The carbon tax as it now stands, is tax the highest polluters(1000), then the prices get passed on in food etc, then a portion of the tax received will be given to family in the form of concessions.
Now even a 5 year old child can tell you what is wrong with labors carbon tax rebate. Its designed so that it cannot be audited.
How do we know what taxes are received, how do we know what the familys get.
Different family's will obviously get different ammounts.
I am not biased here, he suggested something else as an example also, but I have forgot.
Obviously some people do not have cars.
Actually if you are keen to watch a rerun of Q&A watch the comedian and see how much he contributed. "stuff all"
Finally if you understand "mind games", well i can tell you that the new art of journalism
is exactly that. They replay "parts" of a media appearance to make a fool of somebody,
then beat them up. Yeah, it gets an audience, its entertainment and it makes the story run on. Old Joh used to call it "feeding the chickens", as he referred it to giving media appearances. Now it applies to the journalists feeding the public.
Cheers
According to todays news Abbott is on record with an interview on the ABC in 2009 spruiking in favour of a carbon tax. Where does it leave HIS credibility now?.
Well I watched Q&A last night and I can ensure that's not what he said : "in reference to how the tax and rebate could be applied."
He said "If you WERE to have a carbon tax", then you could apply an additional cost to fuel etc., then take you receipts to the tax office at tax time and claim the rebate.
He was making suggestions how to make it easier on family costs. How it could be audited if you like. Keep the receipt from fuel, take them to the ato. pretty simple.
The carbon tax as it now stands, is tax the highest polluters(1000), then the prices get passed on in food etc, then a portion of the tax received will be given to family in the form of concessions.
Now even a 5 year old child can tell you what is wrong with labors carbon tax rebate. Its designed so that it cannot be audited.
How do we know what taxes are received, how do we know what the familys get.
Different family's will obviously get different ammounts.
I am not biased here, he suggested something else as an example also, but I have forgot.
Obviously some people do not have cars.
Actually if you are keen to watch a rerun of Q&A watch the comedian and see how much he contributed. "stuff all"
Finally if you understand "mind games", well i can tell you that the new art of journalism
is exactly that. They replay "parts" of a media appearance to make a fool of somebody,
then beat them up. Yeah, it gets an audience, its entertainment and it makes the story run on. Old Joh used to call it "feeding the chickens", as he referred it to giving media appearances. Now it applies to the journalists feeding the public.
Cheers
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,666
- Reactions
- 7,516
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion.
A well designed carbon tax to change investment directions made sense in 2009 and still does so today. The previous Labour governments focus on a total emission control plan had the theoretical merit that it would actually force down CO2 emissions by having a total CO2 cap and forcing companies to pay for carbon credits. A carbon tax might not force down emissions if companies think they can make enough profits without changing their production methods.
I don't think there is much surprise in remembering that Tony Abbott once supported the concept of a simpler carbon tax scheme versus a more complex emission control plan. At that stage he was trying to \derail PM Rudds plan so spruiking another alternative looked like a good idea.
Of course in 2011 Tony Abbott will simply oppose anything the government is trying to get up to destroy it. End of story. The bather about BIG NEW TAX is just fodder to whip up mass hysteria.
And he doesn't actually think there is any serious problem with global warming anyway. So why waste energy actually doing anything about it ? Lets just pretend..
A well designed carbon tax to change investment directions made sense in 2009 and still does so today. The previous Labour governments focus on a total emission control plan had the theoretical merit that it would actually force down CO2 emissions by having a total CO2 cap and forcing companies to pay for carbon credits. A carbon tax might not force down emissions if companies think they can make enough profits without changing their production methods.
I don't think there is much surprise in remembering that Tony Abbott once supported the concept of a simpler carbon tax scheme versus a more complex emission control plan. At that stage he was trying to \derail PM Rudds plan so spruiking another alternative looked like a good idea.
Of course in 2011 Tony Abbott will simply oppose anything the government is trying to get up to destroy it. End of story. The bather about BIG NEW TAX is just fodder to whip up mass hysteria.
And he doesn't actually think there is any serious problem with global warming anyway. So why waste energy actually doing anything about it ? Lets just pretend..
wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,971
- Reactions
- 13,283
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion.
Not withstanding what joea pointed out... I can think of quite a few things I believed in 2009 that I have changed my mind on.
Why cannot a politician change their mind in light of new/better information?
Jesus! You guys are worse than the British press!!
Not withstanding what joea pointed out... I can think of quite a few things I believed in 2009 that I have changed my mind on.
Why cannot a politician change their mind in light of new/better information?
Jesus! You guys are worse than the British press!!
Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion.
Well, I suppose if we accept that as a principle, we have to accept that Julia Gillard equally had the right to change her mind about the carbon tax.
Not withstanding what joea pointed out... I can think of quite a few things I believed in 2009 that I have changed my mind on.
Why cannot a politician change their mind in light of new/better information?
Jesus! You guys are worse than the British press!!
Well, I suppose if we accept that as a principle, we have to accept that Julia Gillard equally had the right to change her mind about the carbon tax.
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion.
Because a major policy requires a mandate. After all we still have not seen the policy.
We have not see the contents on the policy, and have not seen the price or rebate.
So we are all running around " being warm and fuzzy" over a debate that cannot be had until the policy is chaired in parliment.
ABC has a statement that Abbott will stand by the 2009 media footage.
The "cart is before the horse" as they say. This is how Gillard does business, states a direction and builds the policy on the run.
Swan had a media conferance today on a "snapshot" of the carbon tax.
They must have gave him three vallium as he did not go red and sweaty in question time.
Cheers
Because a major policy requires a mandate. After all we still have not seen the policy.
We have not see the contents on the policy, and have not seen the price or rebate.
So we are all running around " being warm and fuzzy" over a debate that cannot be had until the policy is chaired in parliment.
ABC has a statement that Abbott will stand by the 2009 media footage.
The "cart is before the horse" as they say. This is how Gillard does business, states a direction and builds the policy on the run.
Swan had a media conferance today on a "snapshot" of the carbon tax.
They must have gave him three vallium as he did not go red and sweaty in question time.
Cheers
explod
explod
- Joined
- 4 March 2007
- Posts
- 7,341
- Reactions
- 1,198
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion.
Well, you could always just go away.
Jesus! You guys are worse than the British press!!
Well, you could always just go away.
- Joined
- 16 June 2005
- Posts
- 4,281
- Reactions
- 6
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion
Here we go - Penny Wong in 2009 and even in 2010. She wasn't leader of labor and don't believe Abbott was leader and most likely would have been supporting Turnbull's party line at the time.
Unlike Abbott and Wong, Julia Gillard was leader of the labor party and Swan was deputy. IMO, that puts them in a much more responsible position especially when the message below of Gillard's was belted out repeatedly in the days before the election. The polls were indicating a hung parliament, so she would have known the likelihood of having to give in to the greens if she wanted power desperately enough - and yet she still swamped the airwaves with the following message:
and this is a pretty definite pre-election message from Swan:
Lol did you hear penny wong comment on their carbon tax pre election, or swan or gillards
Here we go - Penny Wong in 2009 and even in 2010. She wasn't leader of labor and don't believe Abbott was leader and most likely would have been supporting Turnbull's party line at the time.
Unlike Abbott and Wong, Julia Gillard was leader of the labor party and Swan was deputy. IMO, that puts them in a much more responsible position especially when the message below of Gillard's was belted out repeatedly in the days before the election. The polls were indicating a hung parliament, so she would have known the likelihood of having to give in to the greens if she wanted power desperately enough - and yet she still swamped the airwaves with the following message:
and this is a pretty definite pre-election message from Swan:
- Joined
- 23 September 2008
- Posts
- 919
- Reactions
- 174
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion
Yes, I'm really confused now that Tony said something years ago. Lets be honest - it doesn't matter whether it's Julia or Tony spruiking a carbon tax we all know that it's plain wrong.
The key issues that confuse everyone is that there's no observed evidence of CO2 gas impacting temperatures as well as the amount they will drop by should they be reduced by a % and over what timeline.
Feel free to make us less confused.
Yes, I'm really confused now that Tony said something years ago. Lets be honest - it doesn't matter whether it's Julia or Tony spruiking a carbon tax we all know that it's plain wrong.
The key issues that confuse everyone is that there's no observed evidence of CO2 gas impacting temperatures as well as the amount they will drop by should they be reduced by a % and over what timeline.
Feel free to make us less confused.
wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,971
- Reactions
- 13,283
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion.
I'd miss you Mr Plod.:
Well, you could always just go away.
I'd miss you Mr Plod.
:
wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,971
- Reactions
- 13,283
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion.
Indeed.
But I did point out that the change of mind should be based on new/better information.
Based the best information available shows that a carbon tax:
1/ Will not abate co2 emissions
2/ Will most likely damage the Oz economy
3/ Is deeply unpopular
I say they made the right call when they lied that there was no tax on the table.
Indeed.
But I did point out that the change of mind should be based on new/better information.
Based the best information available shows that a carbon tax:
1/ Will not abate co2 emissions
2/ Will most likely damage the Oz economy
3/ Is deeply unpopular
I say they made the right call when they lied that there was no tax on the table.
Logique
Investor
- Joined
- 18 April 2007
- Posts
- 4,290
- Reactions
- 768
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion
The Australian people aren't stupid, and that's why Labor won't take the carbon dioxide tax to a general election, as John Howard did on the GST.
All this talk of 'brands'. It's the 'Independent' brand that has been trashed.
Labor had the bureaucracy working on the carbon tax within a month of the election - in secret. There are lies, and then there is premeditation.
The Australian people aren't stupid, and that's why Labor won't take the carbon dioxide tax to a general election, as John Howard did on the GST.
All this talk of 'brands'. It's the 'Independent' brand that has been trashed.
- Joined
- 16 June 2005
- Posts
- 4,281
- Reactions
- 6
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion
The labor brand doesn't look very popular anymore.
And the PM doesn't look to be doing to well with her dyed red hair brand either.
And Abbott - well he's gaining in popularity despite any faults..
The labor brand doesn't look very popular anymore.
And the PM doesn't look to be doing to well with her dyed red hair brand either.
And Abbott - well he's gaining in popularity despite any faults..
IFocus
You are arguing with a Galah
- Joined
- 8 September 2006
- Posts
- 7,672
- Reactions
- 4,764
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion
John Hewson took the GST to an election how did he go........how did that cake work out anyway?
John Hewson took the GST to an election how did he go........how did that cake work out anyway?
- Joined
- 21 June 2009
- Posts
- 5,880
- Reactions
- 14
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion
Anyone tell me how much per tonne carbon is going to be? Anyone here show me some projected numbers of across the board costings for industry/punters/Australia. Anyone here evidence what the actual costs are going to be for fuel/electricity/food? Anyone like to share a study on how many jobs will be lost or gained or even how it will affect the local council costs?
NUP ........ thought not. Because there is none. We have been shown and told by the Guvmint that we all will be better off and so will the country.
But wait ........ what is this?
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-much-better-off/story-fn59niix-1226070948491
Damn right I wanna be $8000 a year better off in the year 2020. That is not even a $18 a week I am better off in 8.5 years time. Average wage in Aussie land is $64,641 in 2011 according to the ABS. Lets just say for comedy purposes only we only earn $50,000 per annum then. Average pay rise in Aussie land is 4% per annum so therefore I DAMN WELL SHOULD BE $2000 per annum better off with NO CARBON TAX. This is just to cover the rising costs of living.
No wait ....... cost of living WILL GO UP with a carbon tax so therefore inflation will go up followed suit by interest rates ........... OH MY HEAD !
Anyone tell me how much per tonne carbon is going to be? Anyone here show me some projected numbers of across the board costings for industry/punters/Australia. Anyone here evidence what the actual costs are going to be for fuel/electricity/food? Anyone like to share a study on how many jobs will be lost or gained or even how it will affect the local council costs?
NUP ........ thought not. Because there is none. We have been shown and told by the Guvmint that we all will be better off and so will the country.
But wait ........ what is this?
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-much-better-off/story-fn59niix-1226070948491
Damn right I wanna be $8000 a year better off in the year 2020. That is not even a $18 a week I am better off in 8.5 years time. Average wage in Aussie land is $64,641 in 2011 according to the ABS. Lets just say for comedy purposes only we only earn $50,000 per annum then. Average pay rise in Aussie land is 4% per annum so therefore I DAMN WELL SHOULD BE $2000 per annum better off with NO CARBON TAX. This is just to cover the rising costs of living.
No wait ....... cost of living WILL GO UP with a carbon tax so therefore inflation will go up followed suit by interest rates ........... OH MY HEAD !
- Joined
- 16 June 2005
- Posts
- 4,281
- Reactions
- 6
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion
At least John Howard had the decency and integrity to take his never-ever GST to an election. Sure he lost it over Work Choices and he was severely punished.
Gillard should do the same - what's she scared of...lol. Yes, she knows very few want a bar of it. Gillard will face the same punishment as John Howard if she imposes this unwanted tax, imo.
At least John Howard had the decency and integrity to take his never-ever GST to an election. Sure he lost it over Work Choices and he was severely punished.
Gillard should do the same - what's she scared of...lol. Yes, she knows very few want a bar of it. Gillard will face the same punishment as John Howard if she imposes this unwanted tax, imo.
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion
It is the worst part of democracy that a party can claim 'I will do X, and not do Y', and then get voted in and do whatever it likes regardless of its promise. What is the real difference between a dictatorship and a party like this? Only one: the 'democratic' party is limited to doing whatever it so wishes for 3 years, when the next party has a go.
So far I have seen three possible solutions to this disgrace (note 'people not voting in a sh-t government is not on the list - I am not a resident of fantasyland'):
1) Constitutional limits on the power of government. Can work in theory, but in reality (such as the US), the limits are ignored because politicians, by the nature of the sort of people they are ([insert one paragraph of adjectives and nouns]), do not respect limits on their power or peoples right to freedom.
2) Continuous democracy. In such a system, you have an initial election, but anyone can change their vote at any time.
3) The ending to the movie 'V for Vendetta'. Pretty risky to impose your will on the people when they respond in such a manner.
That's exactly the point.
It is the worst part of democracy that a party can claim 'I will do X, and not do Y', and then get voted in and do whatever it likes regardless of its promise. What is the real difference between a dictatorship and a party like this? Only one: the 'democratic' party is limited to doing whatever it so wishes for 3 years, when the next party has a go.
So far I have seen three possible solutions to this disgrace (note 'people not voting in a sh-t government is not on the list - I am not a resident of fantasyland'):
1) Constitutional limits on the power of government. Can work in theory, but in reality (such as the US), the limits are ignored because politicians, by the nature of the sort of people they are ([insert one paragraph of adjectives and nouns]), do not respect limits on their power or peoples right to freedom.
2) Continuous democracy. In such a system, you have an initial election, but anyone can change their vote at any time.
3) The ending to the movie 'V for Vendetta'. Pretty risky to impose your will on the people when they respond in such a manner.
Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
Re: Abbotts carbon tax confusion
I wonder if the Abbott ad infinitum rendering of three word slogans is wearing a bit thin with the electorate?
He was actually impressive when he was in the Northern Territory talking to aboriginal people, but back in Canberra, or trawling around various factories telling the employees they may lose their jobs with a carbon tax, for me anyway the repetitiveness is sounding patronising and as though he can't think of anything positive to say about Coalition policies.
As a voter, I want to hear more about the good stuff the Coalition would do. I don't believe that - if the carbon tax is in fact legislated, gets going, the electorate is duly given tax cuts or added welfare - the Coalition would actually reverse those tax cuts and ask welfare recipients to pay back their extra benefits.
Didn't Labor say that if they were elected they would repeal the GST? My memory might be faulty on this.
Actually, sails, the Coalition has fallen two points in both the primary vote and the 2PP in the latest Newspoll, Labor having picked up those two percentage points in both cases.And Abbott - well he's gaining in popularity despite any faults..
I wonder if the Abbott ad infinitum rendering of three word slogans is wearing a bit thin with the electorate?
He was actually impressive when he was in the Northern Territory talking to aboriginal people, but back in Canberra, or trawling around various factories telling the employees they may lose their jobs with a carbon tax, for me anyway the repetitiveness is sounding patronising and as though he can't think of anything positive to say about Coalition policies.
As a voter, I want to hear more about the good stuff the Coalition would do. I don't believe that - if the carbon tax is in fact legislated, gets going, the electorate is duly given tax cuts or added welfare - the Coalition would actually reverse those tax cuts and ask welfare recipients to pay back their extra benefits.
Didn't Labor say that if they were elected they would repeal the GST? My memory might be faulty on this.
