What does the Carbon Tax mean for me?

[Eager]

People probably say the majority on here are righties because this is a "Stock Forum" - primarily about wealth creation and capitalism - 2 things the lefties wouldn't know anything about!

Valid comment. There is bound to be a particular demographic attracted to this forum.

Not valid at all - This leftie knows how to make money quite well, thankyouyverymuch. BTW Julia, I've swung before too, from the introduction of the GST and for a while after. Statewise, it has always been about 50/50. But I simply cannot vote for a government led by Tony Rabbit.

 

[Eager]

When there was similar anger against Howard's work choices, would you then consider all swinging voters as "left" even though some of those same voters now will swing to the "right"?

I guess then that the main decision people will have to make at the next election is to either vote for the Carbon Tax, or Workchoices Mk II.

Some people have already made up their minds and that's fine by me, it really is, but for all those that will swing back to the Coalition in 2013, are you sure in your own minds which is the lesser of two evils?

 

[Eager]

What is the government (us?) striving for? Better living conditions? How much better is better? Where does it stop? Why can't people be happy with living simply and comfortably? Everyone wants more more more.

Yes, good point.

It is amazing, isn't it? We are such a comparitively affluent nation with high living standards, yet so many people bitch about it.

 

[startrader]

I guess then that the main decision people will have to make at the next election is to either vote for the Carbon Tax, or Workchoices Mk II.

Some people have already made up their minds and that's fine by me, it really is, but for all those that will swing back to the Coalition in 2013, are you sure in your own minds which is the lesser of two evils?

Oh yes we're sure, we're very sure! People will be taking a lot more into consideration than what you have suggested and, guess what, a lot of people won't be swinging BACK to the Coalition, it will be the first time they have ever voted for them and they won't be voting for Labor again for a very, very, very long time.

 

[sails]

I guess then that the main decision people will have to make at the next election is to either vote for the Carbon Tax, or Workchoices Mk II...

Yeah, that's exactly the scaremongering that will come from the left as soon as an election is called. But are you telling the truth? Can you substantiate your statement of WC MkII?????


There are two things that stand out from the last election. It was Gillard's droning voice that seemed to be always on TV carrying on about Work Choices on Monday AND "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead".

The coalition did not have policy to revive work choices to the best of my knowledge, so Gillard was simply scaremongering and misleading voters about her tax.

How she thinks anyone will believe her anymore (except her faithful tag alongs) is beyond me.

 

[drsmith]

That one is a bit hard to deal I take it.

There is a revenue hole approaching future governments Abbotts narrative means he will not be able to deal with when he becomes PM.

That also includes an incredible long list of other issues.

Perhaps a topic for one of your past someone-or-another sending something-or-another broke threads, if you dare.

 

[drsmith]

Yes, good point.

It is amazing, isn't it? We are such a comparitively affluent nation with high living standards, yet so many people bitch about it.

I thought you concluded that the majority of us were Greek and that you were superior.

Have you now decided that you're Greek too ?

 

[Julia]

Julia,

I can translate leftist doublespeak:

What IF is saying is that he has no answers to your question.

Thank you, Wayne, for confirming what I'd already concluded.
IF, I'd almost begun to develop some respect for you at one stage when you demonstrated some objectivity. It's really not that hard. Maybe consider it again.

Yes, good point.

It is amazing, isn't it? We are such a comparitively affluent nation with high living standards, yet so many people bitch about it.

You might bitch about it too, if you were unemployed and trying to live on $240 p.w., or trying to support a severely disabled child on a pathetic level of benefit.

So easy for those of us who are doing OK to be so dismissive of those who are absolutely disadvantaged.

 

[Wysiwyg]

Work Choices was passed by the Howard Government in 2005 and was designed to improve employment levels and national economic performance by dispensing with unfair dismissal laws for companies under a certain size

That being any bogus excuse to remove employees is okay. Is not working hard enough, according to the employer, a valid excuse? Any excuse will do?

removing the "no disadvantage test" which had sought to ensure workers were not left disadvantaged by changes in legislation, thereby promoting individual efficiency and requiring workers submit their certified agreements directly to Workplace Authority rather than going through the Australian Industrial Relations Commission.

Law of the jungle, only the strong survive and stuff you jack I am keeping my job at your demise. Worplace "Authority"???? What the hell is that?

It also significantly compromised a workforce's ability to legally go on strike, requiring workers to bargain for previously-guaranteed conditions without collectivised representation, and significantly restricting trade union activity and recruitment on the work site.

The end of trade unions and the unified strength of the workers. You know, the people who toil for their pay and suffer life long physical and mental ailments after (and some during) their service to the employer. If anyone has experienced working life as a casual as I did then y'all would know there is no recourse for being moved on next day for some lame excuse.

 

[Smurf1976]

So easy for those of us who are doing OK to be so dismissive of those who are absolutely disadvantaged.

Indeed and that's the fatal flaw in the carbon tax.

Some will be "compensated" with an amount supposedly equal to their increased living costs. Others will lose their jobs and receive virtually nothing in compensation.

The workers should just re-train and accept it I hear someone say? Oh great, so we swap more high wage manufacturing jobs for $15 an hour service industry jobs. That's just wonderful if you've got a mortgage to pay and a family to support as many have. :

 

[tothemax6]

Yes away from communities and water supplies and earthquake zones and cyclone activity and grazing land is fine.
Oh and jettison the waste into the sun.

Meh, the numbers are clear. You can't meet the natural increase in energy consumption any other way.

 

[Calliope]

You're one funny guy!

He was serious. Perhaps you should take his advice, unless of course you have something worthwhile to offer.

 

[tothemax6]

I guess then that the main decision people will have to make at the next election is to either vote for the Carbon Tax, or Workchoices Mk II.
Some people have already made up their minds and that's fine by me, it really is, but for all those that will swing back to the Coalition in 2013, are you sure in your own minds which is the lesser of two evils?

To call workchoices evil requires twisted morals. Employers should be as free to decide who they employ (and on what terms), as employees are free to decide who employs them (and on what terms). Restricting the later is defined as 'slavery', restricting the former should be considered equally immoral.

Yes, good point.
It is amazing, isn't it? We are such a comparitively affluent nation with high living standards, yet so many people bitch about it.

Because you don't stay an affluent nation by allowing lunatics to deliberately inflict damage upon you. There are a long list of affluent nations that descended into obscurity. Mongolia used to be the biggest and most powerful empire in the world. Portugal used to be one of the wealthiest nations in the world, and the foremost naval power. Things change, often when people change them.

 

[basilio]

I don't think any analyst would suggest that a single technology or approach will be sufficient to create a sustainable, non carbon based, renewable energy supply.

I think the 4th Generation Thorium reactors could be a goer as part of a solution. Solving Geothermal issues and using underground heat also seems a winner. At the moment I'm very interested in the development of cheap alkaline fuel cells (AFC) that could replace coal fired power stations ( They can use gasified coal either from underground or above ground gasification Check LINC energy)

And or course wind, solar, wave, tidal and energy conservation can play a part.

But we have to want to go down these paths. And as you identified earlier (To the Max) the huge re engineering projects required will have to crowd out some consumer spending.

Or we can just keep going as we are until it becomes clear that finite fossil fuel energy supplies are collapsing ahead of increasing demands. Not pretty.

 

[basilio]

Welcome to the Cuckoos nest Eager. You have already been introduced to most of the residents and I'm sure many others will come out soon.

Don't be too put off. I'm sure they are all basically harmless and at heart good people. Just we sometimes have some strikingly different concepts of "logic" "reality" and "common sense" . It gives us all something to think about.

Cheers

 

[basilio]

Indeed and that's the fatal flaw in the carbon tax.

Some will be "compensated" with an amount supposedly equal to their increased living costs. Others will lose their jobs and receive virtually nothing in compensation.

The workers should just re-train and accept it I hear someone say? Oh great, so we swap more high wage manufacturing jobs for $15 an hour service industry jobs. That's just wonderful if you've got a mortgage to pay and a family to support as many have. :

I'm really surprised you see the workings of a Carbon Levy in this way Smurf.

If the levy is successful there will be some big re engineering programs around new renewable power supplies. This is all manufacturing jobs surely? And the intention of the levy and the renewable energy fund is to drive new clean power technologies. I would have thought the skill sets would be similar to many/any jobs lost in the process ?

 

[tothemax6]

Or we can just keep going as we are until it becomes clear that finite fossil fuel energy supplies are collapsing ahead of increasing demands. Not pretty.

I just don't think its going to be that big an issue. There has been this story of 'we are going to run out of fossil fuels, thus guaranteed economic implosion' for a long time now. It doesn't really work like that though. Prices provide a mechanism by which people smoothly move from one energy source to another.

Prior to cheap oil, most land transport was done by burning coal in steam engines. Expensive oil prices encouraged oilers to go out and drill (to strike it rich). Companies like Standard Oil came into existence, oil became widely affordable, and trucks and cars started to fill the place of trains.

The same thing will more or less happen with fossil fuels vs renewable energies and nuclear. Whilst I personally hate the phrase 'renewable energy' (because of how it is currently talked of as a panacea), under $200 oil it will become attractive. Nuclear and battery technologies will become increasingly attractive. Entrepreneurs, eager to strike it rich, will plough money into development. The prices will come down.

The energy problem will largely be solved automatically, provided citizens are not obstructed from solving it by their governments.

 

[basilio]

The energy problem will largely be solved automatically, provided citizens are not obstructed from solving it by their governments. To the Max

Maybe your right ..As I research the field I don't have as much confidence as you seem to.

It seems that the critical factor is energy return on energy invested, or EROEI. Basically that means that if you have to put more and more energy into a technology to get an energy return you end up shooting yourself. Just for one ridiculous example consider someone running a generator to power a mobile phone recharge.

I did post a quite good story on this issue previously.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/10/the-energy-trap/

 

[Wysiwyg]

We already have electric cars that don't require petrol/diesel to run. Probably some grease for bearings so no life threatening issue if oil ceased tomorrow. Electricity generation is what is critical and there is hundreds of years of coal in ground so if we have evolved to this stage in 100 years, mind and computer will create a solution. Doesn't look like the Americans are doing away with ICE's yet.

Don't worry, probably a move to nuclear power by next century to charge the mobile phone battery.

 

[tothemax6]

It seems that the critical factor is energy return on energy invested, or EROEI.

EROEI does seem a useful way of describing it, 'do the math' looks to have some interesting things to say, I'll have to check it out some more. Mind you I still prefer $ as the unit, and profit/loss as the measure, since it embodies all resources including energy (labour, materials etc).