Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Labor's carbon tax lie

Jump to new
moXJO said:
He also said he would not bring it in in the current economic conditions or without the rest of the world making a commitment.
Click to expand...

The whole speech is there in my link...i cant find the above statement anywhere..i did find this little gem though.

Prime Minister John Howard said:
we must position Australia for a low carbon future. We face a major new reform challenge in designing an emissions trading system and setting a long-term goal for reducing our emissions in the absence of a global carbon scheme. These decisions will be amongst the most important Australia takes in the next decade.
Click to expand...

:) Golden isn't it.
 
It really is golden, John Howard would have taken it to an election.
Shame the goon show didn't, they wouldn't be taking the flack they are now.
 
sptrawler said:
Bitter, yes I'm bitter.

Dissapointed somewhat also, because the government after decieving the electorate, now think by putting off the election, will be able to convince the population that deception is ok.
Click to expand...
Firstly. I'm glad, even a little chuffed, that you took my post in the good humour (with serious overtones) that I intended it to be taken. Perhaps you are starting to understand me; I wish others would. Or at least make the effort to.

Secondly, the government is not putting off the election. It is not due yet!!!!!
 
So_Cynical said:
The whole speech is there in my link...i cant find the above statement anywhere..i did find this little gem though.



:) Golden isn't it.
Click to expand...

moXJO said:
Really you're going to make me trawl for it
Click to expand...

Trawl all you want...its not there.

All i can find that comes close is.

PM John Howard said:
Let me remind you on this point that in 1997 the United States Senate voted unanimously 95 to nil against any treaty that did not include major emitting developing countries. Indeed, when the Clinton Administration signed the Kyoto Protocol, it was then Vice President Al Gore who said that the United States could only ratify once and I quote his words, key developing nations participate. The United States has never ratified because the Al Gore condition of that ratification has never been fulfilled. This is a global problem he said that will need a global solution. A decade later nothing has changed to alter that view. I believe that we have reached a new moment of opportunity in this debate after a decade of inflated rhetoric and modest results under the Kyoto protocol. There is now what I regard as an emerging pragmatic consensus on a way forward that includes all major emitters and Australia is helping to forge this consensus.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you mis quoted him? or put your own spin on what he said at the time???
 
There is plenty there

FORMER prime minister John Howard says there has been a global shift away from carbon emissions trading and Australia could be going down a lonely path.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard is pushing to have a fixed price put on carbon emissions for three years before moving towards a trading scheme.

Mr Howard said despite going to the 2007 election supporting a trading scheme he now believed there had been a global shift away from that type of action.

"In 2007 people were almost dancing in the streets in favour of these measures," he told ABC TV today.

Mr Howard said the global financial crisis and the collapse of the Copenhagen climate change talks meant the debate had altered.

"Some of the views have shifted on the science, people aren't as certain anymore as they were four years ago," he said.




"There's no chance in the world of the Americans embracing an emissions trading system."
He said the Chinese, Indians and Canadians also were not keen on the idea.
Click to expand...

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/prime-minister-julia-gillard-defends-carbon-tax-ad-spend/story-fn7x8me2-1226096117237

I remember him blabbering on about it on the news
 
Julia said:
Perhaps so, from your objective overall view, but for the people paying those household bills, I doubt they will agree that it's 'less of a problem'.
Click to expand...
I could probably have expressed that a bit better. :)

My point is that if someone loses their job, or the overall national economy falls in a hole, then that's a bigger problem than simply having their living costs increase. Rising bills aren't good that's for sure, but losing your job is even worse.
 
Eager said:
Firstly. I'm glad, even a little chuffed, that you took my post in the good humour (with serious overtones) that I intended it to be taken. Perhaps you are starting to understand me; I wish others would. Or at least make the effort to.

Secondly, the government is not putting off the election. It is not due yet!!!!!
Click to expand...

Sorry to dissagree with you, but they are putting off the election. Labor can't get through any legislation other than ones the greens want. The problem with that is a party that has 10% of the vote is having most say in our countries future.
The only way to circumvent this is for labor to pull the greens into line(which doesn't seem to be happening). The other option is to call an election and be able to govern in their own right.
Waiting untill the election due next year and allowing the greens to slap them for another 12 months, just highlighs what a gutless bunch of whoosies they are.
They really have painted themselves into a corner, go to an election, get creamed, allow another 12 months of being whiped by the greens.
 
A interesting piece on Ken Henry's original RSPT and the failure of Labor to sell its tax changes to the public at large.

None of that is to dispute Henry's argument that tax reform is hard work: of course it is. Voters are understandably concerned about governments abusing their taxing powers; they need to be convinced changes are in their long-term interests.

Those leaders who can, do -- as did Bob Hawke and Paul Keating, John Howard and Peter Costello; those who can't, such as Julia Gillard and Swan, try bribes instead. That is a loser's strategy, as the carbon tax shows. But blaming it on politics, the media and the public makes no sense at all.

Australia's politics is robustly democratic. So is its media. That has always grated on those who see themselves as engineers of the public beneficence. And yes, at times, it may have led to good proposals not being adopted. But the RSPT was not one of them.
Click to expand...

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...s-he-meant-to-be/story-fn7078da-1226428482983
 
There was a warm and cosy chat with Julia on the internet, she was asked, what effect on temperatures our efforts would achieve. She responded with, we will reduce carbon dioxide emmissions by 160 million tonnes by 2020.

It was a shame that someone didn't ask about the resultant increase in sulphur dioxide and sulphur trioxide emmissions, due to the increase in burning gas instead of coal. The environment can deal with carbon dioxide, it has a few problems with the others.:cry:

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...no-one-likes-her/story-e6freuy9-1226431585087
 
Smurph, someone has started pointing out something you have been alluding to for years.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/the-economy/tasmanian-tradeoff-jobs-or-trees-20120809-23wdq.html

I see the Tassie Green crusader (Bob Brown) is now cruising around the N/W of W.A on a government pension and a free ride on the greenpeace boat. Shame he was told to F Off by the indigenous people.

Also, still waiting for So_Cynical to give us an example of a clean energy company firing up, post carbon tax, now they can get all this government funding.
Come on So_Cynical give us a post of a new clean energy technology company, that is going to supply the new world job opportunities. LOL,LOL
 
Not only that, as you would know sptrawler, building a plant can take up 3-5 years from initial design to actual working order and producing something. Shouldn't have some planning have been done in the last year or so, so that something could have hit the ground running and a plant getting built, right now???

The way l see it, by the time something does get decided on and gets the go ahead, the election will be upon us and a change of government will also take place...
 
sptrawler said:
Smurph, someone has started pointing out something you have been alluding to for years.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/the-economy/tasmanian-tradeoff-jobs-or-trees-20120809-23wdq.html
Click to expand...
It's somewhat shocking when you realise that practically everything in Tas is now government run due to private enterprise having been sent to the wall. About 55% of the population is either on welfare or employed by government.

That's what happens when it becomes virtually impossible to establish any new major business for 30 years. :2twocents
 
DB008 said:
Not only that, as you would know sptrawler, building a plant can take up 3-5 years from initial design to actual working order and producing something. Shouldn't have some planning have been done in the last year or so, so that something could have hit the ground running and a plant getting built, right now???

The way l see it, by the time something does get decided on and gets the go ahead, the election will be upon us and a change of government will also take place...
Click to expand...

The gas hub off Broome makes perfect sense, that's why people with no sense disagree with it. Christ knows what the end game is with Labor and the Greens. Even their pensions will come under the spotlight when the economy goes pear shaped.:D
 

Similar threads

sydboy007
State tax reform
Replies
0
Views
3K
sydboy007
sydboy007
piggybank
Are Australian freight going the same way as our car industry?
Replies
2
Views
3K
Smurf1976
Smurf1976
The Mint Man
Labor Tax Policy, where is it?
6 7 8
Replies
141
Views
21K
greggy
G
R
The American use of War Pretext Incidents
Replies
6
Views
9K
sptrawler
sptrawler
Top