Because governments make decisions all the time which many people don't like or agree with. How could you run a country if every policy decision made had to pass the approval of all the voters immediately?
Of course that wouldn't be practical. But you're totally ignoring the essential fact that Gillard stated categorically during the election campaign that there would be "
No Carbon Tax under the government I lead", and many people voted for her on that basis. Then, as we all know, she did a complete about turn on the instruction of the Greens who made it a condition of letting her govern, and decided we would have a carbon tax.
I don't believe for a moment that you can't see what a betrayal this is, or why the electorate so largely feels angry with her.
Your own credibility would be enhanced if you'd just acknowledge this inescapable fact.
Meh, every government does it, that's the way the system works. The idea is to do it early enough in the term that by the time the next election comes around the population has been pork barreled into submission or just doesn't remember it. JH was just as disingenous in the '98 election campaign about the GST being "dead and buried" as JG has been. Of course at least with JH you kind of had some idea what he stood for rather than the current PM who just flaps in the breeze of focus group opinion.
Good to see you've subsequently corrected yourself here, McLovin. If Ms Gillard had gone to an election with the carbon tax, and received electorate endorsement for it, then those of us who don't want it would just have to suck it up.
Oh FFS, why can't you take my post at face value? Do you always regard the truth as spin?
Because you have put forward spin.
It is spin because, as I have already said, if the government had been managing its finances properly instead of wasting huge amounts of taxpayer funds, they would have been able to supply funds relief without imposing yet another levy on the population.
To suggest we should feel all warm and fuzzy about the carbon tax just because the flood levy will shortly end is an example of either disconnected thinking or a determination to present the carbon tax dishonestly in a favourable light.
At the end of the day it is a matter of dollars and cents in your pocket, agreed?
No. Not agreed at all.
For many of us the actual dollars and cents are a secondary consideration to the utter nonsense that sees Australia imposing a tax which will render many of our industries non-competitive for no measurable outcome on climate.
If the rest of the world were moving in alignment and our trading competitors were not being given therefore an advantage, that might be a different story.
Forget about politics; it's just mathematics!!!!!!!!!
This is where you completely miss the point made by many, i.e. that the whole carbon tax is a political move to satisfy the Greens. Ms Gillard before the election was part of the ousting of Kevin Rudd on the basis that the proposed ETS should be shelved indefinitely.
Then, whacko, the Greens say "hey Julia, we'll allow you to take government if you introduce a carbon tax". OK, says Julia, anything you say to allow me to be Prime Minister, and thus it has remained ever since.
To say it's about dollars and cents, and not politics is total nonsense.