Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GreenFroggie]

Yes or No?

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/blogs/blunt-instrument/can-gillard-do-a-howard-and-sell-us-her-tax/20110228-1bbwf.html

The airline industry has been charging for carbon off-set for a while now which can work in Fanta Pants favour. But their one is voluntary, which doesn't help fanta pants.

As usual the comments are gold.

I agree with this comment, which is fair, and saves me typing it myself:

"This might be a dumb question, and one I shouldn't have to ask I guess, but where exactly does all this new tax income get spent?
I mean, are we getting wind farms or new hydro electric schemes from it?
I really really don't know.
All I know is that for whatever reason, the government that was voted in last year, has changed it's position on a tax.
But I really just want to know that the money isn't going to fund some politician's new rug in his office."

[Nick 2]

Who cares what it's 'spent on'. The idea behind the tax is to get you to use less electricity and petrol. It does this by making these things more expensive. Basic economics. You can start by removing yourself from the Internet

[GreenFroggie]

Well if you are going to make choices to use less electricity and petrol because of a tax then you would want to know what the money is being spent on. Otherwise what is the point of using less electricity and petrol? To make yourself look good? Oh I used x amount of x product last week, aren't I fantastic! No-one cares how much petrol you use really, well, except the government apparently.

[GreenFroggie]

And the same amount of petrol you use would still be the same regardless of price. A full tank of petrol would still be a full tank (if you are one of the people who have to drive to work), except you would pay more for it. If you are going to whinge about paying more for that then you find alternatives, like public transport. But, public transport also uses petrol, and they are contributing to the greenhouse gas/emissions as well so there are no winners with this scenario. Are they expecting everyone to just decide to take up bike riding to get to work to save on petrol useage?

[Nick 2]

what is the point of using less electricity and petrol?

Greenhouse effect. Anyway nobody cares whether you think you have a choice in how much power you use; for a lot of people 'how much you use' will be 'how much you can afford'

[Lord Biscuit©]

Exactly. People with less money should use less power so there's more for the rest of us.

[Thaluikhain]

If you are going to whinge about paying more for that then you find alternatives, like public transport. But, public transport also uses petrol, and they are contributing to the greenhouse gas/emissions as well so there are no winners with this scenario.

Assuming using public transport uses the same amount of fuel as people driving their own cars, yes.

[Lord Biscuit©]

I gonna invent a car that runs on white and blue LEDs. It'll be fully sik.

[GreenFroggie]

They already have those. It's called a Holden Commodore.

[Lord Biscuit©]

That's a Hold-on Commode - it's a little different.

[Mez]

They already have those. It's called a Holden Commodore.

   I like to call them Conformadores, or common whores.

[Pertinax]

Oh how I love the fact that our government's primary device for making stupid interventions into the market is a tax on everything that emits carbon.  The Financial Review published an article yesterday suggesting that the top 20 carbon emitters would pay on average approximately $600M each. The top 7 emitters are electricity generators. This amount represents a 100% increase in costs for those companies.
Their alternatives are to pass on the cost, doubling the retail price of electricity, or to absorb some, pass some on and run a smaller profit. Oh, and there's the other one... to just turn off their generators and get out of the industry creating an electricity shortage and an even greater increase in the price of electricity.

But then I guess people could use less electricity... by sacking their employees and closing their businesses. Then we'd all be unemployed but it won't matter because we'll all be given a plot of land by the government upon which we can grow our own organic food and live as peaceful subsistance farmers. Wouldn't Bob Brown love that.

Fuck me if the world hasn't gone completely stupid.

[Lord Biscuit©]

Ah, but they will get cleverly structured incentives and grants for investing in sustainable or renewable energy. I wouldn't be suprised if it amounted to something in the region of $600M.

[Mez]

There has to be a carbon tax to make people stop using electricity as if it's a free gift from God. I agree with you the world's fucked, though. The expensive photovoltaic array on my roof is actually increasing my electricity bill. Until there is a decent rebate scheme for people to generate their own solar power (or wind or water power) it's never going to get any clearer out there (I'm talking about the air now). Yes, the government kindly paid me $8000 towards it - a substantial fraction of the cost - but now it's costing me over and over again, every bill.    This makes Mez cross.

Ha ha Bix, but even if it were so, it's not nearly enough.

[Nick 2]

Disconnect from the grid so you don't have any bills to pay at all. Easy