"Tony Abbott is proposing what now!?"
I’ve been waiting patiently for the mainstream media, with their depth of experience and resources, to provide a detailed piece examining the proposed “carbon tax” but they’re obviously too busy tweeting or re-tweeting somebody else’s tweets* to oblige, so in the great “DIY” tradition of the Internet**, I thought I’d give it a crack myself.At the moment companies can release large amounts of carbon into the atmosphere with no more consequence than pursed lips and some “tut-tutting”***. The purpose of a carbon tax (or levy, however you want to put it) is that polluting companies will be charged a fee (yet to be set) for every ton of carbon they release.
This means that not only will there be an economic incentive for companies to switch from high-polluting to low-polluting technologies; it will also provide an incentive for consumers to move from goods and services involving large carbon emissions (costly) to goods and services involving lower carbon emissions (less costly).
It also means, as PM Jules has repeatedly said, that the costs of some things will rise, which is why some of the money raised by the carbon tax will be used to compensate lower-income earners as well as being invested in newer, greener technologies.
As to whether the PM “lied” or not, well really, who gives a fat fuck.
She said before the election that there needed to be a price on carbon. Whether you call it a “tax” or a “levy”, it’s completely irrelevant as to whether it’s good policy or not.
Based on everything I’ve read, it’s a good start.
* I don’t know what that means.
** I don’t know what that means, either.
*** I may exaggerate slightly.
Posts
18 comments:
Thank you Ramon, much appreciated. However I'm much more interested in the cat.
As to whether the PM “lied” or not, well really, who gives a fat fuck.
I do, actually. ...sort of...
Look, I'm all for carbon reduction and the idea of a tax/levy/ETS/whatever doesn't really phase me. And I know Labor got a fright at the last election when they thought they might lose, panicked, sacked their leader, got all turned around on policy and ended up in the driver's seat of a hung parliament with a hostile senate - so I understand why things went off the table and are now going back on. What shits me here, is that instead of working any of this into a defensible explanation, Labor seems to be making this utterly pathetic act of playing like it never happened. "No, no, we've never been anything but totally consistent on this issue". Oh, fuck off - we didn't all come down in the last shower, y'know.
Ramon, you're not seriously suggesting we should all be content to be fed this shit - are you?
Very sensible analysis, Ramon.
Also, 'fat fuck' is a great phrase that I intend to use from now on.
I don't give a fat fuck (see! Ooh!) either whether the PM "lied". I'd much prefer to read the policy docs/draft legislation and mute the telly. The "Liar!" call is just one side politicking at another side that's also politicking. Meh.
I don't think politicking is inherently bad; the structure of our political system pretty much demands it. If anything it's kind of funny.
Ramon, when you become Australia's benevolent dictator/philosopher king we can do away with the fat fuckage and just concentrate on good policy, eh.
Also Ramon, when you've got a moment; who should I vote for in the NSW State election?
All good. Was something mentioned about 'compensation' for the masses? Please Explain?
As far as I'm aware, Patch, a household compensation scheme (through some combo of tax-cuts, rebates and welfare increases, I imagine) has been a key part of the plan since the first Rudd proposal. In fact, I've heard claims that the scheme may be generous enough that many low-income earners could actually be better off.
Presumably, this will not extend to people who can afford the cost-of-living increase, but don't want to forsake a few luxuries, and those who should be able to afford it, but have themselves wedged into a lifestyle at the very limit of their means. I expect those two groups to be making the most noise over the issue.
who should I vote for in the NSW State election?
Now there's a political situation that's truly farcical enough to be funny. Unless you live in NSW, I guess. Sorry, Kettle.
Alex, I think it was foolish to rule out a carbon tax before the election but the Party did go to the polls promising action on climate change and Jules did say there should be a price on carbon.
How we get there, I'm really not fussed.
Kettle - fucked if I know.
Ramon, I just wish Jules & Co could acknowledge said foolishness, rather than perpetually changing the subject. It's not like anyone expects politicians to be flawless.
Mr Rabbit might look like a bit of a wally every time he claims to have shifted his position on an issue (climate change, parental leave, and so on), but at least it's better than looking like a greasy turd. --or more of one.
who gives a fat fuck
The older I get, the more this sums up just about everything
The older I get, the more this sums up just about everything
Me too, Squib; it's good, hey.
Kettle, I just heard that Pauline Hanson (didn't she fuck off away to England?) is running for a senate seat in the NSW election. Hope that makes your decision a little easier.
Oddly enough, the older I get the angrier I get.
I fully expect my head to explode any day now from pent up fury.
Good thing the internet's there as a outlet for all that bile, eh Ramon?
I'm with you Ramon. I seem to get angrier with every passing year.
And I thought Pauline decided England had too many Indians for her liking?
I don't mind politicians lying. So long as we have elections every few years, they can do whatever the hell they want as far as I'm concerned. We can always vote them out. The older I get, the more I'm annoyed by the Senate. House of review? No, house of prolong.
The older I get, the more I seem to enjoy those radio stations with all of the talking and less of the music.
Thank you Ramon for that sensible and very informative explanation re carbon tax.
Might I suggest switching brands of cat food?
Golly, Catastrophe, you don't mean Alan Jones, do you?
We can always vote them out.
A fine idea, Perseus, until you look at whom that means voting in.
And gee wizz, enough with the disasters already, huh?
Post a Comment