What happens when green policy-making distorts rational economics? People shine arc lamps on solar panels, generate subsidised 'renewable' electricity and sell it back to the taxpayer at six times the cost of the power used to run the lamps.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/13/the-insanity-of-greenery/

Let the rorts begin!.

Whilst this sounds like a good idea, people tend to forget that one of the reasons we pay income tax, is to help fund things like public schools, public hospitals, public roads etcetera.

There is no guarantee that the money actually collected as taxes will go into public services.

There is no guarantee that the state governments will not skim funds for public hospitals and redirect those funds for other purposes. Even Kevin Rudd has these doubts. (maybe he knows something we don't)

Thomas, don’t know if you are trying to help with the proposed change to health economics or provide some rational basis for having a new tax, the CPRS.

I would like to see a referendum; the question being put would be,

“Should Australia spend $43 billion on healthcare or on upgraded broadband?” No brainer in my view.

This would also improve Telstra shares and eliminate the need for a carbon tax that the French and Germans have now shelved. Who might I ask, are we going to trade carbon with? or is that just a silly technical detail.

May the gods protect us from idiots like this bloke. Not just an idiot, but a lying idiot to boot.

Anyone with half a brain is not taken in with his "tax the big villain", the oil company, & the power generator. Such taxes are quickly passed on to us of course. It is these sort of B grade attempts at a slight of hand, to trick us simple peasants, that have academia held in such low respect today.

If he wants a hospital tax, he could do us the courtesy of calling it that.

I suppose he's too isolated in his ivory tower to have seen what's gone on in the CRU, & the IPCC. He should pull his hesd out of where ever he's had it, & check the real world por a minute or two.

I for one am rather glad that Ruddie has struck resistance to his money grab. It's another desperate attempt to do "something". If it works as well as everything he's done so far god help the sick.

Pink bats, education revolution, boarder protection, immigration/big Australia, & now he wants to make lousy hospitals even worse.

If we let Ruddy take over hospitals, spending the states money to do so, we'll get the health care we would deserve.

Jon j, love your work mate, if you like that link, try this one, scary stuff about loony, lefty, red/greens indeed.

http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/greening.shtml

James H, spindoc, hasbeen & Jon J again, one thing i have not heard from anybody is the enormous savings to be found in reducing the # of health bureaucrats in the system?

They had risen in QLD to a, 3 to 1 ratio for every doctor, nurse, physio, etc, under Goss/Rudd/Swan, then up to 6 to 1 under Beatie. God knows how high the figures are now. From what i have read in "the Australian" recently, NSW health bureaucracy is even worse.

There would be no need for an expensive "early retirement" offer now as there is supposed to be a, tsunami of "baby boomers" about to retire. So natural attrition could be used by any Govt, to reduce all bureaucracy everywhere, cheaply.

Nice thought Snag, but I think you will find that a very large proportion of these bureaucrats are recent hirings, & quite young.

Now we hear they have done the deed. The states have run for cover, health giving them so much trouble.

We will now get a few thousand more in Canberra, not savings. Ruddy has said no one will loose their job.

Aint we got fun.