hasbeen - I think it is time for you to contribute to the discussion on http://www.skepticalscience.com/Is-it-safe-to-double-atmospheric-Carbon-Dioxide-over-200-year-period.html
As I am sure from you statements that you could provide an alternative view.
Better still download The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism from the web site.
Then perhaps you can post without so much misinformation.

Agnostic of Mittagong,

O.K. I can see how you think this would work but would it actually cost big companies any less to install and buy new methods of production or would that cost be passed on to the consumer too?

Also would people still use the public’s perception, that any price rises are the fault of the Government’s Carbon Tax to gouge profits. Not having your faith in human nature when money is involved I think they would.

I still remain sceptical that it won’t be us poor bunnies the ordinary public who end up paying for this. Adequate government compensation, you say, I’ll believe that when I see it too.

Cherful

Businesses will only use technology to reduce CO2 emissions if it is cheaper than buying emissions permits and, if they have a choice of measures they can take to reduce CO2 emissions, they will usually choose the cheapest one. That way businesses stay competitive with each other. If it costs a company money to reduce their CO2 emissions, they will usually pass the extra cost on. Government says it will compensate households for that just as they did when the GST was introduced.

Businesses do raise their prices simply to maintain their margins, particularly if they have little or no competition but most businesses do have competition and know that if they do not keep their prices competitive, they will loose sales. Why? Because they know that people who buy their goods or services will usually choose the cheapest source possible. I mean, why purchase milk from Woolies if it is cheaper at Coles?

You are right that companies that have little or no competition put up their prices and we simply have to pay. For example electricity suppliers in many States seems to put up their prices every year. Blame State Governments for that. They either own the power stations or control the prices they can charge. It has nothing to do with the price of carbon since there is no price on carbon.

Without a price on carbon, CO2 emitters will have no reason to look for ways of reducing their emissions and new technologies will not be developed to help them do so. We can no longer ignore the problems caused by continuing to emit CO2. They must be reduced and stopped altogether by 2100. If they are not, we shall all face serious problems of an increasingly severe climate, temperatures too high to live with, rising sea levels and inability to protect ourselves from their effects.

We either pay an affordable price now and reduce CO2 emissions or we pay a much higher price in the future – a price so high that it costs not only our way of life, but life itself.

A change is a must be; I feel there is a portion of people only worried about how it is going to affect them, what's it going to cost me.
It's only reasonable for the consumer to have a cost, some costs are avoidable and some won't be. You can help yourself out with electricity costs. Household luxuries will be up to you, if you want to pay the carbon tax. The further you travel the more fuel you use, so the more you pay.
People with their head screwed on won't notice any change.

Yes I am worried about the cost considering I don't like paying for fake disasters.

Who is going to stop all the polution happening in in 3rd world countries? The populations there are having a much worse effect on the environment than we in the West are as far as I can see, not to mention the wiping out of major animal species as the bloated populations seek ever more land and resources to survive.

If your theory of consumer led cabon polution is correct people fleeing from overpopulated countries to the West are driving more demand in the West also for carbon fuelled consumer products.Just as the unsustainable populations are leading to the comsumption of more and more carbon fuelled products all around the world. A good case for the massive distrubution of the pill and contraceptives all over the world.

Anyway don't worry, before global warming destroys the world there will be a major world war to settle the dispute over who gets the scarce land and resources left on earth. After the dust-up when the strongest have asserted their claims over control of different territories and resources(much like the old war lord Kings) the billions ethnically cleansed will once again bring the populations down to a sustainable level and there will be relative peace again for a while. This is happening in poor areas around the globe now. Through famine,disease or war nature will restore the balance if man fails too.

As I sit here in Japan at Fukuoka, I am terminally embarrassed to read such nonsense and fatalistic garbage once more. If any one of you thinks for a single moment that any of the Government parasites and its Oligarchic minions is your newly divine saviours, then the inevitable collapse is exactly what you deserve.

The grass roots of the entire Global warming/ Climate change is nothing other than Sociological pseudo scientific con to rob everyone of everything they have, The existing regime of Predatory theft and Printing political money is still never enough, and for the State to have total control and a constant bank roll to feed the ephemeral parasitism of its very own attachments and ever growing ranks of minions.


And some call that an economy.
It is ephemeral in part for when people actually start to use their brains once more and realise their lives are at risk, and their standards of livening have been crushed and annihilated, they might actually be forced to do something in their own self defence from the aggressor.

As other students here read this thread; the question that is asked of me; are they really that stupid and self indulgent in Naiveté?
Sadly and as humiliating as it is to admit, the answer is. YES THEY ARE.