I support a coal phaseout and penalties on CO2. As an Australian I find Morrison's intransigence and fibbing on emissions to be infuriating. Therefore I say good on the EU for at least trying to break the logjam.

I think it's on the cards that Australia and China will become mates again over carbon tariffs using some ploy to avoid them. That will highlight their hypocrisy over green talk without adequate action. How it will all be resolved is hard to predict. I say bring on the carbon tariffs and separate the talkers from the doers.

Our number one enemy is China, with Europe a close second.

Agree with taswegian.
No doubt that the Carbon Tax introduced some years ago was a good thing and achieved its aim until that economic and environmental VANDAL abbott destroyed it.

The EU isn't anywhere near meeting its 2030 commitments let alone its 2050 commitments.

When, and only when, they show the same level of economic suicide that they demand of others, should we take any notice of what they demand.

Dead right, mhaze. Europe is getting more like China, unelected but telling all and sundry what to do. Old World mindset with disdain for the New World.

Two can play at that game. We import about 3 times as much from the EU as we export to them. What ever duty they impose on us, we must impose the same on them. Their industry is already screaming out about their stupidity, the loss of us & a couple more markets should help then get rid if these stupid policies.

We must not submit to these strong arm tactics from a bunch who can't even keep their own lights on, without French nuclear support.

There are 54 countries in our Commonwealth to deal with, plus those in Asia. Up the EU for the rent! I think that the way the EU dictatorship is behaving, more countries will be dropping out of it.

GOOD

We will all be better off for it.

Especially all those LNP deviants we keep hearing about.

Here is an author that exposes madness writ large.

This article is consistent with others published by the author here on OLO.

Politicians are blithely untouched by their market manipulation and the impacting of interference in market forces.

They are blindly leading the country off the edge of a cliff with a real estate bubble that most sensible people are aware of, but not them!

In a further dose of mad consistency, will continue to increase taxes on carbon, to be handed back to those most able to afford the scorch to power bills, by the Sheriff of Nottingham’s daughter, Gladys, with free taxpayer funded solar panels going towards those benefiting from the real estate bubble.

I despair for our future !

Dan

Bloody hell what a load of whinging.

The EU doesn't want its local industry under cut by import form countries which haven't instituted a carbon tax.

So it is prepared to impose tariffs to even the playing field. What on earth is wrong with that? All these Brexiteer types who have banged on about sovereign rights don't seem to want the EU to be allowed to exercise just that.

Deep hypocrisy.

Instead of blaming Govt for everything, why not try curbing your excessive use of polluting materials ?
Cutting back on your excesses will clean up the environment !

SteeleRedux

#..., the AFR this week called for a carbon tax, without recognising that the $7 billion a year that consumers fork out to support renewables in taxes and regulatory requirements already constitutes such a tax. The bureaucracy has never bothered to estimate (or at least to publicise) the tax effect of current measures...#

Are you blind?

The author does well to point out the iniquity of a carbon tax.

And secondly, most posters to this site are not complainers without reason.

We live in a country governed with “corporate “ governance. That in itself quashes the concept of democracy.

Dan

True to its hypocritical form, the EU that dominated promotion of the climate change hoax; that foolishly adopted large CO2 emission reductions, but exempted two of the world’s largest emitters China and India from any reduction; that then dysfunctionally lifted the bloc's emission reduction ambitions to 55 per cent below the 2005 level; now wants to reduce the resulting competitive disadvantage of its industries by penalising the rest of the world.

The hypocritical climate change behaviour of the NSW Government should not pass without comment. In yet another serious lapse of judgement by its Cabinet, it not only adopted far-left Liberal Matt Kean’s fanciful net zero emissions target, but also subsequently accepted Kean’s nomination of green-left, failed prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, as chair of the Net Zero Emissions and Clean Economy board.

Malcolm, owner of an expansive farm in the Upper Hunter, and campaigner for cleaner air, wasted no time in calling for a moratorium on new coal mines in NSW. Ironically, this coincided with disgraced Nationals MP Michael Johnsen’s resignation from the marginal State seat of Upper Hunter, that is heavily reliant on coal mining. Given Malcolm’s voter deterring history, the NSW Coalition now appears likely to lose the by-election

Dear diver dan,

You write: "The author does well to point out the iniquity of a carbon tax."

Do he doesn't at all. The only iniquities here are expecting EU manufacturers to be undercut at will by manufacturers from a first world country like Australia who isn't prepared to shoulder its due burden of climate change action. That's it. Full stop.

Dear Raycom,

Climate change is not a hoax. It is demonstrably real and occurring apace therefore the rest of what you have put is rubbish.

SteeleRedux

You totally ignored my point.

Give an example of which manufactures are undercutting EU manufacturers, I’d be very surprised if you could show any relevant kindred industries which import to EU that would make a ripple on their (the EU), overall imports

More correct to ask probably, is which farm commodity is undercutting the highly subsidised EU rural sector.

Our rural producers are also subsidised directly and indirectly.
It’s more a question of who wins the war of subsidies, and SFA to do with carbon tax or lack of it.

We are paying $7b already in kind, for carbon BS.
I subscribe to the theory put forward here, their whine about lack Au carbon tax effecting the EU, is not felicitous and is actually “Virtue Signalling”.

Dan

Raycom

Interesting that “gay malcom” is enmeshed in the crime scene of the Upper Hunter.
Of course his crimes will be honest ones like tax dodging.
Remember his exposure for the same dealings exposed in the Panama Papers leak.

Not forgetting one from the same school of tricks, currently looking out from behind bars, Eddie O’Beid . (Along with his partner in crime Ian McDonald, another crooked NSW Polli. ).
Caught with his greedy hand in the till by using inside information to scorch some cheap real estate in the upper hunter, containing a proposed coal mine licence.

And let’s not dismiss the Sheriff of Nottingham’s daughter Gladys , off Scott free by all accounts, for dodgy dealing over land development at Badgerys Creek .

I think we have a problem in the upper classes, not necessarily confined to the Upper Hunter!

Dan

Dear diver dan,

You ask: "More correct to ask probably, is which farm commodity is undercutting the highly subsidised EU rural sector."

Sure. Given that France exports more wheat than Australia and Germany isn't too far behind us in wheat exporting countries then both diesel subsidies and lack of a carbon tax would certainly give us an advantage.

Why is that so hard to understand?

Steel, you’re telling porky’s again!

“Sure. Given that France exports more wheat than Australia and Germany isn't too far behind us in wheat exporting countries then both diesel subsidies and lack of a carbon tax would certainly give us an advantage.”

Australia annually exports a considerable amount more wheat than France. Germany exports nearly 1/3rd of what Australia exports, hardly iin the same league as us.

Please stick to the facts otherwise you sound more stupid than you obviously are.
Galen

Dear Galen,

One would have thought you might have parked your notoriously pugnacious attitude for the Holy holiday but it seems as always you can't help yourself.

As I am a little more respectful I will just offer this:

Below are the 15 countries that exported the highest dollar value worth of wheat during 2019.

Russia: US$6.4 billion (16.7% of total wheat exports)
United States: $6.3 billion (16.4%)
Canada: $5.4 billion (14.1%)
France: $4.4 billion (11.4%)
Australia: $2.51 billion (6.6%)
Argentina: $2.45 billion (6.4%)
Ukraine: $1.6 billion (4.3%)
Romania: $1.29 billion (3.4%)
Germany: $1.25 billion (3.3%)
Kazakhstan: $1 billion (2.6%)

http://www.worldstopexports.com/wheat-exports-country/

And this for 2018:

1 Russia 8,400
2 Canada 5,700
3 United States 5,500
4 France 4,100
5 Australia 3,100
6 Ukraine 3,000
7 Argentina 2,400
8 Romania 1,230
9 Germany 1,160
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wheat_exports

And let you respond.

SteeleRedux

I’m lost to know why your banging on about France, when it’s the EU issuing the gripe.

What the EU will achieve with this nonsense, is to drive a wedge between Asia and the West.

Au will have no choice but to reestablish relations with China as a consequence.
This at a time when the US is beating the drum against China.

Very short sighted.

Dan

SteeleRedux

As a PS, I would think this a great moment for Au to totally dump out the $90bn French submarine contract and invite the Chinese to tender.

Dan

I agree the perfect time to dump France, & the rest of the EU. They obviously can't be trusted to supply anything they have been contracted to supply, Vaccine for example so we should be able to do it free & clear.

Banning the import of European cars would be a good first response to no supply of vaccines.

Don't think Chinese subs would be a good idea Diver, but US nuclear subs, even leased would be the most sensible choice. They might just be of some use as a deterrent too.

Well Steel

Lying again, now you claim it’s via dollar value that’s not what you claimed.

Here it is by tonnage, which completely sinks your two posts full of lies.

# Country Quantity
tonnes
1  Russia 33,025,971
2  United States 27,299,214
3  Canada 22,061,500
4  Australia 21,985,900
5  Ukraine 17,314,278
6  France 15,228,664
7  Argentina 13,099,133
8  Germany 7,890,971
9  Romania 5,759,094
10  Kazakhstan 4,256,341

Please explain, liar?
Galen

Hasbeen.

I’d trust the Chinese before Biden. Which of course means neither can be trusted.
The Chinese are well established in Asia, as they are in Australia.
A view away from Europe and towards Asia is realistic.

Dan

Dear Galen,

You poor thing. You really aren't up to this are you. Come on mate, I keep pointing out where you repeatedly balls up what should be very basics and we aren't ever seeing any improvement. It seems you may well be incapable of anything but a juvenile level response.

However I am in a charitable mood given the Christian season so I will make the effort once more.

The figures you quoted were without a citation but the seemingly came from this link: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wheat_exports

As everyone can see your figures are from 2017. Mine were referenced and came from 2018 and 2019.

In 2018 the dollar value of France's wheat exports was $4,111,875,000 while Australia's was $3,036,049,000.

In 2019 the dollar value of France's wheat exports was $4,298,894,000 while Australia's was $2,482,945,000.
http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/TP

So my insipid and disrespectful Muppet you have stuffed up completely and really ought to be apologising for your little outburst.

Just a couple of points on the great wheat export debate:

1. This is highly variable. Taking Australia's results during the height of a drought as being representative is at best misleading and at worst misinformation.
2. Bearing in mind that the numbers are highly variable year on year due to weather conditions, about half of France's wheat exports remain within the EU which is the issue here.

If the EU wants to impose tariffs on those countries that haven't followed them down the rabbit-hole of climate alarmism, then so be it. Its their call and their right. The only losers are their own peoples.

Steel,

My data may be from 2017, it’s still 10o% correct. Your 2018-2019 data reflects an unusual period of time when Australian wheat exports where severely affected by drought.

If you look at the overall long term data it is obvious Australia exceeds France in wheat exports by volume.

Go suck on those apples you insipid muppet.
Galen

Dear Galen,

Well now that is just inexcusable. I give you a link to the data and yet you still sit there trying to assert a falsehood. What would your god be thinking of you now?

You say “Your 2018-2019 data reflects an unusual period of time when Australian wheat exports where severely affected by drought.”

Bollocks. You obviously didn't bother looking did you.

Australian wheat volumes only exceed those of France in one other year out of the last 15, and that was in 2012.

Australia
2005 tonnes 13914503
2006 tonnes 14975540
2007 tonnes 6755804
2008 tonnes 8278014
2009 tonnes 14996065
2010 tonnes 15888042
2011 tonnes 17657181
2012 tonnes 23535862 *
2013 tonnes 18001619
2014 tonnes 18282773
2015 tonnes 17053209
2016 tonnes 16148016
2017 tonnes 21985914 *
2018 tonnes 12352837
2019 tonnes 9591796

France
2005 tonnes 16022528
2006 tonnes 16580501
2007 tonnes 14386449
2008 tonnes 16292571
2009 tonnes 16872217
2010 tonnes 21081540
2011 tonnes 20345934
2012 tonnes 16469022
2013 tonnes 19638502
2014 tonnes 20398724
2015 tonnes 19815289
2016 tonnes 18343653
2017 tonnes 15228664
2018 tonnes 18940343
2019 tonnes 19956974

So when you say: “If you look at the overall long term data it is obvious Australia exceeds France in wheat exports by volume.” you are really talking out of your arse again aren't you.

Now I would normally expect and apology from someone who accused me of lying three times in a single deranged thread but I suspect you aren't that kind of person. You can't even come up with your own insults. Far more likely is that you will skulk off until the next thread where you will come out sniping yet again. But you may surprise us.

SR,

The main reason for tariffs is to protect local industries which are why the EU already has high import tariffs and why other countries have reciprocal tariffs on imports from the EU.

Considering that Australia is faring better in meeting its targets than the EU, the real reason for these carbon tariffs is more about general protection than climate change.

Finally, you are right, the EU does have its own sovereign rights to raise tariffs as does Australia to retaliate proportionally.

Dear mhaze,

You wrote: "Taking Australia's results during the height of a drought as being representative is at best misleading and at worst misinformation."

Given the figures clearly show the opposite, that instead 'Taking Australia's results during a rare bumper crop as being representative is at best misleading and at worst misinformation.' are you going to call out our dear Galen? That would be consistent at least.

He does seem to have scarpered though so perhaps it doesn't matter.

SteeleRedux

you are misinformed about climate change.

The scientific method demands that we declare the hypothesis of catastrophic man-made global warming a failed hypothesis due to its long history of failed predictions. In other words, the continued belief in catastrophic man-made global warming is anti-science because it has ignored a basic requirement of the scientific method.

You could start to inform yourself by reading the article, ‘Science Theory Unbound by Test – The Story of the Man-Made Global Warming Hypothesis’ https://objectivistindividualist.blogspot.com/2021/02/science-theory-unbound-by-test-story-of.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AnObjectivistIndividualist+%28An+Objectivist+Individualist%29

I haven’t scarpered anywhere idiot.

I stand by my original post.

Galen

This is pure virtue signalling by the EU. By WHO rules any attempt to erect protectionist tariffs (which these are) will invite immediate retaliatory tariffs.

To put tariffs on Aus who imports nearly 3x as much from the EU as it exports to the EU would an act of economic self-harm.

Galen,
Why do you stand by your mistakes instead of standing corrected?

__________________________________________________________________________

Raycom,
You are misinformed not only about climate change, but also about the scientific method.

Firstly, the statistics alone give only an indication, not an explanation, of what's going on. Science tries to find an explanation as to why the statistics are as they are.

Secondly, there's no separate "hypothesis of catastrophic man-made global warming". It's all part of the theory of climate. We know how the greenhouse effect works, and we know that altering the composition of the planet's atmosphere affects it. We know that human activity has resulted in a 50% increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration. And we have ample evidence the planet is warming. We also know that there are potential positive feedback mechanisms which, if triggered, could warm the planet a lot more.

By focussing only on the catastrophic predictions, you're cherry picking. That's an unscientific approach.

But worse than that, you're misrepresenting many of what you regard as "failed predictions". Many were conditional on inaction, yet the world, and particularly Europe, has made huge efforts to reduce its CO2 emissions. And most were on such long timescales that it's far too early to declare them wrong yet.

There are of course some genuine incorrect predictions, but they don't invalidate the correct ones. And they certainly don't invalidate our understanding of the physics, though they may help improve it. Scientists learn from their mistakes as well as from what they get right.

___________________________________________________________________________\

Shadow,
Whether applying a carbon tax on imports counts as a tariff is unclear, but we shouldn't punish them for trying.

Aidan,

Seriously, there is absolutely no doubt that it is a tariff:

"a tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of imports or exports."

And under WHO regulations any tariff can be reciprocated by the country on which it is placed.

And a tariff placed on imports from Aus is a punishment and a reciprocal punishment is called for unjust tariffs.

Dear Galen,

Tut tut my dear fellow, defending a baseless fabrication can obviously be taxing for you. Please don't over do it, I need you around for giggles.

Dear Raycom,

Hansen's predictions have nailed it. We have employed measures to decrease carbon output thus making his Scenario B predictions the most relevant. It turns out the current trends are in lockstep with it.

http://youtu.be/UVz67cwmxTM

Your linked site is terrible. Not only is it terribly designed may of the statements made are simply not true or are complete distortions. Is there a couple of statements from it that you are prepared to hang your hat on?

Shadowminister,

Are Australia's emission standards on imported motor vehicles a tariff or not?

SteeleRedux

You may be interested in the climate catastrophist predictions according to the Extinction Clock (https://extinctionclock.org/) that have been unsuccessful to date, and those that are predicted for the future. The prediction sources are interesting, including such luminaries as Malcolm Turnbull, Prince Charles, Greta Thunberg and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Shadow,
The point is it would not be exclusive to imports; it would equally apply to their domestic production.

Do you regard Australia's GST as a tariff? If not, what's the difference?

SR,

Did you not read the definition. As no tax is paid on emission standards then it is not a tariff.

Aidan,

The EU is not directly applying a carbon tax to the production of goods, it is a tax on power production and at best an indirect tax as much as the subsidies on renewables is an indirect tax on every citizen in Aus.

Direct taxes on imports from Aus will almost certainly be met with direct taxes on imports from the EU to Aus as per WTO regulations.

Steelreflux

My posts are correct. 2012/2017 Australian wheat exports exceeded France, 100% correct. You are the idiot, face these facts. Idiot.
Galen

SR,

Clearly, you didn't read the definition. There is no duty or tax to be paid on meeting emission standards. If anything emission standards for cars are at best non-tariff trade barriers.

Aidan,

FFS look up the definition. A GST is applied to all sales within Aus not just imports and is thus not a tariff.

For example, German winemakers do not themselves pay any carbon tax to produce wine. However, their costs are increased due to taxes paid by power producers. The EU already has trade tariffs on just about all imported goods to protect their producers, and as a result, all other countries have similar tariffs on EU products. Any additional tariffs such as a carbon tax tariff would be additional protection that would attract additional tariffs on EU exports.

The whole point of trade negotiations is to reduce tariffs and increase sales of locally produced goods. The EU used to be about 25% of the world market but has dropped to 15% over the decades, and now after Brexit will drop even further.

Dear Galen,

Are you really going to stand by statements such as this? "If you look at the overall long term data it is obvious Australia exceeds France in wheat exports by volume."

That is what was challenged, not your 2017 figures. No one has said boo about them.

Look mate you got rolled completely on this one and have ended up looking like a goose. Save it for the next try, one day you might just get one over on me. Won't that be a call for celebration.

Steelreflux, happy to let you have this one, my 2012/2017 data still proves Aus exceeded French export tonnes in both those years, but in general France exceeds Aus more often, my bad. You have a victory lap now, enjoy!
Galen