The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Changing, adapting, innovating > Comments

Changing, adapting, innovating : Comments

By Ben McNeil, published 17/8/2009

Is Australia doing the equivalent of protecting the type-writer industry at the start of the computer age?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. All
Dr. Ben Wow you have certainly started something you want the rest of us to take our chances whilst you and your mates start a new industry of dreaming up carbon emissions and what they should be taxed? It is a tax Dr. Ben as you should know. The money goes to the government and then to political organisations like yours. You produce nothing!
All the green technology is built offshore and that is mostly Chinese. You blokes make me laugh you produce nothing! You are perfectly happy for more taxes for us and then work for a not for profit organisation which shields you from paying a lot of tax, if any, yourself.
My suggestion is that Fringe Benefits Taxes are paid by the recipient and the Assets Test is applied to all Political and Public Service pensions. See how they like it!
Posted by JBowyer, Monday, 17 August 2009 6:05:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
JBowyer,

I agree that Ben article is a little under cooked.
But let me remind you that life in a desert is tough and there aren't that many jobs there either.

The ecosystem has clear multiple signs of failure and collectively it is clear we are in bother or soon will be.

The problem with the AGW debate is that CO2 has been jumped on by the mass media as being the baddie so in their simplistic reasoning if the CO2 issue can't be currently quantified to allow reasonable prediction voila no problem....But it is neither that simple... the multi discipline systemic failures are still there.

And you are worried about your wealth. In truth there may end up with no wealth. What Ben is saying is let's not wait till we hit the ground after falling off the empire state building pull the rip cord! i.e. adapt our economy. before it leaves us..

The Luddites said the world would come to an end with the Spinning Jenny it didn't there is no real reason why going green will be any different...But then again self interest is a powerful if sometimes retrogressive motivator.
Posted by examinator, Monday, 17 August 2009 6:27:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Green technology is an area where countries including Australia have missed huge opportunities. Perhaps I should say, especially Australia. Solar thermal power went overseas to USA - and we're still ignoring it. We smioply haven't had the foresight to invest in renewables with an eye on the potential markets. We have, instead looked backwards for answers ubnder pressure from existing undustries. Our economy may suffer for this in the long run.

If we had spent money on developing 'greener' power generation methods, we could have cleaned up in supplying China and India with new power plants. Instead they are left needing quick expansions in capacity and generally have to look to coal.

Green power will reduce in cost as more people use it and economies of scale kick in. But perhaps the stable door is just flapping in the wind now where our ability to latch on to this opportnity is concerned. Time will tell.
Posted by Phil Matimein, Tuesday, 18 August 2009 12:51:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
An excellent article. Opinion polls are showing that the majority of Australians want change and innovation that strongly supports renewables. Let's create the perfect climate for inventors and innovators.

Sadly conservatives with their 'wait and see' comments, act to champion the status quo and the do next to nothing interests of high pollution industries. It shows a particularly self serving, blinkered vision that is clearly not in the national or global interest.

Shamefully, the compensation pleadings by lobbyists that are the antithesis of corporate social responsibility, still pack a punch with both major parties. Compensation paid to such recalcitrants is wasted money.

After treating air pollution as a no-cost by-product for decades, they now invest in running scare campaigns to pay and do as little as possible to lower their pollution liability. To minimise their harm, these fossils need to be permanently sequestrated as soon as possible.
Posted by Quick response, Tuesday, 18 August 2009 2:54:26 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<br /><br />passing it along http://www.real-wishes.com<br /><br />

<br /><br /><a href="http://www.real-wishes.com" title=" wishes " name=" wishes "><img style="border: ridge 4px yellow;" src="http://www.real-wishes.com/images/wish-3.jpg" alt=" wishes " title=" wishes "/><br /> wishes </a><br /><br />
Posted by F.thanh, Wednesday, 19 August 2009 6:12:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is cheap to get finance to buy an existing asset. It is expensive to fund the construction of a new asset because you cannot get a loan backed by a future asset. You can get a loan backed by an existing asset to then fund a future asset but why bother mortgaging an existing asset because it is better for you to leave it unencumbered and take the profits from it and reinvest. Companies tend to reinvest profits in keeping the old assets going by spending money on advertising because the cost of money - equity - for new assets is much higher than the cost of money for existing assets. The cost is about 10 times more for equity for innovative assets than it is for loans for existing assets so it is no wonder that people tend to buy existing assets rather than invest in new assets.

The result of the way the financial system is structured means there is little investment in new productive assets and very little in new innovative assets.

A solution to the problem is to allow the banks to give zero interest loans for investments where we know that without interest charges the investments will be profitable. Solar thermal energy plants are an example because if built with zero interest loans then they are immediately profitable because the cost of producing energy from a solar plant is lower than the cost from a fuel burning plant as there is no fuel cost.

For banks to do this requires the government regulator not to require banks to put these special zero interest loans on the bank's balance sheet. Banks can still make a profit from the loans but they do not have to worry about depleting their reserves if the loans are not repaid. If the loans are structured so that banks get their profits only if the loans are repaid then it is still highly likely that most loans will be repaid.

This is a very simple way for the government and the banks to encourage investment and innovation.
Posted by Fickle Pickle, Thursday, 20 August 2009 3:46:34 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy