Why is Gillard now so keen to introduce a carbon tax yet compensate large polluters for additional costs and consumers for increased prices ? Logic says that a sufficiently large price signal is needed to change industry practice and reduce consumption ... with the ultimate goal of reducing carbon pollution.

With what Gillard describes as 'generous compensation', the incentive to change is likely to be insignificant .. and the effect on CO2 emissions negligible. As currently proposed, Gillard's carbon tax / ETS is just a money-go-round ... likely to achieve nothing.

So let's get Garnaut to sweeten the deal .. promise some tax cuts for those on lower wages. Popular .. but will it achieve anything for climate change / global warming ? Highly unlikely.

And its yet another deception.

Why would any thinking government make substantial changes to its tax system .. before the tax summit it has scheduled for October ? Little logic there.

So, Gillard's carbon tax / ETS / tax-cut compensation package is yet another 'con' .... first a promise that there would be no such carbon tax ... then 'being forced to compromise' because of the hung parliament ... then the lie that she went into the last election wanting an ETS (she didn't .. she wanted a 'consensus committee') ...

now we have imposition of a new tax being offset by tax cuts ...
whilst the mining industry has negotiated to pay $ 60 billion less than originally planned ....

And this mob reckon they are 'good economic managers' ??

Is it really compulsory for politicians to leave their brains at home when they go to work .. or is it just an unfortunate habit ... on both sides ?

Would it not make more sense to wait for a move from the 'large emitters', then see what effect their strategies have and perhaps follow suit if they get positive results.

Why is it that this government is obsessed with obtaining the 'trophy' here.

Krud so badly wanted to take his 'ETS' trophy to Copenhagen, yet Copenhagen was nothing more than what many of us saw it for, 'a waste of tax payers money'.

>>Is it really compulsory for politicians to leave their brains at home when they go to work

Now the reason behind these stupid decisions is quite simply the fact that we pay peanuts, so we end up with monkeys.

its the clever use of spin i detest
lets tax the big emmiters[ie coal users and petro users]

the big emmiters is you
calling them big business is a lie
they pass it on to you..GET IT

you are made to feel you wont be taxed
but you must know YOU WILL be taxed

it is getting absurdly difficult to find info

i heard on bbc last night a sceme*

to create biogas in kenya
that is going to produce *6 times the carbondi-oxide
it is intended to 'fix'

dw tv reported on the same thing the day before
both searches have been prevented finding
[just trying to connect to bbc has taken 8 minutes so far]

entering search terms into the box only gives a waiting loopy circle

sio from memory the sceme has been given massive hectars of land
to grow a weed people cant eat..to burn it to make biogas to make electicity..the whole sceme is paid for with euro carbon credits

seems many vilage's have been seized
and that food crops even have been taken over[to grow non food]
add in the poor dont use electicity...and will be given 'jobs' perpetually harvesting a poisen weed in lue of growing their own food

if only you could hear what was said
i did find dorkins was born in kenya
and a lot of other useless info about other things

oh i got a search result

Search results for kenya biogas
Sorry, there are no results for your search.

For advice on how to use BBC Search
see our Frequently Asked Questions.

talk about fiddling while rome burns

its a scam people
to subsidise land clearing
[jobs for serfs and cash to the masters]

not only are the concept's based in fraud
so too is the fruits..[dont say you wernt told]

oh plenty of old 'good' stuff turned up
[from last year]
..ie pre publicity spin /pr

but not the latest
as was revealed while you slept

who cares*
go back to sleep

see the circular deciete of
juliar gulliard
http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-03-03.68.2

quote..""On the premise
of the Leader of the Opposition’s question..about rising prices:

it was he...in this parliament yesterday

who was chiding the government..for not giving sufficient information...so that you could work out...what price rises were going to be..

So let us not have any of this hypocrisy
from the Leader of the Opposition.

Out of his own mouth yesterday,
he said to this parliament he was critical of the government
because he did not have enough information to know what price rises were going to be,

and now,a short 24 hours later,
he is back to making figures up and asserting price rises.""

how difficult is it..to give the numbers?
or use the numbers garnutt gives?

""I say to the Leader of the Opposition
get to grips..with the fundamentals of this debate,"""

YES LETS..!
dont repeat circular spin

""and the fundamentals of this debate are:
climate change is real;""'

lol thats..a debate?
..or de-bait?

""it is caused by human activity;""

ONLY HUH_MAN..*ACTIVITY?
clearly this is fraud..[debatable]

""we need to reduce carbon pollution.

The best way of doing that is to price carbon
and..where we want to get to ...is
a market emissions based trading system
where the price of carbon..*is set by the market*""

capitalists
not govt

""and where the economy has a cap
on the amount of pollution it can generate.""

note carbon
has now become ""polution""

""That is the way forward.The member for Wentworth[ex banker]..
is very perceptive about these things""

lol

""and the Leader of the Opposition
should listen to his advice
and the advice of economists*[lol] around the world.

That is the right thing to do.""

Tony Abbott

Mr Speaker, I seek leave to table the speech of the former climate change minister when she said, ‘Don’t try to lead the world on it.’

Leave not granted.""

or this

""We need to transform our economy.
We need to price carbon.

Former Prime Minister John Howard
went to the 2007 election promising that""..

AND LOST...!

from here
http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-03-03.76.1

[avoiding saying
it will cost jobs]

bob brown was on 7.30 report last night

he said ..they didnt ask for the 5 years govt fixed price
that came from committie...lol

so ju-liar lied again
it wernt the 'greens'

if big business needs a new thing to trade in
let big business set the price

get govt away from the whole topic
[govts cant run trading scemes..
why let them set the rules]

but the big busy ness body neds govt to get their next exclusive franchise ..to trade in carbon credits..[to turn food crops into SUBSIDISED BIO fuels]..

the latest thing reported in germany
[where food production isnt subsidised
so looses farmland for food to those wanting govt subsidy

to make subsidised fuel

govt pririties have become subverted to business intrests
and still we get greenie mouthpieces defending the lies

yesterday on big ideas [abc]
was an ex smoker lobbiest..now moved on to the green thing
revealing how big m,oney subverted science[its sad they cant se this carbon tax thing is the same thing]..big business neding biogas plants or selling solar or wind cells

big business subveerting the science
to grow corn into fuel[subsidised]
to clear land in kenya

when will you see the lies
its the same spin that saw big tobacco
legsislated to pay ...for its own demise..

the rapists now have their next victim...
consumers..[the bigest group of polluters]..
who shall all pay tax ..based on a lobby-lie..in the end

Carbon dioxide never was nor ever will be a pollutant.
We spend billions of taxpayers dollars trying to get rid of it. Why? Do we want to have a mass extermination of all life forms on earth?

Parliamentarians are always looking for a way to tax the poor punter and this is no different.

the absence of the 'man-made-climate-change-cult' on this thread speaks volumes.
They must be running out of hot air.

Amusing! but so far the thread could be a continuation of todays Canberra anti tax meeting.
It had Abbott thanking every one for coming, including one nation,its founder, shooters party,also wanting to return to gun laws before Howard's reforms.
Another rag tag group tells us the world wide carbon debate is a front for Germany taking over the world!
Question time, still in progress in my view must have Tony Abbott wishing he never called on the debate.
Gillard has been outstanding, so has the Labor team.
8 members[from all sides ] have been thrown out, most for an hour.
Pyne, a thorn in even his teams side for 24 hours.
I think remember its an opinion, Abbott is going to find this subject counter productive.
Hidden between the lines in his official fan book the Australian news paper this morning is a warning.
While being hard on Labor is working, being negative on every thing is not.
I believe in climate change and if man is not contributing to it we are to almost every thing else.
Every thing that over population waste, miss use of the planet, can be seen is man made.
We, all of us, should look deeper at why an opposition bound by market forces, is against open market plans for this problem.
Be aware, some groups involved in this protest are way out there others fronts for big polluters who will spend any amount to avoid fixing problems.

belly quote..""Be aware,
some groups involved in this protest
are way out there""

so we heard in a setup question
one was said to have 3 members

so how come 100's turned up?

...""others fronts for big polluters""

you mean those big poluters
*getting bailed out?

that arguement
dont float belly

ask yourself just egsactly..
"who will spend any amount""
to get a slice of the carbon credit cake!

say anything
to make the only problem carbon
to only tax carbon
[bot methane and nitrouse oxide]
hundreds of times worse

""to avoid fixing [the real]..problems.""

i thought the question about greenjobs was revealing
two apprentices...[great one julia]

oh and they get the research for free
[students do it as part of their study]

so today she who namecalls with impunity
visited a windfarm

the question i was waiting for from tony
''how much electicity..that windfarmer
[capital..[lol] windfarm]..has produced

[how much govt capital [subsidy]
what is his ...feed-in tarrif rate

how much was his projection..
versis the actual output

how many days did the wind deliver power
[that coverd costs]
how many days were wid free
[what is his record for one day
how many days did they run on a straight out loss

what does the tradesman
[looking after the apprentaces ..actually do]
how many breakdowns

re the 'greenjobs'
how many was ONLY in building it
how many fulltime/parttime

how does his output
compare to the industry/output
could it survive only..on basic tarrif inputs

what is the lifespan of a windmill
how many wind-vanes have been broken
how much does just one cost

will the feedin tarrif/subsidy
EVER come..out of carbon-credits?

Well you obviously saw question time OUG.
But gee mate you think of it differently than me.
Yes one group has three nominated members, surely you are not saying only that group attended?
Many groups did so.
Are you quite sure mining and coal all fossil fuel owners are not funding the campaign?
All those storys about Dick Smith funding greeny protesters get taken up, but we do not think big business does the same.
How much forest has man destroyed in the last 200 years.
How many water ways are unclean now.
How much coal have we burnt in those years.
How much petroleum products.
Human population growth, what was our [the worlds]population 200years ago.
What is it now.
What will it be in 200 years.
I remain convinced we play a roll in climate change.
And that we[all humanity]should understand and try to pick up our rubbish, stop doing it.

a new department to collect the lie tax, a new department to give back some of the money to the 'needy', higher prices for the average joe blow. I suggest you invest in Canberra real estate. It is already bursting with public servants promoting the gw lie and now we will have numerous more public servants to play with your money and give you a little back just before the next election. Labour for the working man. What an absolute joke!

Can we take a breath.
This thread is heading the way of all such threads.
I am not an expert.
And know of no one here who is.
So we put our views, based on what?
What we hear on shock jock radio.
Read in the tainted comic books we call news papers.
See on TV.
Yes LABOR, my party,has been totally dysfunctional on this and some other issues.
Not now, it has woken
Rudd no less Gillard, have made commitments then changed, been as handy as an ash tray on a Harley.
Abbott has held every view possible,from its rubbish to its quite true.
We look to Australian politics for answers to world wide problem.
And those crying lie are not concerned science , more believable science at least casts doubt on the thought man is not in part responsible.
CONSPIRACY theory's abound.
And miss information is out in front.
Look understand the truth ,our actions will have no effect on world temperatures.
BUT know understand ,per head of population we are among the worst emitters.
China is acting Europe is America not yet, but the world will.
Why should we not lead.
We could have been number one in solar but would not act.
To let this matter rest on our political biases is pure folly, it is not an Australian issue but a world one.
Who wants to debate human population,impacts on the planet, who wants to know just what the truth may be.
Start with the insanity that carbon is no threat to us.

belly..it might be that big oil and big coal are 'behind' the protests
but it was people who decided to go[to imply we are paid stoooges is just sad mate]

yesterday i listend to a inteligent gent
ok sounded like a pommy but not a toff

he was/is a unionist
with a common british brogue/accent
[i think his name is cameron
he was speaking in the senet]

literally tearing chunks off liberal policy
naming numbers..naming and shaming
tearing great shards off the liberalisation of work conditions of the liberals

it contrasted with juliaqr praising john howards forsight
praising the former treasuror[i think juliar is taklen with howard]
she talks [sings his praises constantly..is pushing HIS CARBON TRADING SCEME]

to say she is prostituting
for the capitalists is being kind

im still looking for his speach
http://www.openaustralia.org/?keyword=house%20hansard&creativeid=1117913217&gclid=CMGSzPi5rKcCFQXabgoda1BHAA

it deserves reading
but jliars big new tax
mate thats just finnishing off howards dirty work

i got a fixed pool of funds
govt doubling the price of my smokes
or putting a big new tax on the allready poor

..mate thats a mongrel act
saying we are going to tax the big poluters
then getting their bill upon the poor
in their power bill and fuel bill

i paid my tax getting it..now they are stealing the rest of it
and only to make the rich richer

[only so the money men can trade credits..
and fix nothing but their bank accounts

tax the rich before the working poor are forced to eat them

belly asks why should we not lead
[after saying usa /europe are leading]

pm says china is leading
[in parlement question time yesterday]

so who are we leading[or following]
lets lose the spin[we arnt leading]

this whole thing is tied in spin belly
spain led..now they are broke]
italy led..now broke

the germans leasd us into food starvation
[turning farmland into SUBSIDISED petro farms]
their tax moneys are being spent in kenya
to rip up native vegitation and native farms and villages
to mono crop a weed to burn for electick power

[thats going tyo produce 6 times more carbon polutant]

how can you be so blindsided
one eyed
[by loving your party
by thinking your party can do no wrong]

the gren party loyalists are as decieved as the two party loyalists
its the blind leading the blind

how much of the stuff
cameron threw at the libs yesterday
has labour fixed up[near nothing..it made a few token changes..but the contracts are law]..you cant repair the egg howard broke

same with this tax
more of howards egg breaking

europs tax failed
the yanki tax
china is building more coal..generators
than green

the ten states]much quoted by juliar
..is only token..less than one billion..
[and our 6 states
shall pay 36 to 45 billion]..

cant you see its based on a lie

more forrests shall be destroyed
but the ocean is ignored..

the ocean cleans most of the co2 from the air mate
takes it into the deep ocean/current and stores much of it

..[there are rivers of methane down there]
but no one is talking about them

not one of your experts
so how relyable is 'the science'

we arnt taxing
ALL THE greenhouse/POLUTANT'SSSSS

only one..

[thats like fixing a hole
in a sieve and saying its fixed]

it just dont float
thus its spin

tracked down camerons words
http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2011-03-23.90.2&s=cameron#g95.1

[attacking the howard oppression years]
lest we forget

have previously posted juliar praising her god head [howard]
and how he was so far seing ..in trying to bring on a new tax on carbon..

its clear from comerons words govt is aware of the changes
it has only superficially tried to fix

proving the two parties
serve the same adgenda

[big busness /money
not the people]

the reds are in bed with the blue bloods
juliar is but one of their begotten children
[she loves john ...just as much as tony adores both

at least scroll up from this link
http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2011-03-23.90.2&s=cameron#g95.1

and be ashamed

they know
yet do nothing

but bring on the rest of the john how-hard..abuse adgenda

magorin [lib]quote
from link

""Labor Senator Doug Cameron urged the Prime Minister to move quickly on revealing the detail of the planned carbon tax..

..which we know nothing about;
we do not even know the parameters that are being set..

..saying that the debate would be “quite easy”
to win when the public was better informed.""

he of course is right and wrong
juliar kept the details secret
we need wonder why?

speaking of juliar...""urged the party to take on the emissions trading scheme. Then she talked Kevin Rudd into abandoning the emissions trading scheme.

Then she dumped him for abandoning the emissions trading scheme. Then she promised, before the election, that there would be no emissions trading scheme

and then she goes and introduces an emissions trading scheme.
Who is the real Julia?""

AS WELL AS A NEW TAX
giving us both burdens
[one to set a subsidised minimum price..
then to let the market rip..to all and more than the poor can bear]

""the Prime Minister made a speech in South Australia to tell us that the coalminers and the steelworkers may lose their jobs,

given the Greens want to shut the coalmines down tomorrow,
but we can retrain them and put them into green jobs—waiters at rainforest resorts.

That is what the coalminers will be reduced to.""

its interesting to note here
cameron starts talking at 4.39
finsished 4.54

thus talked 15 minutes

so lets hear end of current speaker

""I would like to go on but time does not permit—it never does in this place. We need a good 20 minutes on an MPI.

Eight minutes is never enough to go into detail,
but you know the detail. I have the detail here.

Costs of living are skyrocketing and you know it.

That is what the next election will be about
and the carbon tax will be at the centre of that debate.""

this speach will be repeated..many times..[in the future]

only then it will be a lib
[pushing the carbon tax button]..!

""It is hypocritical of the opposition to pretend—that is what they are doing—that they care about the living standards of working people in this country...That is the greatest lot of codswallop I have ever heard.""

""Watch them react in a minute
when I press the Work Choices button.*

""They are reacting already.
A smile is on their face;a smile which says,
‘Please don’t mention Work Choices..because you’ve got us pinged.""

""You’ve exposed the hypocrisy of the coalition.’""

just as carbon tax will EXPOSE labor complicity

""Don’t talk to me about looking after working families.
Don’t talk to me about rising costs of living
when you can set out to take away..the right of workers to negotiate with their employer to get a decent standard of living..""

and then the labrats continued the OPPRESSION
but read on..

[quoting]
""The Howard government’s industrial legislation,
it was good for wages,
it was good for jobs
and it was good for workers.

And let’s never forget that.""

should have mentioned how they
talked in average wage terms
not minimum

but then both parties are scummy

""I will tell you
what we will never forget.

We will never forget the impact of Work Choices
on the standard of living of Australian families.

We will never forget that because we know that you do not care.

You come here arguing about the standard of living
for ordinary working people and you really do not care.

It is all a mass of hypocrisy.
It oozes out of every pore of your body.

What was the impact of Work Choices?

Work Choices was devastating on Australian families’ standard of living—absolutely devastating...More than a million Australians on awards suffered a real pay cut of up to $97.75 a week,..almost $100 a week,..and you have the hide to come here and talk about the standard of living of workers.

You have absolutely no idea
about the needs of ordinary working people.""

funny how govts FORGET?

""Hundreds of thousands of workers
were pushed onto individual contracts.

Seventy per cent of workers lost their shift loadings.

You have got a responsibility to stand up and tell us how that squares off with protecting the standard of living of ordinary workers.

Sixty-eight per cent lost their annual leave loading.
Annual leave loadings went down the tube with the coalition.

Sixty-five per cent lost their penalty rates.
That is the history of the coalition and their so-called concern for workers’ standard of living.

Forty-nine per cent lost their overtime loadings.
That was your contribution to ordinary workers’ standard of living.

Do not come here and lecture us
about standards of living for working people.

Do not come here with your hypocrisy oozing out every pore.""

no we got that ourselves
pot/kettle two party blindness?

""Twenty-five per cent lost their public holidays.
That was your contribution to the standard of living of workers in this country.

More than 3½ million Australians lost protection from unfair dismissal.

*That was how you cared for workers in this country."""

and your saddling them with a
BIG BUSINESS CASH SUBSIDY

set regulated by capitalists
who have revealed how much they care for workers

""An unknown number of workers—they just could not be counted—
were sacked or treated unfairly and had no recourse during the coalition push on Work Choices and the implementation of that legislation.

So do not come here lecturing us
about standards of living

when you were the destroyers of workers’ standards
of living under Work Choices...""

and the labrats finnished it off for big money
show me the mining tax?

yes smokers got their's
but how about the BIG MINERS?

""Not only were you the destroyers of workers’ standards of living under Work Choices,..you were absolute economic incompetents when you were in government.""

POT
/
KETTLE

""Peter Costello has built a myth around himself,..Not only did he not have the guts to stand up"""

POT/KETTLE

""He just did not have it.

So I am not one who comes in here
and swoons about Peter Costello.""

YET JULIAR LORDS HIS NAME
and jonnies

""Peter Costello...watching the money roll in from the mining boom..[carbon-tax]..and doling it all out on tax cuts..[poluters-subsidy]..that were doing nothing to build this country for the future.

You may understand..
I am not a fan..of somebody who is weak.

I am not a fan..of somebody
who does not look after the country well.

I am not a fan..of someone who delivered this*.

This is what Peter Costello delivered:
a failure of investment..in this country under the coalition.""

note*..no mention/concern.. of workers...NOW

""Less than two-thirds of profits
were ever reinvested in this country....LOL

""So investment did not come in.""

but the tax..will leave

""Our productivity growth was at the bottom of the OECD.

..manufacturers share fell from 23½ per cent to 17½ per cent.

The things that you make,""[or the cash you take?]

.."*the things..that are the knowledge industry,
fell under the Howard government.""

now..its kill the tax'payer
[pay as you earn'].. cash-cow

""There was a failure..of competitiveness.
There was a failure..of balance""

now a failure..to protect..propriotiously

""because you ripped $30 billion
out of the wage share in this country..

*and you put it into the profits of big business..lol..through WorkChoices.""

just as you*now..shall rip out..36 billion
to gift to carbon/cash crediters
[capitalists]

"That is what you lot did,
so do not come here..with your hypocrisy
and lecture us..about cost-of-living issues.

The biggest problem..that you had
was a failure of sustainability.

You know John Howard..*wanted to bring in..*a price on carbon.

*You know..he wanted a trading/scheme
but..he could never get it up""

lol

""because the extremists were there.""

denialists?

""Why did he want to get it up?

At least Howard..did recognise what the scientists were saying
because he was getting..the advice from the scientists."""

SORRY MATE GARNUT
is an e-con0mist

the science is flawed
greehouse gasses is not limited to ONE gas alone

OUG gee you go in hard there mate.
Now Gillard had a purpose in saying good things about John Howard.
He remains a conservative Hero, Abbott never will be.
No hero of mine but a fox like very good politician.
She wanted to point out, did very well, in telling us Abbott has turned both his own and his party's policy on its head.
OUG Garno got his job BECAUSE THE HARDEST bit is the economy and it is very hard.
Far too many who question climate change seem to think its AUSTRALIAN POLITICS that is the problem.
Look to world wide implications and world wide scientific advice pro and con.
Better advice than Abbott's yes no maybe but no exist.

belly
tell me mate
how much is the tax going to be in the first year

[truth is you dont know..even how much
your taking it on faith]

how much will it be the 2de year
again you dont know egsactly how much

[but this is about 'certainty'..
so we only know for certain it will be indexed..

it will rise EVERY YEAR]

if you dont know
vote no

thing is mate ..you truswt your party
even though the other party cameup with the idea
[and even the godhead himself couldnt sell it]

i would think ..that you would know[or care]
that if 'he' thunk it..he KNOWS
it will hurt the workers
more than the bosses

cause thats how his perverted little mind thinks

but you go ahead ol boy
support an unknown cost
support a howard tax on the workers

john howhard is laughing all the way to his carbon trading house

the bosses learned long ago
subvert the union
and you can tell the fools
dirt is cake
and they will love you
for lying down with dogs

its no skin of my nose mate[brother]
i got my tax on smoking..that wont change
cant wait till you lot ..get to pay the taxman.. too

it will still be based on lies

and wont change a single polution affect
from wreaking its inevitable cost.. on all our kids
but thats in the future

think mate they say no oil/coal in 30/40/50 years
by then all the solar cells will have died
and all the windmills will have broken

and we payed all that tax
for no permanant solution

[pride goeth before the fall]

Sorry OUG that post can not be answered other than this way.
On NO SUBJECT are my words not my own thoughts no one else's.
I stand firmly with man made climate change.
In those 50 years wind mills will fall over, but be replaced by new ones.
Solar panels will rot, and better ones take the place.
While humanity lives free we will progress, come up with new technology's and you can bank on it.
Costs rise tax's too wages do too.
My Dad earned $12.50 a fortnight once you spend more than that on a packet of tobacco now.
All this is true.
But that 50 years may be very different from the last.
Population will grow at the same or a higher rate.
Droughts then floods will come and go.
More of the African Continent will become desert.
Food famine may kill millions.
But the earth will be about the same size and suffering our neglect.
I fear we can not look truly at this world wide issue without politics getting in the way.

comeon belly..you been arround
im not saying your not doing your own thinking

but mate please think
how many times you took a car to a mechanic
and they said its this..[but it ended up being that]

dont you remember ''ITS THE OZONE LAYER"
[hole in the ozone]..remember the adverts showing deserts?

then they said the earth is warming
then said its cooling..but finally said its changing

please brother be honest with yourself
it this was a car what would you be saying to the driver

mate you been out to the outback
remember how huge it is..

how many shrubs grasses are sucking up the carbon..you been on the oceans..remember how big there are..there is such a thing as algi[and algal blooms]..all these things suck up carbon..they love it..cant live without this 'poisen'

we cant live without this 'poisen'
[talk about giving a rat a bad name]
it was the same thing with smokers[give them bad names]
thats how the game goes with taxing 'denyers'

its the same old tax them till they die game
only now they can tax the bubbles in ya beer..dear
tax the bubbles ...in ya soda ..pop

tax the air bubbles in ya cake and your bread
and still call it poisen

talk about grenhouse GASSES
yet only tax one of the least bad
the worst two dont get nuthin..
cause they are made by farmers and miners

and they got a nice bonus yesterday
http://www.openaustralia.org/search/?s=carbon+tax
http://www.openaustralia.org/search/?s=eu+carbon+tax

ok as usual having trouble finding it
meanwhile
from ya mate bill
http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-03-23.22.1

ok found it belly

its worth a reading
with open eyes
noting the miners making the 'other' poisen...[methane]
easilly makes up another 23 percent[add in the nitrouse oxides in the link..23%..[not named but quantified]

just mining and farming
make HALF THE 'POLUTION'

but dont pay ANY TAX

in fact get a NEW TRADING SCEME
http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-03-24.30.1

""The Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Bill 2011 fulfils an election commitment to give farmers, forest growers and landholders access to carbon markets.""

..note these are the big*poluters
getting bailed out

read on

""This will begin to unlock the abatement *opportunities
in the land sector..which currently..

*>>>>..*make up 23 per cent
of Australia’s emissions.*<<<<<GET IT?

*Australia has amongst the highest
*agricultural emissions of the developed countries*""

mainly via their generating *nitrous oxide
[300 times worse than carbon dioxide]
from nitrogen[see previous posts]
and landline link

BUT THATS NOT BEING TAXED...!

now you know why

we made "a promise"

thus YOU only talk of greenhouse gasses
but...*only tax ..ONE...*carbon..lol

se the joke old bloke
anything linked to howard is anti worker
pro big business and farming

tax the fools on their carbon polution
ignore the *big poluters
in fact BAIL THEM OUT

its the smokers tax scam
all over again

egsactly who
is talking about taxing farmers and miners

NO ONE...
get it yet?

OUG Mate,this is not one of those times I spit the dummy, have done that far too often.
And here and now pledge to do every thing in my power to never again do so, or keep my promise to me, leave here.
Now I still disagree, yep with almost every thing you said in those posts.
BUT I do think we are being side tracked on climate change.
It has become a debate about politics.
About science vs twisted science, some views may as well have come from you and me, on both sides.
Humans drift along thinking God or mother nature will fix every thing we break.
It is not going to happen we must fix it.
John Howard wanted just what Labor does ,Abbott once did, as did Hockey and Turnbull.
China is out spending America and Europe on measures to cut emissions.
We must stop viewing this issue as an Australian one, it never was.
I had intended to start a thread like this, would have thought more deniers would post.
But note just who turned up in Canberra hardly middle Australia.
In Port Macquarrie NSW 8 came to a planned meeting over 300 opposed them in a pro meeting.
Middle Australia has not been seen at these meetings.

belly please answer my math question[at end]

think why the debate is about poli-tricks
ie lack of numbers and name calling

the science is proved

greenhouse GASSES!..are destroying something
and lets pretend..taxing one gas will fix it

politricks makes it so that
we dont tax ALL THE GASSES
[thus the problem
[whatever it is]
*wont be fixed

..by just taxing one..!

thats all im saying belly

if we cant say...*what the problem IS
and EXPLAIN..*or know
just how much a tax [cost]..it takes to fix it

its just an excuse for a new tax
politricks 101

NOW THE MATH question

lets imagine you got a fire in ya lounge room
BUT you got no roof

tell me how manmy logs ...do you need to burn
to raise the temp ..even one degree

will it take more logs..
or less logs ..to increase the temp
[one degree]

1/..if the sky is cloudy
2/..if the ozone hole is square
3/..if the real problem isnt heat but cold

belly please explain the problem logiclly to yourself

you know no matter how much logs we burn..
the heat rises up...into outerspace

the concepts they use to con us
with science ...are tricky

because the solution they want
needs lie's ..to make a problem ..that gives them ..the tax they want

please people
help me explain it better ..to our brother

he just might be the only one ..that can save the world
by getting just one labour unionist ..to abstain
from the devision that makes taxation by fear the law..

in lue of understanding fact
we got sold a lie

[we just dont know
whats true anymore]

not polies..
not lobby..
not unions..
not parties...

no-one
media lies...
science lied..

big business wins by devision
only union unity can save us

Really there's only one comment here, or several in one group.

Carbon pricing has been to the election and voted in. Both parties put it up as an ETS and it was given a mandate. It is only Abbott that made an issue of it and only for one reason, to beat Malcolm, who will take the job back next year after Abbott embarrasses himself more and more.

If you don't unerstand how carbon pricing works then please don't make your inane comments here or anywhere. When you do it just shows you have swallowed Abbott's lines for simpletons. I won't waste my time explaining it, you'll see how it works when it comes in, as it will.

Abbott has supported this concept for all but the last year and a bit. Even them he has had many different positions on it, just oppose everything and you have his positions.

And he actually has the nerve to make a political lie an issue. The gall of that rabid, big eared loser.

Here's a tip. Try thinking while your kids can still breathe.

We meet again RobbyH, looks like you are going to be a fly by nighter.
Loaded with insults and a bravado that would leave you in real life.
Certainly no intention of other than annoying people.
I see you form of verbal graffiti as evidence you can not debate.
And in relation to your most used insult, idiots? well do you have a mirror?
Leave you too your angry ant impersonations.

hlobby quote''you'll see how it works when it comes in, as it will.""

that about says it all
he takes it on trust

thus his previous quote

"" I won't waste my time explaining it,""

proves he is just wind and bluster

[to wit
he/she/it..dont know]

to wit
didnt try to comprehend
anything to do with the topic

to wit
the halfwit thinks..
anyone who ""swallowed Abbott's lines
*for simpletons""[no matter how inteligent or dumb]
""actually has the nerve to make ..a political lie ..an issue.""

now any reasonable peron will know
BOTH PARTIES LIE..its just he drank the mindless coolaide

that thinks this quote
in anyway rebuts or informs

""The gall of that rabid,
*big eared loser""

he dont even know it
but he picked up on ju-liars overert
covert perverted ab/use of her calling ...m/r-abbit

rabid being of course..linked to big ear queerdeeerr

just as the bbbb-itch word links to www-itch wurd
thats how the two party spin gets played
repeat it..till they eat it up
as their truth[no proof]

i recall john howard being called a baby killer
i think many greens said the same about mr busche
plioitics is all about name calling
subtle insult in lue of answers

but whinging about it all
sure got the headline away
from the true topic/debait we didnt have

ie the debate we're *not being allowed..[yet again]..to have
anyhow i realise name calling is a cheap shot
over to you oak shot

it is suggested you get up to speed
READ SCIENCE FACTS MATE

dont simply swallow the
two party..*coolaide

Steve McIntyre uncovers another hockey stick trick
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/24/steve-mcintyre-uncovers-another-trick/
where are the academic cops?

Just when you think the bottom of the Hockey Stick rabbit hole has been reached, Steve McIntyre finds yet more evidence of misconduct by the Team.
http://climateaudit.org/2011/03/23/13321/

The research was from Briffa and Osborn (1999) published in Science magazine and purported to show the consistency of the reconstruction of past climate using tree rings with other reconstructions including the Mann Hockey Stick. But the trick was exposed in the Climategate dossier, which also included code segments and datasets.

In the next picture, Steve shows what Briffa and Osborn did – not only did they truncate their reconstruction to hide a steep decline in the late 20th Century but also a substantial early segment from 1402-1550:

As I’ve written elsewhere,
http://futurehistoric.wordpress.com/2011/02/22/defining-research-misconduct/

this sort of truncation can be characterized as research misconduct – specifically falsification. But where are the academic cops? Any comment from Science magazine?

Steve also discusses the code underlying the plot and you can see how the truncation is a clear deliberate choice – not something that falls out of poorly understood analysis or poor programming.

http://84rules.wordpress.com/2010/05/19/the-level-of-non-disclosure-of-adverse-data-we-saw-was-perhaps-perfectly-acceptable/

No Sea Level Rise For The Past 50 Years

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/no-sea-level-rise-for-50-years/

While the IPCC and its boy
scouts present wilder and wilder
sea level predictions for the near
future..

*the real observational facts
demonstrate that sea level
has remained virtually stable for
the last 40-50 years.

http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/paper_540.pdf

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/if-you-are-wrong-the-first-time-and-the-second-time-keep-making-the-lie-bigger-and-bigger/

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/arctic-basin-full-of-thick-ice-in-2011/

[Deleted for abuse and user suspended.]

I never back down to the likes of you RobbyH.
needless insults miss placed over confidence, just what are you running away from?
I truly look to other posters for balance and understanding, but while not bothering to report you .
Ask this, so far in your latest return you have not posted once without insulting at least some in every thread.
Is that god for OLO?
I am reminded of a school yard bully, they stand on clay feet and low IQ, good by bloke.

RobbyH,

Assuming that all countries introduce a price on carbon, then a carbon tax is the most efficient way of reducing emissions. However, if Australia goes it alone, all it does is move the emissions off shore.

To illustrate this, let me use Blue Scope steel as an example. Producing steel requires blast furnaces that consume coal to reduce the iron ore to metal in a set ratio of carbon to iron. Inefficiencies can be reduced, but there is a basic chemical and thermal minimum requirement. Presently BSS is one of the most efficient in the world, and consumes less carbon in transport.

Consumers in Australia have the choice of buying from Wollongong or China, and because of the low cost of doing business in China, already the lion's share is imported.

With a carbon tax, the price of Australian steel increases, and the price of imported steel stays the same. BSS closes and the production of steel in China increases. Emissions in Aus go down, but emissions in China and other exporters go up even more. The net result in this example is that a carbon tax increases GHG emissions and puts thousands of Australians out of work.

The lesson to the big polluter countries is that a carbon tax in other countries is great for the non taxed countries' economy.

Go it alone, I note many are saying if we put a price on carbon we will be going alone.
It may be of more worth, just a thought, to highlight that many have done this long ago.
Carbon trading could be critiqued by highlighting the trouble in carbon credits, prices have been all over the place.
We could even look truly past politics and ask is climate change real? are humans involved?
What is the likely out come.
Should we act.
If it is real.
If the impacts are bad, then act, and forget the price.
Now blue scope steel would say it will kill them, fact is steel making in this country has been shrinking for many years.
Yes right now they struggle cheap offshore labour is the problem.
In time one side will be proven right, we need carbon tax or we do not.
I am prepared to be judged but am aware of the smell of self interest that develops when politics sides with big business.

HERE are the 100 reasons,
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/146138/146138

released in a dossier issued by the European Foundation,

why climate change is natural and not man-made:

1)There is “no real scientific proof” that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man’s activity.

2)Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.

3)Warmer periods of the Earth’s history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.

4)After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.

5)Throughout the Earth’s history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and CO2 levels have often been higher – more than ten times as high.

6)Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time.

7)The 0.7C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.


8)The IPCC theory is driven by just 60 scientists and favourable reviewers not the 4,000 usually cited.

9)Leaked e-mails from British climate scientists – in a scandal known as “Climate-gate” - suggest that that has been manipulated to exaggerate global warming

10)A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years.

11)Politicians and activiists claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming but sea levels rates have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 ago

12)Philip Stott, Emeritus Professor of Biogeography at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London says climate change is too complicated to be caused by just one factor, whether CO2 or clouds

15)Professor Plimer, Professor of Geology and Earth Sciences at the University of Adelaide, stated that the idea of taking a single trace gas in the atmosphere, accusing it and finding it guilty of total responsibility for climate change, is an “absurdity

That was a well put together post from start to finish One Under God.
I would like to say I agree, but do not.
May I ask why the experts who say man made climate change is true are rubbished.
Often by some who are experts in other Fields.
Now fossil fuels, note we are getting short of them?
Not coal, any idea how much money rides on us continuing to export coal and use it.
Pietro chemicals would you spend a few bob defending all that cash if it was yours.
Just maybe the disinformation is served best by such as the greens.
See I have no doubt, not a bit, conservation care for the environment, climate change fear, is leg ironed by the greens.
People love to throw lines like water melon at concerns for this planet fueled by a radical group pretending to be conservationist.
One day we may just get a Chance to ask why so many floods? fires? droughts ,storms,
How much has our population grown in 50 years ,200 years ,the next 50 years.
The deception is the idea that humanity could ever not damage the planet we would crush the great barrier reef to make cement if there was a dollar in it.

Belly,

I find it interesting that you are happy to ditch your colleagues in Wollongong. However, BSS was only one example, as all manufacturing and food production competes with imports and has an energy input.

This puts at risk all farming and manufacturing jobs, and threatens to leave Australia as a service based industry only.

It is notable that countries in the EU are backing away from parts of the ETS (which is only partial anyway) and one of the 10 states in the USA that Juliar cited as having a carbon price is about to abandon it.

We are about to tax household to provide a band aid for the conscience of the greens who are shown to be the biggest consumers of gas guzzling SUVs etc. This hypocrisy is sickening.

In the history of this country many have been called traitors.
I again highlight if blue scope is to go under will it be carbon that kills it.
We stopped selling butter to England, a lot more too after they joined the EU.
The SM of those days told us we would all be ruined, yet we developed many more markets and the world did not end.
My question has to be this.
if man made climate change is true, do we all go down together or make sacrifices?
The deniers include some very unintelligent groups.
one claims it is a plot to give Germany control of the world.
It is in my view sad so very many want to link communism with climate change science.
silly sad and wrong.

belly look atwhat you said

""Now fossil fuels,..note we are getting short of them?""

ok the question mark may indicate you doudt it
and rightfully so..we are nowhere near ..the halfway mark yetthat half way mark is called peak oil..we have many decades of oil to go to even reach peak oil

now lets skip one line and quote another line of yours

""Petro chemicals ...would you spend a few bob
defending all that cash ..if it was yours.""

yes i guess i would
but i would also be defending it..if i knew others were lying
and trying to send me broke..based on a lie..

but mate look at how you defend your party
its not because of money but because of pride
[and thats fine mate]

but see that this wasnt greated in labvour 'party'
it was generated by the faceless egsecutive..who serve not the party nor the members..but the same big money as the liberals

mate this was john howards plan
why canm you see a lie is a lie if its from john
bot cant twell a lie from julia..both are scaming a lie

you said well written
read the link belly

i only listed the first ten
there are still 90 other reasons AT THE LINK

please think my brother
if the tax comes in it will cost me less than 40 bucks a year
[i use just over a ton a year on my electick bill]
dont have a car..and dont buy food etc

also big petro isnt paying me
im purely going on them lying
this is carbon tax by deception

worse if it was true[and it isnt]
taxing only one greenhouse gas wont fix the problem

as repeatedly said
the farmers [nitrous oxide]..
and the miners [methane]..

THEY ALONE
make half*.. the greenhouse gasses
and get off ..tax free

belly look atwhat you said

""Now fossil fuels,..note we are getting short of them?""

ok the question mark may indicate you doudt it
and rightfully so..we are nowhere near ..the halfway mark yet

that half way mark is called peak oil..
we have many decades of oil to go
to even reach peak oil

now lets skip one line
and quote another line of yours

""Petro chemicals ...would you spend a few bob
defending all that cash ..if it was yours.""

yes i guess i would
but i would also be defending it..

if i knew others were lying
and trying to send me broke..based on a lie..

but mate look at how you defend your party
its not because of money but because of pride
[and thats fine mate]

but see that this wasnt greated in labvour 'party'..!

it was generated by the faceless egsecutive..
who serve not the party nor the members..but the same big money as the liberals

mate this was john howards*plan..!

why canm you see a lie is a lie
if its from john
but cant tell a lie
from julia..

both are scaming a lie

you said well written
read the link belly

i only listed the first ten
there are still 90 other reasons AT THE LINK

please think my brother
if the tax comes in it will cost me less than 40 bucks a year
[i use just over a ton a year on my electick bill]
dont have a car..and dont buy food etc

also big petro isnt paying me
im purely going on them lying
this is carbon tax by deception

worse if it was true[and it isnt]

taxing only one greenhouse gas wont fix the problem

as repeatedly said
the farmers [nitrous oxide]..
and the miners [methane]..

THEY ALONE
make half*.. the greenhouse gasses

cant you see
even burning gas STILL generates co2
about half of coal..but co2 none the less

furher laying a pipeline..to the fraking gas wells
[that leak a lot of methane..

but worse..involves clearing land
[50 meters either side of the pipeline]..

ie further co2 created by clearing the land..
just to lay some pipes to pipe the gas..

mate every way you look at it
the cure is worse than what they claim they are trying to fix

real; scientists have said
we will reduce climate change
less than one point [point .ooo1 of a degree]

[currently the temp difference betwen day and night
is near 10 full degrees]..

so a tiny fraction
of a degree ..is a huge con

howards con
the liberal party con

knowing labour alone has the green numbers to pull it off
[then disappear like nsw labour has

while the libs come back
to do more work choice type stuff
but being the 'good guys'..saying we will cancel the big new tax

[but then wont]
and then its work choices two
all because you trusted ..your party

rape is rape
regardless of which party is raping ya

Belly,

I never claimed we would all be ruined with a carbon tax, just poorer, and there will be no difference in the emissions world wide.

I have a suggestion, let those idiots that think that they need to set an example do it first themselves. The biggest owners of gas guzzling SUVs are the greens, their motto is "follow me, I'm right behind you!"

The first step in a journey is the start, not the finish.
The question hings on one thing.
Is man made climate change true.
Abbott says it is.
Hockey said it is
Howard said yes
Turnbull said yes
I say yes
If we like Luddites fear change we suffer for it.
It is true until Labor and Liberal take planet conservation on board, we feed the greens.
It is unlikely I can change your views ,I proudly fall in to your idiot category, but fear not!
I would rather be proved wrong than stand by while my earth suffers.

belly today on bbc it was revealed the lie
that finger prints are 100% right all the time was rebutted

it turns out that circular reasoning
as well as cognitive bias was the problem

this is the same bias
that sees you asking just the one question

instead of questioning
if their SOLUTION is the RIGHT solution

see that none of those you claim your bias with are scientists
yet you claim a science based 'truth'

tony knows the science has been tricked up
but he dont know enough science to refute their trickery
so he has changed his story

think my brother
[this is the smoking thing all over again]
smoking 'causes cancer'..thus all cancer death
is smoking related*..and becomes a smoking statiastic

[yet only 25 percent is smoking related
ie see the smoking topic ..quoting your mate coombiya]

lets get the spin that speding causes accidents
ie all accidents are speeding related
[thats curcular reasoning]

black pitbull dogs attack human's
all dog attacks are pit bull related

se how the bias self sustains a lie?

i got caught with tom burns saying canabis legalisation
is labour party policy..[ie just vote labour in..and the drug law is gone]

well mate labour won
BUT the drug law wasnt gone
and the labrat party was in for too long
soon it too will be gone..but by circular reasoning the libs came

but the fact is all parties lie
especialy to get rid of a problem
or bring in a new tax

its sad you think thery know science
you know you dont..why presume they do

even if true[and its not]
the cure wont work..they should be agreeing
that a tax cures the problem..

but they dont..
they say look science..
i say look ...a big new tax

BUILT ON LIES/SPIN
AND BIASED CIRCULAR REASONING

If the government was to introduce the carbon tax at a level that matched the effective carbon tax of the industrialised countries (which I believe is about $4 per ton), then the government could claim to make an example without vandalising the manufacturing we have left. The figure of $26 to $45 per ton will have a massive impact on industry.

A journey starts with a single step. There is no need to start with a gigantic leap when everyone else is taking baby steps.

its annoying that its claimed only 1000 BIG abusers will pay
thing is they WILL pass it on..[with a little extra *as a bonus]

please note question..[d]

""Senate debates
on 24 Mar 2011


Rachel Siewert (WA,Australian Greens)
I move:

That the Senate—
(a)
notes that smoking is the largest preventable cause of death and disease in Australia
*and places our health system under severe financial strain;""

one needs think why

[if its a fact]
govt needs to move a motion

[thing is its not a fact smokers
"are straining the health system"]

""(b)
recognises that Australia has in the past
been a world leader in anti-smoking initiatives;""

the antismoking lobby
has huge power..in australia
mainly because govt is a major shareholder
see [d]

""(c)
acknowledges the important ongoing work and recent initiatives of Australian governments to reduce the burden of diseases caused by smoking,including plain packaging,advertising and point of sale bans, mass media campaigns the Tackling Indigenous Smoking initiative

*and cessation support;""....?

its funny how first we get a big new tax
WITHOUT CONSULTATION..virtually overnight
not knowing the real reasons[see abouve]
behind it..

[noting this was begun under howard..
first moved by liberals..sealed signed by labrats]
hurting mainly the poor

""(d)
expresses concern at the investment of more than $100 million of taxpayers money in shares in international tobacco companies by the Commonwealth Future Fund;and""

why needs govt seervants to hold 100 million in shares
except to get a major shareholder power..on the board
that nulifies the lobby

""(e)
calls on the Government to review
and revise investment criteria..as a matter of urgency
to ensure that the Future-Fund is invested into ethical enterprises that are consistent..with the health and wellbeing of the nation and not into tobacco.""

now the knife blade
has done its vile
lobby couldnt change things
even if it wanted to

100 million to raise billions
aint the public ser-vice
serving their add-vice empowerments..well

""Question negatived.""

whatever that means