10-40,000 people across the country rallied to 'say yes to the carbon tax. The protest was organised by unions and eco groups. Much of the same "last chance to save the planet" rhetoric featured in the speeches.

What I still haven't seen explained by the protesters or the government is how the tax will actually stop climate change. Do these people honestly think that taxing the Australian populace there is going to be a significant reduction in global CO2 output?

Can anyone who attended the protest today explain exactly how those tax dollars are going to be used?

Can anyone attending the protests today explain how a 20% reduction in Australia's 1% contribution to global CO2 will undo the effects of the big CO2 producers America, China, India and Russia?

Can any of the protesters explain why the pro carbon tax campaign has resorted to showing billowing steam as an example to 'carbon' going into the atmosphere?

And can any of the protesters explain how human CO2 is more damaging than the 96% of the CO2 produced naturally?

The tax will reduce the rate at which fossil carbon is burned.
When the oil runs out 1,000,000,000 people will starve.
Other countries have the tax,they will not trade with Australia.
The tax refund will exactly compensate the average consumer.
Large users will pay more.
Small users will have money to spare.
Some of the tax will develop renewable energy.
The counties with this tax are doing well.

So how many of these people attending, have never bothered to
install even a solar hot water system on their roofs? 70% of
the Australian population still have not, simple as pee technology
that has been around for more then 30 years. It would even save
them money.

Attending a demo, signing a petition and waving flags is easy
peasy stuff, compared to be able to think a bit rationally.

Some of the carbon tax will subsidize solar water heaters.
Electric water tank heaters are no longer allowed for new houses.
Gas water tank heaters are allowed for new houses.
Using gas directly for heating avoids the losses in converting
the energy in the gas to electricity.

Were the people at the rally irrational because they had not fitted
solar water heating?.
Shall we ignore them because they are irrational?.

I will ignore that spin.

Why does it always come back to the "we only contribute 1%, so if we cut back it won't achieve anything" argument?

It seems to me that it's the same as the guy who continues to violate water restrictions because watering his lawn for four hours a day, seven days a week won't reduce dam levels. He's a small-time player, right?

Or the kid who steals a lolly because the shop has heaps, so they won't miss one.

Yeah, we're a small fish in the world of global polluters. Unless you twist the figures to per capita rates, of course. In the grand scheme of things, our emissions would barely be noticed if they disappeared overnight. However, what right to we have to expect the big-time polluters to clean up their act when we won't follow suit? Why would they bother when we "white western imperialists" won't do the same?

I'm not convinced that a carbon tax is the answer. It seems to me that the government isn't even sure what the carbon tax will look like or what it will achieve. Hell, I'm not even entirely convinced that there is such a thing as anthropogenic climate change. I am, however, convinced that if there is a cleaner way of doing things, without detriment to our quality of life (and here, again, I'm not sure about the carbon tax), then we should investigate that way.

*Shall we ignore them because they are irrational?.*

Yup. Better to judge then by what they do, then how
loud they croak at the demo. People go to demos for
the entertainment these days.