The Forum > General Discussion > 10 - 40,000 Say Yes to Carbon Tax
10 - 40,000 Say Yes to Carbon Tax
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Page 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
-
- All
Posted by Pastel Blue, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 12:47:32 AM
| |
I'm finding it very interesting how those who support the carbon tax have expressed so much opinion without answering any of the original questions and whole point of this thread.
Can someone please explain how the pro-carbon carbon tax suppoters are justified in using deceitful visual images, e.g. steam, as evidence man is sending billowing clouds of carbon pollution into the atmosphere. Is this not propaganda? If there is a need to lie in order to get people to believe something is wrong with the message. Has it dawned on the supporters how convenient the Climate Commisions report, which was paid for by the Labour Gov't, aligned so perfectly with Labour's need for proof? These kind of white wash reports get produced all the time by governments trying to sell particular ideas. To this comment from Pastel Blue "Let's be intellectually honest. The boffins told us something we didn't want to hear, and we've lacked the courage to do anything but deny it." You are almost correct but the wrong way around. The IPCC has been trying sell us a load us scientific BS and the courageous scientists that spoke out against it were demonised for expressing their doubts. The 'deniers' are the ones in the crowd that see the Emperor is naked. Have a look at Bob Carter's excellent interpretation of the scientific climate statistics for the past several thousand years? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI Posted by sbr108, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 7:36:35 AM
| |
Poorer families get compensated for rise in the prices caused by Carbon Tax _ Why? So they can purchase products produced in polluting countries.
Posted by Philo, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 9:13:16 AM
| |
Er... Pastel Blue, the comment I made about the Maya Prediction was tounge in cheek & not meant to be taken seriously.
Where do I stand in the overall equation. Well; Do I believe that the sea levels will rise. That's a given. The sea will rise regardless of what we do. So Yes. Does man contribute to the level of Carbon? Yes. But at an absolute minimum. Will reducing Mans contribution to the CO2 level make a difference World wide? Yes, but at an absolute minimum. Will a carbon tax make a difference? Yes & No, It will increase Big Business profits & Yes, You & I will pay for their profits. It will not make a contribution to reducing the level of CO2. It will not make a difference to the level of CO2 in the atmosphere. So, No. Having said all of that... Am I in favour of poluting the Atmosphere. NO! But a steady phasing OUT of CO2 producing industry will be great for mankind. Am I in favour of Alternate Energy sources. YES! But, a "steady" phasing IN of Green Energy will be great for mankind & Big Business. The optimum word here, being, "STEADY." A win, win situation. The sudden collapse of the Carbon Industry would be catrostropic for mankind, as tens of millions of people would be out of work instantly. What then? World War 111. A lose. lose situation. Posted by Jayb, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 10:44:47 AM
| |
I'm 100% all for alternative energy. Alternative energy such as solar power offers freedom, pay once and then free electricity from then on.
Freedom from the power company monopolies is why I advocate for solar energy, not the fear of carbon or climate change. I will support any government initiatives from either party that makes it easier and cheaper for households to acquire solar energy. If the government is serious about promoting green energy why are they reducing the subsidy or putting time limits on the subsidy? Posted by sbr108, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 12:23:24 PM
| |
sbr108; If the government is serious about promoting green energy why are they reducing the subsidy or putting time limits on the subsidy?
Good Question. My contacts in Government won't answer that directly. I have asked them the same question & all I get is a rote long letter telling me what a marvelous job they are doing. As I tell them, "The longer the correspondence the more BS there is." It's lobbying from the Power Companies that has reduced the subsidies. In yesterdays TV News the Power Companies said, "The increases were necesary. They were losing revenue because of the increase in the number of people using Solar Power." Have I installed Solar Power? Yes I have. I've installed a 2.2 kW system. This is the minimum I would need to be Solar neutral (almost) I am a pensioner. I really could not afford the $5000 to put it on without drawing on the equity on my house loan. But with the rises coming I could not afford not too. (see rock & a hard place.) I notice that most Solar Companies only offer Specials on two products. A 1.5 kW system, which will drop a Pensioner Bill by half or a 3 kW system which is beyond them. A 3 kW system would make a family (2 +2) power neutral. But at $7000 cash up front? Do you see the problem. I have asked the Solar Companies why they don't have specials on 2.2-6 kW systems. I've never received a reply. So I suspect that there is a bit of collusion somewhere in the system. Posted by Jayb, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 1:29:18 PM
|
The original quote was that the carbon tax is a government conspiracy to make people feel guilty and then redeem them (to what end is unclear). Rather than saying "that's laughable", which will not persuade the conspiracy theorist, I ran with the idea. He might, after all, be right.
If in fact the conspiracy theory is correct, which it is not, then as an unintended side-benefit we end up with a good piece of policy and at the same time everyone is guilt-free. Smiles all round.