Dear spindoc,

Firstly Thank You for not stooping to personal insults in your response to what I wrote. I'm not an economist and I quoted
from an article that made sense to me. In reply to the points
that you've raised - I again will direct you to another article
that makes sense to me - to keep things in balance with what
you've read on the subject.

http://newmatilda.com/2011/04/11/why-carbon-tax-wont-cost-you-800

Col put the glasses on have another look at say your last twenty posts.
If you do not come here to verbally poke and prod no one does.
Verbal body Language, like body language its self, can not be hidden.
Your last two posts say VERY CLEARLY you are a bit flustered.
My mind may well not exist.
But mate! I would not swap it for yours for another hundred years of life and all the wolds Rich's.
Abbott ,today chanted and got his puppets to do the same, these words.
Sorry can not remember the first one, it inferred all promise/action democracy was the last part.
Democracy? is it democratic to request an 80 million dollar spend, on a plebiscite.
BUT SAY I will ignore it, if the result is not one I like Democracy mate it ain't!

Dear Lexi, since we have now embarked upon the road to mutual respect, which I do feel good about, I would like to try to add some value.

Firstly, did you note from my post that I expressly excluded any “impact to household” figures? I took only the gross Tax take based on the assumption of $25 per ton.

Two reasons of this, 1) there is currently absolutely no policy to support anything else and 2) modeling “nothing” is for people who have an axe to grind and want to impress those who are, well, impressionable.

I won’t comment on the link you provided to “newamtilda”, other than to say stop going to such sites, they are doing your head in, it’s not even good enough to be junk.

I know you are very well read and have lots and lots of information about “things”. A tragedy of today’s world I’m afraid, we have information overload. What is missing from most of this “information” is the context and relevance needed to turn it into knowledge.

Such information can at best make someone sound “plausible”, good enough for many, embarrassing for most.

I look forward to our fresh approach to things.

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/jacktheinsider/index.php
The comments that are part of this link are informative.
If we look back, to the week before Gillard took Rudd's job,few of us saw it.
In my mind currently both leaders are the wrong ones.
Abbott however stands on quick sand.
Gillard is up to her chin in very deep mud.
As our two Donkeys line up for the start of a race years away.
The first team to remember the fine cotton thing, a better race horse running under another name, if we See a race horse replace the donkey ,one side will be left floundering at the start, watch this place.

If you wish to have an insight to Political interventionism and political Economy Lexi, Just read some history about Europe in the late 18th and early 19th century; then produce a dissertation for peer review. I am sure you will understand when you realise some truths.
Economics is not a mathematical calculation that is accounting; Economics is Human Action, Social interaction and peaceful, political intervention and meddling with the natural social interaction only leads to a catastrophic disaster and immense suffering. War and Carnage, Just another Monopoly structure Governments are proficient at.
Government is not omnipotent; it cannot create a society, it is its destroyer lex

Dear Spindoc and All-,

Thank you for your advice.
As I stated previously - I do a great deal
of research before posting - and I cite references
that make sense to me. I'm sorry spindoc, that
you find "New Matilda," to be "junk." I prefer to
read all sides to any issue, and as I said - then make
up my mind.

The pollution problem is an exceedingly difficult one to
solve, for sev eral reasons. First, some people see
pollution as a regrettable but inevitable by-product
of desired economic development - "Where there's smoke
there's jobs." Second, control of pollution sometimes
requires international co-ordination, for one country's
emissions or pesticides can end up in other countries'
air or food. Third, the effects of pollution may not show
up for many years, so severe environmental damage can occur
with little public awareness that it is taking place.
Fourth, preventing or correcting pollution can be costly,
technically complex, and sometimes - when the damage is
irreversible - impossible.

In general, the most industrialised nations are now actively
trying to limit the effects of pollution, but of course the
populous less developed societies are more concerned with
economic growth, and tend to see pollution as part of the
price they have to pay for it.

Anyway, I feel that I have nothing further constructive to contribute
to this discussion - so I shall see you on another thread.