Gday young Gypsy, just a couple of years in front of you.
Every one of us has every right to an opinion.
No mater what that opinion is.
I think we are not well served by the current lot on both sides but not as badly as you do.
From both sides of the house good government could be formed.
And I strongly hold the view global warming is in part man made ,so we are doing the right thing, in joining many country's in slowing our emissions down.
If I am wrong, just say I am, is clean energy/renewable energy not some thing we must do in any case soon as oil and coal even will not be around forever?
Today Mr Abbott, supported by his trained team, time and again tried to say trading in a world wide scheme was wrong.
A ton of carbon cut is a good thing surely?
I wounder how Tony can believe there are Australian emissions floating around up there identifiable from all the other country's emissions?

It is interesting how Lexi will quote as gospel figures from the Federal labor government's modelling on the carbon tax, but instantly dismiss the modelling by the Victorian coalition government.

While I have not seen the Victorian modelling, the federal model has some blatant flaws:

1 its model is based on $20/t not the $23 to be legislated.
2 The 1% inflation figure only includes the initial spike, and not the resultant COLA wage increases later, nor that the carbon price continually rises,
3 The job losses calculated assume that our major competitors have a similar cost on carbon and do not factor in the increased competition from outside.

If all these factors are taken in, the job losses may be closer to the Victorian report than the terms of reference restricted federal model.

I wounder how Tony can believe there are Australian emissions floating around up there identifiable from all the other country's emissions?
Belly,
He doesn't so stop twisting words. He never once said a carbon tax was good or bad or we should or shouldn't have one. What he says & I think he is right in saying that for a small emitter like Australia no amount of tax will better the climate. If you can explain how a tax from about 10 million australians will positively alter the climate than I volunteer to pay double. at this stage of affairs an australian carbon tax is utterly pointless. When the big polluters start cutting back then we should join in. As it is now it's just plain senseless & that's why Abbott is rightly opposed to it.

Dear gypsy,

I can fully understand your current mood.
Not finding suitable employment can affect one's
mindset. However, have you thought about re-training,
going back to study, and looking at perhaps another
field than the one you're currently interested in?
Have you also tried employment agencies? Or looking
at related fields to the ones in which you've got
experience. What about asking for an appointment
with the human resources manager of any organisation
that you're interested in working for - and simply
make an appointment to talk to the HR manager and ask
for advice in how one would go about applying for a
position with their company. You'd need to have done
your homework on the company - so that you'd be able
to give them good reasons for why you'd like to work
for them. Just an idea.

Dear SM,

Again just to clarify a few points. I quoted the figures
from The Herald Sun article that gypsy referred to in her
post. They are not "My" figures. And it's also interesting
how you make excuses for the Liberal Government in Victoria
yet the Federal Treasury's figures
and modelling is automatically
questionable - by you.

As for your constant reference to our Prime Minister
using derogatory terminology implying she's a liar -
try this on for size with Moany Tony:

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/liberal-leader-australias-prime-minister/story-e6frezzo-1225869968304

Lexi,

The figures in the Sun Herald were by Deloites "access economics" branch, an independent body.

The flaws in the Treasury modelling are due to Treasury using incorrect terms of reference supplied to them by Federal labor. I notice that you haven't disputed these flaws.

Dear Lexi,
I recently completed 2 retraining courses to further my employment options [Certificate 2 and 3 in security and First Aid] all of which I passed. All i'm waiting on now is the licence.

Are you aware of and know the significance of our "Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900"? The first 4 words state: "Whereas we the people.
Clause 5 states: "This Act and all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution, shall be binding on the courts, judges and people of every state and of every part of the Commonwealth
Section 128 states: "The people by way of Referendum to vote for any changes which will effect the their freedoms and rights".

The government has a duty to the people of Australia to hold a referendum for the people to vote regarding the carbon tax. By having a referendum of the people's vote will either endorse (carry) or deny (not Carry)the carbon tax. We are only bound by laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution Not under a corporation seal.

The High Court of Australia, Decision - Re Wakin [1999] HCA27; 198 CLR 511; 163 ALR270; 73 ALJR 839 (17 June 1999) Kirby JJ stated - A legislature cannot, by pre-amblular assertions, recite itself into constitutional power where none exists. [239]
As I stated before, the Constitution states: "Whereas we the people", it does not state "Whereas we the government" or "Whereas we the parliament". This means we the people rule and the elected politicians are there to represent us and do what we the people want, Not what the political parties they belong to want.

I hope this post will be of assistance to you.