Julia says that the overwhelming majority now support a tax on polution (carbon tax)

So, if this is th case, then why not simply take it to the electrate.

You can either wait two years, or, you can call an election now.

What do have to loose, after all, you apparently have the overwhelming support.

Or do you!

Gillard could take it to an election, or she can attempt to intimidate debate on the subject by having a media enquirie. I heard one Labor luminary complaining about anti government blogs as well. No surprises there, straight out of the Joe Stalin song book.

Your simplicity is overwhelming. Surely there is more than one issue in an election. Julia has the job at hand, with no constructive help from the libs it is all up to labor.

You do go on 579, it's Bob Brown who pulls Julia's strings. He's the puppet master, she's just the doll, although describing her as such is unfair to dolls.

Unfortunately if I described her as she is, I'd probably be banned for a week. She has much to answer for

If anyone REALLY wanted to know what the majority wanted- they'd just hold a referendum on the issue.
If a politician never makes an effort to put an issue to referendum- you know that they're not serious about 'what the majority wants' at all, and are only jerking everyone else off for publicity sake.

What a storm in a teacup!

All these personal attacks on the PM are really beyond
the pale. The PM is merely doing her job - governing,
and that's no easy task with the consistent personal
attacks on the Prime Minister by Mr Abbott and his team.

Give it a rest - you'll all get your chance to vote her
out at the next election in the meantime - you're simply
making yourselves look offensive and stunningly ignorant.

I don't see how the moderators can see a discussion in this type of information. It is in the same pile as racism, ignorance, personal attacks and immature reporting.

Lexi, what's the point of waiting till 'the next election'? That only gives her more time to cause more damage.

I seem to remember you wanting to give KRudd until 'the next election' when you used to be Foxy. That didn't work either.

Get rid of her and her destructive government now, or we will soon be a banana republic - just as Keating said.

579, your statement doesn't add up. How is concern for the way our nation is being dragged down akin to ' racism, ignorance, personal attacks and immature reporting'?

In the house, those to the speakers left are the opposition.
Those to the right government.
The coalition, it is one, Liberal Nationals sits on the left.
The other coalition, Labor A green put there by conservatives and independents make up the lower house.
Senate too is controlled by labor/green coalition hence they govern.
A referendum costs millions, governments govern.
I am pleased tom say this bill like every one so far will pass.
cop IT sweet!

Another content free whinge.

By all means, please continue.

Dear Austin,

Why give her until the next election?

Because that's our democratic process.

We may not like everything that a government
does but here in this country we usually allow
our duly elected governments to see out their
full terms.

Imagine if we kept replacing our governments simply
because we didn't approve of some of their policies.
Look at the fuss that was made over the GST - and
today it's simply part and parcel of our daily life
and not the diaster that people claimed it
would be.

So again I repeat, you can always try to get rid of the PM
at the next election. In the meantime - she's going to get
on with the job of governing whether we like it or not.

Lexi,

When the government blatantly lies to the electorate, and passes legislation primarily to stay in office, then it deserves no respect.

Juliar is as bent as Thomson upon whom she relies so heavily.

SM,

I have a different take on things to yourself.
And I don't for one moment agree with your
opinion. You're entitled to it of course, but
that does not make it fact - simply your opinion.

Lexi,

It is my opinion that a prime minister that could only form government by breaking her election promises should not be allowed to continue her economic vandalism without criticism.

Your opinion is that she should?

SM,

You are entitled to your opinion -
but not your facts.

And there was me thinking that a fact was an inalienable truth.

No wonder labor is in such strife if they cannot differentiate between fact and opinion.

as usual, many of you are missing the point.

By all means let her run her course, but what i am saying is she shoukd either take this serious issue along to the election with her, or, if she wants it so badly now, call an early election.

How much simpler can it be.

Lexi I address this post to you.
We are in debate in part but not totally,with a group of old men sitting outside the villages only shop.
Intent on grumbling and not much more they enjoy the day.
On getting home the wife will put the apron on them and get them to work.
I have a feed in front of me, like everything I eat I made it myself.
I see am a bachelor now.
This one is humble pie,intent on getting my party/government back in line I have said they are dead.
Well no! still think they can not win an election but.
Public disagrees with me.
That poll, at my party's lowest, while Abbott is at his highest!
IF Rudd lead we would win!
It reminds us,even Rechtub, it is not LIBERALISM we confront but a counterfeit!
The old fellas chuckle but we just may yet get the last laughter.
Do not take it to heart,gee me saying that?!
Just picture that old shop and the grass hats and bib and brace over alls.

Dear Belly,

Thanks for your concern but I really
am not going to be influenced by what
someone posts on a public forum - especially
as far as politics is concerned. The issues
that we're currently facing in this country
are complex ones that will take this government's
full term to try to solve. From my perspective
the policies that this government has and the
agenda it's pursuing makes sense. How well they
succeed - time will tell. In the meantime I for
one believe that they should simply get on
with doing their job - and not be diverted by
the Opposition's tactics of distraction.

I would like to see our Prime Minister take the
reins of leadership firmly with both hands - and
get on with the job - ignoring all the negativity
around her. Empty kettles make the most noise.

Ms Gillard would have far more respect if she said I know the electorate on the whole does not want this tax but we are doing it anyway. Could it be she is totally deceived herself when she claims the majority want it. Deception has become part of life for this woman.

Dear runner,

You possibly may not be aware of that fact that
she's said precisely that many, many, times.
Perhaps you could watch Question Time in Parliament
at some point. It will keep you up to date
with what the government's agenda really is -
rather than buying into any negativity.

Lexi, can you tell us why she wont take this tax to the election, iether now or in two years.

Why the rush to get it hrough.

Now had she waited until the next election to put the tax to the people, some of her credabillity would have been saved, dont you think?

Most major reforms are made by labour, you will just have to live with it. Mr Rudd is the next PM and he isn't even in the running.
Ocean fish are folowing the warmer waters, changing the usual variety of catch. Big changes are happening, and accelerating.
Some are worried about AU industry, the only ones that can solve that problem is us, bye Australian

Carbon Tax: Short Term Pain, Long Term Gain
The Carbon tax is a response to the growing concerns of climate change and a pre-emptive solution to the predicted negative effects it will have on the Earth’s environment if Carbon pollution is left unchecked. I strongly believe that a price on Carbon emissions should be implemented as soon as possible, as a stable price for Carbon emissions now is preferable to paying market distorted prices later, which may not be efficient in reducing the effects of climate change.
There is an abundance of evidence that shows that Carbon emissions are having a negative impact on the Earth’s environment. Case in point is the numerous reports detailing that there are significant increases in the Earth’s temperature, with the CSIRO stating that the earth has warmed on average 0.7°C since 1910 and 90% of the warmest years occurred in the past decade. Australia’s economy is closely tied to agriculture, and disregarding the effects of climate change could have a devastating effect economically as well as environmentally; if this occurs it will be difficult or impossible to restore the Earth to its former state.
How is it that so many people are opposed to paying a small amount of money in the present, rather than paying huge amounts of money, trying to fix the Earth when its descent has already gone past the point of no return?

SG, the problem is not so much the price on carbn, but rather how it has come about.

Firstly, such major changes shoud be taken to the people so we as a whole can evaluate then decide.

Secondly a carbon tax is simply a permit to polute and as such there is no penilty for poluters as they will simply pass the tax on, plus some.

One billion in tax will result in about 1.4 billion in passed on costs.

Now if it were an ETS, that would be different as poluters would have to buy credits which would limit polution.

But, the underlying issues are;
1. We the consumers are responsible for polution as the polutrs are simply servicing our needs.

2. If Australia we to cease all emissions it would hardly be noticed globally and, as polution is a global issue, its a bit like one farmer spraying for weeds while ten others dont bother.

Pissing into a fan is one saying that comes in to mind.

Dear rehctub,

You need to get hold of the facts.

The following links may help:

http://www.cleanenergyfuture.gov.au

And -

http://www.cleanenergyfuture.gov.au/the-benefits-of-a-carbon-price/

Lexi it really is time to stop posting labor party propaganda as if it has some worthwhile truth in it. Only a puppet could believe this stuff.

Student G

I suggest you do a bit of research on the global cooling scare of the 70's and the many lies made up by Al Gore, data manipulation by the IPCC and just see how much carbon is emitted by volcanos compared with that which humans emit. You could not possibly then be gullible enough to think taxing will make one bit of difference to our ever changing climate.

Dear Hasbeen,

If you think that only a "puppet" could believe
Australia's top economists and scientists -
what does that say about those who believe the
vacuous spin and rhetoric instead.

Still, I guess it took the medical profession from the
1960s to the present era to get the public, and the
governments we elect, to act on the toxic, life-taking
effects of tobacco. Eventually sanity prevailed,
although it took over 40 years.

It is clearly time for economists to commence their
campaign for pollution taxes and getting prices to tell
the truth. And that is precisely what is currently
happening with the support of the current government.

Lexi, even the government takes its advice from non scientist, so that say something dont you think.

Now, do you agree that its the people who cause the problem and not the poluters, as they are simply suppling our needs.

Now if you do agree then why are we punishing the poluters rather than taxing the users.

Of cause, if the users we taxed directly, then the tax paid would be free from all costs and profits.

Now a good way would be to have a sliding scale for usage of polution causing items, so that it becomes a true user pays system that rewards those for sound practices.

You may not be able to grasp the concept, but if a business is hit with a tax, which is in fact an exoense, then they not only have to recoup the costs, but also their costs and the amoun for lost opportunity.

This is why 1 billion in will be charged at more like 1.4 ,
billion out.

Yes Lexi, puppets, & only sock puppets at that.

If I were selling a product to the public and my bottom line was affected by taxing/pricing carbon, I'd raise my prices while working within market constraints, as always. Prices for many consumer goods will rise under a carbon tax, undeniably, but consumers will be compensated with income tax cuts and other measures. Meanwhile, fellow posters, demonstrate some level of intelligence and get past the "big new tax" rhetoric.

More on topic, any topic with "Julia" in it seems to end up in the same sad soup amongst posters. a couple of points

1. She's PM, get over it.

2. Mr Abbott does not particularly deserve to be in her place.

Donning a truckers cap and joining a protest circulation of trucks around Canberra, and other such stunts including associating with witch-hunts, makes Mr ABBOTT a populist and less of a statesman than other contenders for the job. Compared to Mr Turnbull, Mr Abbott looks like a drovers dog looking for a flock. Aussies don't want rabid, unbalanced leaders. We don't want the Pines, the Howes and their ilk. Australia has moved past that. Anyone who thinks that a good old fashioned clear majority will re-establish itself has not read the signs. The issues are not that clear-cut and the electorate is more nuanced.

Go for it trolls, protect your turf, I'm done for awhile with OLO.

Luciferase
Nice rant, now do you really think the majority of us are in favour of a carbon tax?

After all, thats what this thread is actally about.

Now as for passing the tax on, this is how it works.

They pay say one billion in tax.

So, they then have funding costs, say 8% .

Then admin costs, say 3%.

So that 1 bill is now plus 11%.

Then you have to allow for lost opportunity of another 12%.

So all up this makes the mark up on that 1 billion, 26%.

Now to achieve a 26% margin, you must add 35% to the 1 billion.

With me so far?

So, would it not make better sence to simply tax the user the one billion and save the 35% mark up?

As usual, th government has gone about it the wrong way.

But, what lse could we expect from these incompitents.

Now as for tonny abbot, well im with you, i dont think he is a strong leader,however, thanks to andrew wilki and his support for julia, i think he will be PM come next election.

Unless of cause andrew does an about face and supports rudd.

This of cause is the problem she has caused by going to any measures to save office.

Meanwhile our country continues on its path of uncertainy which is the cause of the lack of confidence, which is the worst way we could be traveling.

Thanks!

Dear rehctub,

There's an old saying that goes something like -
"If you keep on doing what you're doing, you can't
expect different results."

We can't keep on polluting and continue to think that
nothing is going to happen to our planet. What the government
is proposing is merely a small step in trying to rectify
the situation - and encourage alternative energy sources
for our future. I can't understand why people scream against
new ideas. New ideas, instead of being welcomed for the
opportunities they open up for the improvement of the
human lot, seem to be threats to those who've become
comfortable in their ideologies .

In Australa in 2006, leading climatologists with our country's
pre-eminent public research organisation, CSIRO, were
forbidden by the organisation's management to publicly
discuss the implications of climate change.

Management was acting on behalf of the government.
And Australia is one of the standout countries in terms of
human development status. It's not corrupt. Its science is
world class. None of this mattered, In 2006, the Australian
Government's position was to cast doubt on global
warming and refuse to enter into UN agreements such as the
Kyoto protocol.

With the release of the Stern Report on climate change, the
Australian Government's position had changed - yet the
Prime Minister remained half-hearted about a commitment to
counter global warming.

Anyway, I feel strongly about this issue. Nothing but knowledge
is going to save the planet and the humans and animals that
live in it. The renewable technologies many of us get excited
about; the carbon-neutral lifestyles we aim for are the
invention of humans, and their success depends on an
understanding of them and a wish to implement them.

A better world is possible. It will take effort. It won't be
easy. But it will be worth it.

Lexi, now write this 1000 times.

CO2 is not pollution.

Dear Hasbeen,

I agree with you it's part of nature.
However, I invite you to sit
in a room filled with CO2, and then tell me
that it was good for you.

When the balance in nature is upset and the ratio
of oxygen to carbon dioxide is unbalanced one can
only imagine the catastrophe the earth will be in.
But I suppose for mutants - it really
wouldn't make much difference.

We know that as a result of the burning of fuels
and wastes and the razing of forests, the amount of
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is steadily
increasing. This gas creates a "greenhouse effect,"
on the planet, for it allows solar rays to reach
the earth's surface but prevents heat from radiating
back into space. The consequence will be global
warming, which will eventually cause the melting of the
polar ice caps, a rise in sea levels, and changes in
weather patterns. Even minor fluctuations in global
temperature can have drastic consequences.

Of course control of pollution is politically
difficult for the economic interests behind the
"smokestack" industries are a powerful lobby that is
reluctant to commit the necessary resources to the task.

Lexi

If the results of polluting (by your definition) is a higher standard of living, more money for health, education, jobs and a longer life span then I think it is a much better option than us all retiring to Byron bay and smoking dope with no electricity. Or maybe just maybe we might be smart enough to use nuclear power. You could not possibly believe this tax is going to do anything but send the 'pollution'elsewhere. Surely your love of Gillard has not blinded you to that extent.

runner,

Surely your religious beliefs instruct man in the wisdom of "moderation".

It's always amusing that pro-growthers always promote the alternative to rampant consumerism as us being reduced to "living in caves" or in your example - living in Byron and smoking dope.

(I'm not convinced about the marvellous projected impact of the Carbon Tax either, but I do realise that the West has to pull in its belt to some extent).

So Lexi, why then are we taxing those who polute to feed our needs, who, by the very nature of running a business, will charge us more than if te gvernment would otherwise have to charge us.

Can anyone out there tell me the logic in this.

Now, as for a carbon tax, im with runner on this one.

Are you suggesting we go without and bring our future generations into this world that will have a growing population but diminishing workforce.

Remember, we cant possibly reduce carbon and grow witout something breaking.

Meanwhile, the other 98% of polutrrs globally will continue to grow while we get left behind just so the likes of you can feel all warm and fuzzy.

Furthermore, if ther are a majority of you that want to reduce carbon so badly, then simply turn off your lights, walk everywhere and let us continue living the the wold of reality.

Surely if the majority reduce their outputs, and the rest of us stay the same, you will have achieved your objective without hurting the nation.

Poirot

'I'm not convinced about the marvellous projected impact of the Carbon Tax either, but I do realise that the West has to pull in its belt to some extent)'

So the tax isn't about 'big polluters'as Ms Gillard claims but about taxing and raising the costs for everyday consumers. Then why is she compensating the consumers to buy more? Why can't this woman be honest for once. I for one would be happy to pay that bit more tax if it was going to help the environement one iota. The dishonesty is the thing that repulses most Australians. This is about Green ideology not helping the environment.

Dear rehctub,

Why is the government charging the polluters?
It's a dis-incentive. You pollute - you get charged.
And as it is - only 500 of the biggest polluters will
be affected at this stage. This is only the first step
of a program that will be introduced in stages. One
step at a time.

Have you forgotten about the GST
and the problems it has caused. The huge unemployment,
the rise of food prices, bankruptcies, or was it
all just in our imagination? We pay 10% more on everything
today - thanks to the GST. And is the public complaining?

All this is intended as an incentive to develop
new practices of production. The rest of the world is already
moving along those lines - and if we don't, we'll be left
behind on the technological dust heap.

Australia has always had the unfortunate reputation -
"if it ain't broke - don't fix it." Which is simply
an excuse for inaction.
And, as a result,
since the 1950s and 60s Australia has been losing
its creative talent
to other nations.

In simple terms - if you keep breaking the law, and being
fined for it - you will continue to pay for your
persistent ignorance unless you change your ways.

New technology creates new jobs. We have been whining about
job losses for the past century and yet Australia has one of
the strongest economies. However this will change if we're
not competitive and persist in antiquated methods of
production that even countries like China are trying to change.

It's always been difficult in Australian production to introduce
more efficient and economical methods resulting with
manufacturing going overseas. If this continues that's going
to be the killer - and we'll have no one to blame but ourselves.

Do we want the same situation as Eastern European countries
having to buy their power supply from Russia. We can of course
run cables to China and buy our power supply from China -
because if we continue to maintain our ignorance - that's the
direction in which we're heading.

Dear Lexi,
Re:Storm in a teacup.You are so right my friend, I too am sick of this puerile heckling and so forth. There are far more important things to get passionate about ergo: perhaps focusing on those in the poorer countries almost dying for the want of food and drink, I cannot believe the base and crass comments that some of these posters insist on putting up. I was re:reading a rhyme written by Spike Milligan, which basically said "Oh What a lovely Doll, my daughter said,
whilst in Africa a little girl exclaimed
Oh! what a lovely piece of bread"
Sort of puts things in context doesn't it?
Cheers Lexi,
NSB

Dear Noisy,

It certainly does put things into perspective.

The concept of public debate is sadly lacking
today in our political arena. I remember reading
no more than a generation ago that anyone with a
message could set up a soap box in Hyde Park,
London and inform, entertain, and, on occasion,
abuse the audience. Today public debate occurs
in a free-wheeling and inconclusive way via the
Internet or as "infotainment" on talkback radio and
so-called public affairs television.

Put our politicians back on soap boxes (or the back
of trucks) in front of the village voters.

Today "wedge politics" is deliberately creating a division
between people. Therefore, interest group self-interest
and antagonism between voters permeates policy-making.
This destroys trust, togetherness, and a caring society.
There's "them" and "us," rather than simply "us," and
much effort is employed in partisan politics which
could be much better used in more positive pursuits.

Frankly I'm sick of it all, as I imagine a lot of people
are.

Lexi

I cannot believe that J Gillard has proposed more draconian laws for asylums seekers than J Howard. She had the opportunity to step away and reinstate on-shore assessment.

I also cannot believe that, for once, I hope the Opposition actually does oppose this new legislation - even though it would be for all the wrong reasons.

Dear Ammonite,

As a lawyer by profession the Prime Minister should
know that she's done the wrong thing here with
pursuing the Malaysian Solution. She's playing
politics and attempting to appear "tough," in the
asylum-seeker debate as a means of what she hopes
will attract votes for her. It won't. And it's a
big mistake on her part. As she will eventually
find out. She should have done what she thought was
the right thing to do - and not given in to playing
the game by somebody else's rules.

It seems more than simply attempting to appear "tough".
Labor, appears to be going out of its way to introduce the most odious policy it can. No human right's protection. Abbott referred to the proposed amendments as "offshore dumping" - and he's right.

What a diabolical little coterie this Labor government has become - myopic, media driven populism exposes them as a party of straw. (and this is from a former Labor voter)

Dear Poirot,

Aren't we lucky in this country.

We will get a chance to have our say at the next election.

Interesting times ahead.

cont'd ...

the following link may be of some interest:

http://newmatilda.com/2011/08/31/thats-it-malaysia-solution

lexi and others, you still have not answered my question.

Why are we taxing the generators and not the users?

Now as for the GST, it is not on most food items.
Having said this i have always maimtained the tax is unfair in its present state.

Like Poirot, I am always bemused by the options people assume sit before us - either rampant consumerism and greed or living in caves. What happened to options C,D,E and F. It is a human failing to exaggerate one side of an argument, we all do it, but this halts some real discussion on what it means to be human and what it is we want from our societies. Shouldn't the economy work for 'us' and not the other way around. The economy is not a living and breathing entity, it is a human construct and collectively we have the ability to shape it to best advantage.

Is there no happy medium? As a child of the 60s (peace and love man :P) my generation was raised with little luxuries, mum at home for the most part, discipline and (in my case) love, any treats were met with great excitment and enthusiasm.

In some ways, modern kids have missed out on this with too much too soon and no joy in 'stuff' because there has been too much of it.

I don't mean to sound like a 'in my day' old fogey, because I can also see the wonderful advantages of being born after this time. People are much less racist and bigoted, teachers can no longer by tyrants (there were a few doosies), technology has seen great improvements in medial science, etc. But wouldn't it be great to combine the two?

Rampant and elitist based capitalism will eventually implode, the GFC has already seen the beginning and the ongoing problems in Europe. There are numerous opportunities to focus on improving things so greed does not run amok and result in systems that benefit the few over the majority.

Certainly better democratic processes are a good start including on a Carbon Tax.

Pelican, i to am from that era and i agree with what you say. Kids today ave little to look forward to as they have it all.

As for the carbon tax, it appears a case of those who want it just dont want to pay for it.

Now if 60%' reduce their emissins by say 10%, surely that will make enough difference and negate the need for yet another tax.

This is assumming hat 60% is a vast majority, as madam PM says.

Same result, less pain, and those who really care can feel all warm and fuzzy.b

Now, do we have a problem with that?

Pelican,

"...wouldn't it be great to combine the two?"

That is the most sensible and well-reasoned post - I wish you were PM : )

Dear rehctub,

Kindly go back and re-read my posts.
I have answered your question.
You simply refuse to understand it.
Therefore - there's nothing more that I can say to you.
See you on another thread.

Pelican, Poirot

I can never understand those who turn all issues into basic black or white.

There is always a balance, compromise and negotiation. Products can simply be made to last longer, or be amenable to upgrading. New technology WILL provide new jobs - hopefully in third world countries not just we excessively replete western countries.

Whether corporations like it or not, they will not always be able to pay minimal wages in third world countries - there have been strikes in China, Korea, Thailand etc and the option of closing manufacturing in countries like Australia for the expediency of cheap labour will no longer be an option.

Ammo, you simply dont get it, do you.

The only thing that keeps us going is the resourses boom and cheap imports.

Damage either of these and it will be game over.

The very reason we are in trouble is because basic wages are to high.

You know the balance is wrong bwhen unskilled earn as much as some trades people and expect to be able to live a normal life on 38 hrs per week.

Now as for andvances in tech, how you can expect that to create jobs is beyong me.

If history has showed us anything, it is the opp.

But its nice to see you are optomistic.

Believe me, the last thing we should be doing right now is placing more burden on business, large or small.

Just be carfull what you wish for.

Here you go, rehctub, this should soothe your fevered brow:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-09-18/greens-seek-tax-cut-for-small-business/2904938

PO, businesses dont want tax cuts, they want a hugebreduction in the wall of red tape they have to dea with.

In fact, the red tape is such now hat most small busimesses can no longer getnthrough it without professiomal help, and thays a problem.

There is a real disincentive to become an employer now, which simply plays into the hands of the large monopolies, and this is a problem we should be vary concerned about.