Oh, really indy?

This guy and most economists think different:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckcH0Wrmy74

Oh wait - politics and some pollies just get sillier and sillier.

qanda,
any moron can find selective clips on youtube showing interviews out of context ?
The bottom line remains the same. The Carbon Tax is stupid & audacious & does absolutely, definitively nothing to prevent climate change. ask anyone who hasn't been educated beyond their comprehension.
If we really want to change the climate for the better then we're definitely having ourselves on.
Are you actually saying we should go against nature twice ? First by ruining much of the atmosphere & then by trying to prevent the natural cycle of icing ?
You really need to make up your mind, you've only got ten thousand years, at least that's what the cycles are purported to have been according to scientists of course.

individual,

It takes a special kind of arrogance to insinuate - as you do - every second post that anybody who holds an opinion contrary to your own is some kind of uneducated moron.

That appears to be your sole argument in just about every debate you enter.

http://skepticalscience.com/china-leading-role-solutions.html

I was talking to someone the other day about Singapore taxing car use to such an extent that it became too expensive for the average person (thus saving the environment). To make up for it they have state-of-the-art pubic transport. Yep, it's a small country, but it demonstrates the usefulness of scaling back consumption - or directing it to a more eco-friendly model - in order to protect the environment.

Any moron, indy? The 'denialosphere' have created a cult in selective cherry-picking.

Point is, indy - Tony Abbott said what he said (and went to great lengths afterwards to justify it).

You might not remember indy but John Howard and Senator Hill had a much better strategy response than Labor had to combat global warming. It was only when the Labor Party took over 'ownership' did Tony 'it's crap' Abbott start to play shenanigan politics.

Fwiw, I've been saying for quite some time that the tax won't mitigate global warming (it can't) and there are many papers out there that back that up. I could reference them but you wouldn't go there, they're written by real climate scientists (not anti-science bloggers).

What you and your fellow travellers seem to close your eyes and block your ears to is that the tax is/was always meant to begin the transition of Oz to a lower fossil fuel economy - it has to start sometime - even Abbott acknowledges that.

to begin the transition of Oz to a lower fossil fuel economy
qanda,
they didn't say that at first but I still maintain it (The Tax) does nothing but fill the superannuation of those who least deserve it. If they were serious about reducing emission than surely it'd make more sense to reduce tax for every bit of emission reduced rather than charge tax & maintain the emission ? After all isn't a reduction that is the key argument ?

Poirot,
the usefulness of scaling back consumption - or directing it to a more eco-friendly model - in order to protect the environment.
Isn't that what I have been promoting to here all along & now you're hitting out at me for doing so. How many times have I posted in favour of reducing waste in transport by proposing a mono rail system but no, none of it ever makes sense to those who want a perfect climate but forfeit neither money, nor conditions why, not even dispose of some of the non-sense they're so heavily burdened with by choice & not by genetic inheritance.

Unfortunately Poirot, you have to follow things to their logical conclusion to find the truth.

Please explain just why you want to deprive people of the most fuel effective transport option in Oz. Is it because you hate people, or because of some fool ideology. Neither a very good reason, if you are rational.

As public transport in Oz costs more fuel, & therefor CO2 per passenger mile than the use of the private motor vehicle, I have often wondered why smelly buses, & inefficient trains are so favoured by the fringe people, such as greens. You should be demanding a reduction in polluting public transport in Oz, not a reduction, if carbon dioxide is your worry.

We do understand the problem with academics. They are horrified that a smart plumber can make more than most, not very smart, but much exalted university professor. This they would love to stop. Of course they can not say this out loud in public, so come on side of some rabid notion that CO2 is a pollutant.

I wonder how much longer we have to wait for our own cultural revolution, so we can put these people to work in something more suited to their intellect.