With the I'll fated carbon tax getting the chop, the ETS will still effectively be a permit to pollute.

I say this because the way a business operates, is that it determines it's costs and expenses then adds a margin to it's product/service in order to make a profit.

So, as carbon credit certificates become scarce, one would assume companies will pay extra to secure their polution permits, then simply pass on the additional costs.

As an alternative, I feel we should be charging the user of energy any tax on carbon, not to generator, as once prices increase to most users, their automatic reaction is to reduce their usage, and this reduction will ultimately reduce carbon emissions.

I say this because either way prices will rise, just as usage will fall, so why the need for yet another tax, especially when we here will have our tax determined by outsiders and sock market traders alike.

Rechtub good morning.
No sense in us clashing again.
I do truly, think you are the wrong bloke to open the batting on this issue.
Current ALP policy will cut the costs, from what they are now to a much lower one.
So very many in the world would pay much more, if asked.
And read todays story [link in your other thread this subject].
Look at the given numbers who it claims want action.
You, now till election day need more voters not less.
You can not plant pumpkin and try to harvest water melons.

Current ALP policy will cut the costs,
Belly, Belly, Belly,
Sorry to disillusion you but I'm afraid there's no such thing. Go back & check on their record by starting yesterday & you'll find nothing to that effect.

Of course the LNP's "Direct Action" plan will cost nothing to anybody, right?

I'm disappointed that Rudd sold the early adoption of an ETS as a measure to help families with living costs rather than a coming into line with the European carbon market due its unexpectedly large current disparity with Australia's carbon price. Many Australians are happier with matching the European effort on contributing to carbon abatement, as poor an effort as that might be.

Of course, Abbott's response was a three word slogan rather than taking the opportunity to sell "Direct Action", making himself look silly again.

Just heard Joe Hockey performing well for the LNP re fringe the benefit change on cars, not that he's got a leg to stand on(*), but looking the goods. That was until he said Australia was hitching itself to the European economy via the ETS, the usual hyperbole he is noted for. he even said the carbon price would rise to $40/tonne if the AUD fell 30% against the euro, alarmist rubbish.

* On one hand he says there is no rorting related to car claims yet, on the other hand, he says the motor vehicle manufacturing industry (which we already keep on life-support)will be ruined by the change. He can't have it both ways. Regarding the documentation impost, returning to keeping a log book for three months is no biggy and won't ruin the industry, as it didn't in the past.

Anyway, given my disappointment in Rudd (see above) I can't blame Joe for pinning his ears back now we are deeply into election campaigning.

Indy being the sporting bloke I am not take the strap to you.
See I truly honestly do not think you can understand.
Every one who understands why it will cost 4 billion dollars, to adopt the policy Howard Turnbull and Nelson shared with Labor knows why business likes the early jump from tax to trading scheme.
See you in another threa