Carbon Tax - Is your opinion based on how much you make?

[cement]

Carbon pffft. That volcano just spewed out more carbon then we will make in the next 100 years

 

[moosenoose]

More sustainable? :lol: For how long? Forever?? :lol: :lol:

Lets face the facts. Coal and oil aren't going to last forever. We'd be lucky if it lasts another 100yrs. The carbon tax will well and truly outlive it...and then what will they tax us on?

I'm all for sustainability and recycling and putting the right things in the right bins, and not throwing rubbish out the window of my car or allowing dolphins to choke on my beer stubbie holders :lol:.....but I shouldn't have to be treated by a little kid by Mother Gillard and Pappa Brown

 

[cement]

Probably the gas that Shell are now sniffing around near Ningaloo. Yeah so what if its World heritage listed environment. That's just a bit of paper to a government. But not worth nearly as much as the waterproof folding kind.

 

[Wally]

Probably the gas that Shell are now sniffing around near Ningaloo. Yeah so what if its World heritage listed environment. That's just a bit of paper to a government. But not worth nearly as much as the waterproof folding kind.

Precisely. Hard to cop when you hear of things like this.

 

[DanNG]

It's a load of crap. The only reason behind it is to create a new commodity to trade on because the world economy is up the ****ter. It starts with Australia and will then spread, they are doing whatever is necessary to get it started but we will eventually have a full blown carbon offsets trading scheme.

 

[Renenet]

Contrary to popular belief, CO2 is not the largest greenhouse gas, water is...

I had to look this one up. According to this New Scientist article, you're right that water vapour contributes about 50% to the greenhouse effect, the natural system that keeps the Earth warm. It's done this for a very long time, long before humans discovered industry.

carbon is an organic molecule ESSENTIAL to life on earth..

Yes, absolutely. The problem is that atmospheric concentrations of CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) are increasing rapidly. CO2 was around 300 ppm at the beginning of the 20th century and is now approximately 390 ppm. The Earth's natural systems are having trouble keeping up. There is more information in this article here.

That same article debunks the myth that volcanoes outdo us in CO2 emissions.

As for the farmers, I don't think agriculture is included in the carbon tax, at least not yet.

For the record, in general I support pricing greenhouse gas emissions. The current price of burning fossil fuels does not reflect the social and environmental costs. Renewables are left behind in such a system. My opinion would not change if my yearly salary was $2 or $200,000. I don't know yet if I support this particular policy. I'll look at it and let you know.

I also agree that it would be preferable if the whole world moved to such a scheme as one. The Copenhagen conference showed that it's not likely to happen. My theory - maybe a fond hope - is that as more countries move to a carbon pricing scheme, pressure will mount on those which have not. Once a critical mass has been reached, the rest will follow.

 

[wokka]

What i get out of the tax is not important. As a self funded retiree i will pay indirectly like everyone and possibly receive nothing. My opinion will be based upon the effectiveness of the scheme when proposed. I'd prefer a cardon trading scheme because the value is locked in the scheme whereas with a tax it can be used for other purposes.

 

[damian83]

Even the $150k amount that's being thrown around as a family income limit isn't high. I bet families making that sort of money who are paying a mortgage, a car and for food would disagree that they were wealthy.

what about people making 50k pa? i hate when people that make top dollar think their poor, for crying out loud, try living a family on one small wage with bugger all help from centrelink.... i can almost afford paying off a mortgage now but im not going to till the wife is working again... its to hard living week by week on 20 bucks


stuff the tax we have too many as it is

 

[wokka]

what about people making 50k pa? i hate when people that make top dollar think their poor, for crying out loud, try living a family on one small wage with bugger all help from centrelink.... i can almost afford paying off a mortgage now but im not going to till the wife is working again... its to hard living week by week on 20 bucks


stuff the tax we have too many as it is

Dont worry about paying off the mortgage. There is no prze when you do. The only advantage of a mortgage is that you have long term tenure over the property. Eventually the principal in the loan becomes insignificant. if you have a 300K house now with a 200K loan and you only pay the interest of say $300 a week thats fair rent and on top of that in 20 years the house should be worth close to the million and youll still only be paying nominal rent.

 

[damian83]

getting a 300k loan and paying back 800k over 30 years is a fair bit effed i think, rent is 350a week and loan would be 450 a week
so its a big whack on one wage

 

[wokka]

Damian, Ive been there done that and it ain't that bad. Someone will get in trouble for going off topic soon so pm or start a thread if you want to dicuss.

 

[damian83]

sorry was meant to be along the lines of taxes making it harder for living not just a rental mortgage debate

 

[abnrmal91]

So far the carbon tax seems really well setup. Alot of people will benefit financially from the tax breaks. Gets a thumbs up from me.

 

[moosenoose]

I hope China was watching. After all, we are trying to save the world :lol: Sad, dumb day for Australia. All we've achieved today is empty people's wallets.

Ps: empty people's wallets..... further.

Does anyone else think she's an antidote for Viagra? 8)

 

[Naga_Kanya]

As for the farmers, I don't think agriculture is included in the carbon tax, at least not yet.

Odd - didn't the UN study show that meat was the most damaging industry as far as climate change was concerned? Aside from that I do agree with you!

 

[moosenoose]

I think we need to put a nuclear bomb into India. We could get rid of a billion+ carbon-dioxide breathing pollution machines that way :lol: Someone send the red-terror an email and tell her about that scenario

Although, that is a bit extreme. Not to mention nasty and un-neighborly But that's right, we don't use the nuclear resources we have at our fingertips.

 

[ianinoz]

I support it and I am a retired engineer (self funded < $50k pa) who may not be retired for much longer as I've been head-hunted and could soon find myself working again and back in the big money (> $180k pa base) - I'll still support it and hope to be able to make a real physical impact in helping my new employer stay viable and reduce their carbon footprint.

I made my home thermally efficient 20 years ago when it wasn't trendy and there were no tax incentives to do so or free schemes to do it. Been benefiting from my efforts ever since.

I do not support using the Uranium fuel cycle - for engineering, physics, safety, waste disposal and proliferation reasons. We have much more Thorium and this is much better and the Thorium fuel cycle is what Australia should be using as well ad UCC, NG fired trigen power gen and maybe some renewables and distributed micro power generation schemes.

 

[Craig2]

YES

there are more trees now than there was previously due to plantation timber ect
Its just something the government has found to give them more money
to put the new (enviromentally friendly) cars into production produced 100 x more greenhouse gas than our fuel thirsty cars will in the next 100 years. YEP THE WHOLE THING MAKES SENCE TO ME

Were you the one that voted yes and I make more than $150k? Just wondering as it surprised me that someone would vote yes in that category.

I think we need to put a nuclear bomb into India. We could get rid of a billion+ carbon-dioxide breathing pollution machines that way :lol: Someone send the red-terror an email and tell her about that scenario

Although, that is a bit extreme. Not to mention nasty and un-neighborly But that's right, we don't use the nuclear resources we have at our fingertips.

Forget India NUKE Parliment House
That would fix alot of issues

 

[moosenoose]

:lol: I like it!

 

[jack]

Carbon pffft. That volcano just spewed out more carbon then we will make in the next 100 years

an insidious urban myth. humans put out 150 times as much as volcanoes