Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new tax (1 Viewer)

[SylviaB]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

The simple solution is to:
-Ban coal power stations

Fuck that shit

 

[0bs3n3]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

Why not? Introduce incentives for people to 'go green' instead of throwing money at the polluters (for what? Nothing will change).

 

[ComingUpForAir]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

Um no lol

If carbon tax -> equal income tax deduction,

My oh my, I didn't realize you where an illiterate 10 year old..
The price of coal-fired electricity will be higher......if you don't understand why this will increase the competitiveness of alternative energy sources, you are a downright idiot, not in the general sense, but in the sense you eat, and converse with, your own faeces

there is no incentive to buy 'green products'

The fuck do you mean by a 'green product'? a lime perhaps? Such an assertion has no relevance to my proposition
(unless of course you are referring to electricity generated without CO2 emissions, if so, your horrible at articulating yourself, and precisely incorrect)

Anyway, this isnt even what's happening... high income earners arent getting any concessions despite the fact they probably use more energy per capita. In essence, its a way for Rudd to secretely increase income redistribution without people noticing

Again, an obscure digression that has no relevance whatsoever to the argument I was making, what prompted you to construct this sentence? really, it's disturbing.

All good in theory (except for the first part of your argument), but:
-How will you make sure that companies do not overstate emissions to get more free permits
-Why should all products have an additional margin for permit traders' profits?

You really ought to go learn to read, you know, it helps a lot, not to mention it would stop you churning out these kinds on statements.
I was arguing against an ETS, a carbon tax does not involved permits.
Really, these questions do not dignify a response.

At the end of the day, all we are looking to achieve through this system is what I set out earlier (i.e. no more coal, no more fossil fuelled transport)... it'd be so much more efficient to target these areas directly

Great stuff, lets 'ban' all our electricity generators, it's not like we need them to power hospitals, schools or anything. Terrific point, very sophisticated thinking.

 

[SylviaB]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

Why not? Introduce incentives for people to 'go green' instead of throwing money at the polluters (for what? Nothing will change).

little thing called freedom

also, I'm not comfortable with the idea of legislation that will cost billions of dollars and thousands of jobs to make a minuscule effort towards preventing a problem that we may or may not actually have any influence over.

 

[aussie-boy]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

My oh my, I didn't realize you where an illiterate 10 year old..
The price of coal-fired electricity will be higher......if you don't understand why this will increase the competitiveness of alternative energy sources, you are a downright idiot, not in the general sense, but in the sense you eat, and converse with, your own faeces

The price of coal electricity will be higher by the amount of the tax.
But you just said in an earlier post that all carbon tax paid will be met with equal reductions in income tax.
So in reality, coal electricity is no more expensive than any other type.

Great stuff, lets 'ban' all our electricity generators, it's not like we need them to power hospitals, schools or anything. Terrific point, very sophisticated thinking.

What do you think the ultimate point of any carbon tax is?
Making stuff more expensive doesn't reduce its environmental impact - the point is to eventually price these old technologies out of the market.

Any carbon tax is an indirect ban on the use of fossil fuels

 

[Serius]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

^ total retard...he just doesnt get it does he....

 

[ad infinitum]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

The price of coal electricity will be higher by the amount of the tax.
But you just said in an earlier post that all carbon tax paid will be met with equal reductions in income tax.
So in reality, coal electricity is no more expensive than any other type.

You ought to stop taking ques from your pets...this is your dog speaking isn't it? Not a human?

Making stuff more expensive doesn't reduce its environmental impact - the point is to eventually price these old technologies out of the market.

Any carbon tax is an indirect ban on the use of fossil fuels

Oh, on second thoughts, you ought to leave the thinking to your dog.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

i am not proffering any opinion i'm simply providing facts.

You did obviously misinterpret the article as you asserted that this article refuted my claim that 'carbon dioxide is in no way harmful to the environment'.

Straw man argument. Pffft. I'm not the one citing wikipedia as a credible source of information.

hsc: 2011

 

[thongetsu]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

Tony Abbot is an oblivious idiot.

 

[thongetsu]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

Because this wont affect him as much as it will affect the future generations.

 

[ComingUpForAir]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

Because this wont affect him as much as it will affect the future generations.

err, he has 3 young kids..

 

[Penny Wong]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

If anything, what Australian's need are more taxes and direct Government intervention in the home. You want a non-communal water heating system? Then expect me to be knocking at your door.

 

[redmayne]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

Please, spare us the rubbish. Anthropogenic global warming exists.

And there are going to have to be economic sacrifices. Why don't people get over it. It's saving a few dollars now versus the future safety of the entire economy, let alone the future of our existence altogether. You can't turn around the way the entire planet powers and transports itself without making sacrifices, you have to pay the bill. It's only money, let go of it, tightasses.

For example, coral bleaching and rising sea levels (which are proven to be happening) threaten to destroy the Great Barrier Reef. The former within 20 years. That will cost Australia $37.7 billion. And that's only in the tourism sector of our not so populous country. Imagine the damage it will do to all industries around the world.

 

[SylviaB]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

Please, spare us the rubbish. Anthropogenic global warming exists.

yeah lucky there's a consensus in the scientific community : /

And there are going to have to be economic sacrifices. Why don't people get over it. It's saving a few dollars now versus the future safety of the entire economy, let alone the future of our existence altogether.

LMAO, you think the Australian ETS would make even the slighest most minisclue difference at all? No, of course it won't.
Hell, Australia could reduce it's greenhouse emissions to ZERO and it would STILL happen.

For example, coral bleaching and rising sea levels (which are proven to be happening) threaten to destroy the Great Barrier Reef. The former within 20 years. That will cost Australia $37.7 billion. And that's only in the tourism sector of our not so populous country. Imagine the damage it will do to all industries around the world.

Cool and all, have anything to suggest that cutting our emissions will stop this in any way?

 

[runoutofsleep]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

ugh

 

[redmayne]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

I find that argument so bloody short-sighted.

The entire world needs to change. And Australia is part of the world, as you obviously don't realise. As a developed, G20 nation, it's our responsibility to lead on these kinds of things.

So no, of course just us introducing an ETS in Australia won't stop it, I never said that. But it's a beginning that needs to be made. The rest of the world are gonna start doing things, are we supposed to just sit here and let them do all the heavy lifting.

And, unfortunately, the GBR is more or less screwed. I was using it as an example of the economic effects of global warming. Many others we could stop with adequate change.

"Green is the new red." You're a joke. I hope that's a joke, you putting it there. I hope you're poking fun at the wack conspiracy theories that crackpots like Nick Minchin rave about.

 

[lynton]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

Please, spare us the rubbish. Anthropogenic global warming exists.

And there are going to have to be economic sacrifices. Why don't people get over it. It's saving a few dollars now versus the future safety of the entire economy, let alone the future of our existence altogether. You can't turn around the way the entire planet powers and transports itself without making sacrifices, you have to pay the bill. It's only money, let go of it, tightasses.

For example, coral bleaching and rising sea levels (which are proven to be happening) threaten to destroy the Great Barrier Reef. The former within 20 years. That will cost Australia $37.7 billion. And that's only in the tourism sector of our not so populous country. Imagine the damage it will do to all industries around the world.

+1
The acidification of the oceans through rising co2 levels is a major problem. Carbonic acid is crippling the Great barrier reef and many other shelled animals and it is a proven fact. Global warming is a serious problem and the sooner we act, the better off Australia will be. Australia is going to be one of the most affected countries in the world if we do not act on climate change. My suggestions are to stop all old growth logging and deforestation; implement more environmentally safe and green technologies and find more renewable energy alternatives.
One more thing, Phytoplankton is the worlds greatest oxygen contributor, contributing 50% of all our oxygen. If the air and sea temperature keep rising then the world will be trouble as the microscopic organism will die, increasing the levels of co2 in the atmosphere, further increasing global warming. So dont tell me rising ocean temperatures is not due to global warming because we all know you are wrong. If the world doesnt do something then all the phytoplankton will die and so will our way of life.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

I find that argument so bloody short-sighted.

The entire world needs to change. And Australia is part of the world, as you obviously don't realise. As a developed, G20 nation, it's our responsibility to lead on these kinds of things.

Maybe international cooperation is the best possible solution. Maybe.

But we also have to ask if it is a realistic solution. Can we really expect China and India, where hundreds of millions still live in poverty, to reduce emissions when their per capita emissions are still way below our own?

Can we expect any countries not to simply do what they do all the time and cheat on their international agreements or outright ignore them?

It is foolish to put faith in governments to solve any problem. History shows us that governments are inevitably corrupted by powerful interests, there is no reason that this will be an exception and we are already seeing this happen right now, with huge concessions being given to the biggest polluters.

These major polluters will simply bribe government officials, and hide their emissions, the only real losers will be the poor and middle class.

There's also the problem of "exporting" emissions. For instance, if the price of carbon is very high in Australia, producers can shift production offshore to somewhere like Indonesia or New Zealand which is allowed to omit more carbon under international agreements because it already has lower per capita emissions.

The best way to deal with climate change is to create a society that is a rich and prosperous as possible. The wealthier we are, the better equipped we will be to deal with the adverse effects of climate change.

So no, of course just us introducing an ETS in Australia won't stop it, I never said that. But it's a beginning that needs to be made. The rest of the world are gonna start doing things, are we supposed to just sit here and let them do all the heavy lifting.

It doesn't matter what most of the world does; over 40% of the world's carbon emissions are produced by China and the United States. Without these countries seriously on board, international action will not work.

 

[redmayne]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

Maybe international cooperation is the best possible solution. Maybe.

But we also have to ask if it is a realistic solution. Can we really expect China and India, where hundreds of millions still live in poverty, to reduce emissions when their per capita emissions are still way below our own?

Can we expect any countries not to simply do what they do all the time and cheat on their international agreements or outright ignore them?

It is foolish to put faith in governments to solve any problem. History shows us that governments are inevitably corrupted by powerful interests, there is no reason that this will be an exception and we are already seeing this happen right now, with huge concessions being given to the biggest polluters.

These major polluters will simply bribe government officials, and hide their emissions, the only real losers will be the poor and middle class.

There's also the problem of "exporting" emissions. For instance, if the price of carbon is very high in Australia, producers can shift production offshore to somewhere like Indonesia or New Zealand which is allowed to omit more carbon under international agreements because it already has lower per capita emissions.

The best way to deal with climate change is to create a society that is a rich and prosperous as possible. The wealthier we are, the better equipped we will be to deal with the adverse effects of climate change.



It doesn't matter what most of the world does; over 40% of the world's carbon emissions are produced by China and the United States. Without these countries seriously on board, international action will not work.

Congratulations. What a constructive and realistic attitude.

The only alternative to making an effort now, is not making an effort.

So we have to do what we can, with the governments of Australia and the world (who will all be here for foreseeable future, whether you like it or not.)

The only thing that wealth has done for Western society is make us the worst per capita polluters (see Australians). Sure we're equipped to deal with it, but does anyone want to part with their precious goddamn money? No, it's sickening.

People aren't gonna volunteer their money for the world of their own volition. So the government needs to do it for them.

Well the US is getting on board better than most, so there's a fair chunk. If the rest of the world plus the US catches on, China's polluting ways will definitely be in the minority.

 

[loquasagacious]

Re: Strong and effective climate change policy, that doesn't involve a great, big new

People aren't gonna volunteer their money for the world of their own volition. So the government needs to do it for them.

Hint: people elect governments.

Well the US is getting on board better than most, so there's a fair chunk. If the rest of the world plus the US catches on, China's polluting ways will definitely be in the minority.

And China will be the winner. Everyone else saves the world from climate change while China profits from pollution.