-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Australia's carbon (dioxide) tax
- Thread starter Hallo Alfie
- Start date
Hallo Alfie
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2009
- Messages
- 10,691
Only time will tell the full depth and breadth.
What we do know is that the tax will have some impact on the economy, on jobs, and on business and household costs - that is what it is designed to do.
We also know that it will do four parts of stuff all in saving the climate.
What we do know is that the tax will have some impact on the economy, on jobs, and on business and household costs - that is what it is designed to do.
We also know that it will do four parts of stuff all in saving the climate.
Hang on a minute Alfie.
You have not answered your "We were warned' alarm, as though it has had an impact beyond what was predicted.
Are you going to run away from your alarmist talk?
Hallo Alfie
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2009
- Messages
- 10,691
Two things.
I just did answer.
Why would you think I was speaking on "an impact beyond what was predicted"?
You appear to be agreeing with my point about the warnings, and at the same time trying to take my comments beyond the words used.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
It is actually designed to lower the cost of renewable energy. The cost of solar is already plummeting, so that it is now cheaper to buy solar without a rebate than it was to buy it with a rebate just a few years ago.
If you are concerned about rising costs to business, you would be far more useful directing your energy to controlling the rising costs of power infrastructure and generation. Those costs have risen far more than the carbon price, and in a way that is directly attributable to deceptive pricing by business and state governments.
uvar
Critical Thinker
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-09/abbott-says-electricity-price-rise-reason-a-furphy/4187906
...Mr Abbott said it was a fabrication for the Prime Minister to suggest power prices are rising because the states are over-investing in power infrastructure.
He says the carbon tax is to blame for rising electricity costs.
But Opposition energy spokesman Ian Macfarlane has admitted state government spending on the poles and wires of electricity networks has pushed power prices higher.
And the former opposition leader, frontbencher Malcolm Turnbull, agrees with that position.
"There is no doubt the bulk of the reason for the 50 per cent, or thereabouts, increase in electricity prices for example in New South Wales over the last few years has been because of investments in poles and wires basically in the transmission and distribution networks," he said.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...bout-electricity/story-e6frgd0x-1226446264715
...In Australia, $11 billion of infrastructure has been built to meet seasonal peaks in demand.
In South Australia, for example, 20 per cent of network capacity is needed for the equivalent of 23 hours a year...
Strange, Alfie, this kind of thing has been responsible for much larger price rises than the carbon price will but despite your interest in avoiding
...Mr Abbott said it was a fabrication for the Prime Minister to suggest power prices are rising because the states are over-investing in power infrastructure.
He says the carbon tax is to blame for rising electricity costs.
But Opposition energy spokesman Ian Macfarlane has admitted state government spending on the poles and wires of electricity networks has pushed power prices higher.
And the former opposition leader, frontbencher Malcolm Turnbull, agrees with that position.
"There is no doubt the bulk of the reason for the 50 per cent, or thereabouts, increase in electricity prices for example in New South Wales over the last few years has been because of investments in poles and wires basically in the transmission and distribution networks," he said.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...bout-electricity/story-e6frgd0x-1226446264715
...In Australia, $11 billion of infrastructure has been built to meet seasonal peaks in demand.
In South Australia, for example, 20 per cent of network capacity is needed for the equivalent of 23 hours a year...
Strange, Alfie, this kind of thing has been responsible for much larger price rises than the carbon price will but despite your interest in avoiding
you don't seem to have mentioned it. (And yes, I have selectively quoted, especially in that second article. Enjoy!)
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
Yes, his own front bench is calling him a liar, because he is. Facts cannot be allowed to stand in the way of his narrative. If the truth gets out, then people won't vote for him.
In Victoria, the privatised SPAustnet is deliberately building infrastructure, including new office buildings, for much more than they need to cost because it is guaranteed a rate of return on what it spends.
Last edited:
Hallo Alfie
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2009
- Messages
- 10,691
So people's bills are getting smaller are they?
Evidence that solar prices are "plummeting" please.
I'm not arguing that at all. The split is roughly 50/50, no?
Last edited:
bit_pattern
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
- Messages
- 7,406
uvar
Critical Thinker
No - even ignoring that most households will be compensated for the carbon price rise - although it varies from state to state and e.g. in NSW it is close to 50/50 (first article I found, perhaps out of date).
But that's only if you look at the most recent price rise (obviously the only one the carbon price is part of). Its share is small compared to the typical rises over the last few years:
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
One partial reason for the massive hike in infrastructure costs was the need to make the country power lines safer, since they were responsible for the most deadly fire on Black Saturday. One of the reasons that the fires were so deadly was because of global warming, it helped make the temperatures that much hotter, it helped make the drought that much worse.
You answered nothing.
Where is your evidence that the carbon tax has had an impact beyond what was predicted?
Hallo Alfie
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2009
- Messages
- 10,691
Evidence please.
Rubbish. The reasons that the fires were "so bad" were a combination of things ranging from bad luck, poor management by councils (no burning off due to stupid green schemes), dense suburban living in country locations among others.
Am I understanding you correctly. The job losses above were predicted? Where and when?
I may not be paying enough attention.
But what job losses?
Hallo Alfie
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2009
- Messages
- 10,691
You're kidding!? Please review this current discussion and how it commenced.
Well given the unemployment rate, steady at 5% nationally and below in some states, a very good question.
Can you please supply me with the evidence that job losses are above what was predicted, and it is due to the carbon tax.
Very simple, you either have the evidence or have nothing.
Hallo Alfie
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2009
- Messages
- 10,691
Please review the discussion and come back to me when you have caught up. We seem to be at cross purposes and you are asking questions based on things not said nor claimed.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
For someone who claims to be full of information, you know how to play dumb whenever it suits you, then you claim there is no evidence. I read the news sites, I keep up with what they say about black saturday, I know what the recommendations of the royal commission were. Google it ffs. ger off your ** for a change when it doesn't suit you. I predict you will now report this post, get it sent to AAH, and claim there is no evidence when there is a whole royal commissions worth.
Last edited:
I said
Yes, you are right you did not say that.
The whole crux of my dissagreement was your "we were warned".
Your link for that was very general and did not back up your "we were warned" quote.
We are not getting anywhere with this, best left without you answering my original question.