Peter Peter Peter,
as you are an educated man, I am surprised at the purphy you just threw onto the table. I'm starting to think your intellect is begining to overheat a little.
You just attempted to turn a scientific debate into a political one. But I'll take a chomp.
Economy.
We both know that the effects of a previous governments policies/budgeting will carry over into the term of the next government. Good or bad. It sometimes takes several years to play out to the result, unless a government puts in seriously flawed policies.
Trade as an example. When lil jonnie howler got dumped, we had a trade deficet that was diminishing, and became a growing surplus whilst under krudds rule.
Several months ago, that flatlined. And now for the 5th month in a row we have recorded a deficit. Why? come on, you are the educated one, i'm just a dumb year 11 drop out trying to get a better understanding.
Can we blame the high dollar? I don't think so, because when the dollar was 1.05, the trade surplus was still growing.
In your view as an economist, what has caused that turn around?
Jobless rate.
In this country, this is the most falsified piece of data you will ever see!!! And as an economist, you should know that!
Static unemplyment
One of the first things the Gillard government did, was to lower the parameters that dictated if you were employed/unemployed. Now if you work more than 18 hours a week, you are deemed employed, but most likley qualify for part dole. Listing yourself as part time, also removes you from the unemployed numbers if you do more then 9 hours work.
The biggest changer, which was driven under Keating's reign, moved volunteer workers from the unemployed lists to the employed ones. Despite the lack of proper pay.
Dynamic unemployment.
One of the twists the government uses to play the numbers game, is to have 'training courses' set up for the long term unemployed. They enrol them into the courses just before the reporting period. These people are no longer unemployed as they now on TRAINING, and therefore deemed a student. (unemployable)
Hmmm
nice side step there buddy. This guvmint has screwed us for a long time. And I don't have much hope of yabbot repealing it. I only hope at least he comes up with some decent ways to use the dollars.
There are so many other ways the guvmint could have extracted the dollars to fund pollution reduction measures.
The irony is, that my business generates some pretty nasty waste. I, being environmentally aware, ensure that said waste is disposed of by the proper means of the day. That costs money, money I try to pass onto the consumer. The problem is, the more educated the consumer is, the more they object to the charge.
I'd place you in that group in an instant Peter.
You realise, when I do an oil change on your car, every litre of oil I extract and send away for recycling/proper disposal, costs almost as much as each new litre i put in your car. I cannot even add a processing surcharge equalling my trade discount on your new oil, else it would cost more to send each litre away than it would to on sell you a new litre.
This tax, just means the govmints of the world found a way to tax us for air. I am anti conspiracy theory..but not on the carbon tax