CARBON TAX-It's Started!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: gold coast QLD australia
Age: 86
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
None of them have a friggin clue, they are all guessing, all of them. They told us way back in 2002 that by 2010 most of the south east coast of Australia would be threatened, anybody seen Kirra beach lately, you need a packed lunch and a camel to get across it to the water, now they say 2016, I call it moving the goal posts for political reasons. When you have lived as long as I have you realise that money and power is what drives most, I have no reason what so ever to doubt that is behind all this crap as well.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by teresa green
They told us way back in 2002 that by 2010 most of the south east coast of Australia would be threatened
I've followed this debate on the science side for many years and never, ever heard of that. It's certainly extremely improbable that a genuine mainstream climate scientist would've talked about "most of the east coast" being threatened within a period of 8 years or less because such a prediction would be ridiculous to make in the first place. However this is one of many topics for which the number of urban myths peddled around the web is quite astonishing.
they are all guessing, all of them
When you have lived as long as I have...
.....money and power is what drives most, I have no reason what so ever to doubt that is behind all this crap as well.
Let's start with all medical research. Is that all just "crap" driven by "money and power"? Because I can tell you for a fact that a large proportion of medical research is either funded by drug companies, or wholly carried out in drug company research labs, with most of the rest funded by Government, and a smattering funded by private fundraising. How much of it, exactly, are you prepared to categorically state is "crap" using the vast expertise (Medicine, I presume, is one of many of them) you've gained whilst getting older?
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fertilizer tax
Carbon Tax is a complete crock of ****. The idea was raised in a discussion paper by Robert S McNamara in the 60's. The rationale behind the carbon tax concept was born along with numerous other methods of how a government could:
a) Bleed more money out of it's people without causing anarchy or having the people fight back and
b) How to fictitiously create a scare tactic that would scare the people into submission and doing whatever the government ask. Well the environment is one of those scare tactics - save the world today or your kids won't have a world to live in!!
Ok, to be upfront and honest, we are completely fu#king this planet, no doubt, but is a carbon tax the answer, is paying the government more money (and to date they have not proven to be a reliable or competent custodian of that money) the answer? Not likely, I mean the government is the one who has brought us CASA and the ATO, so what makes us believe the environment will be managed properly? We can reduce our carbon footprint all we want, but a nation if 22 million is merely a pimple on Rosanne Barr's ass in comparison to places like the USA (they are too scared to even tax their citizens the correct amount let alone introduce a new tax), then you have China, India, Indonesia - Yeah, they could really give a flying fu#k about pollution, then don't forget the worlds atomic waste, oil rigs pissing oil into the ocean, pesticides, corporate greed, corruption and the list goes on.... And you really thinking little old Australia sitting down at the arse end of the planet with a handful of residents being lead by 'a Welsh carrot top who walks like a man and talks like she has just smoked three cones' will make a difference by paying another tax???
Christ, people are naive.
a) Bleed more money out of it's people without causing anarchy or having the people fight back and
b) How to fictitiously create a scare tactic that would scare the people into submission and doing whatever the government ask. Well the environment is one of those scare tactics - save the world today or your kids won't have a world to live in!!
Ok, to be upfront and honest, we are completely fu#king this planet, no doubt, but is a carbon tax the answer, is paying the government more money (and to date they have not proven to be a reliable or competent custodian of that money) the answer? Not likely, I mean the government is the one who has brought us CASA and the ATO, so what makes us believe the environment will be managed properly? We can reduce our carbon footprint all we want, but a nation if 22 million is merely a pimple on Rosanne Barr's ass in comparison to places like the USA (they are too scared to even tax their citizens the correct amount let alone introduce a new tax), then you have China, India, Indonesia - Yeah, they could really give a flying fu#k about pollution, then don't forget the worlds atomic waste, oil rigs pissing oil into the ocean, pesticides, corporate greed, corruption and the list goes on.... And you really thinking little old Australia sitting down at the arse end of the planet with a handful of residents being lead by 'a Welsh carrot top who walks like a man and talks like she has just smoked three cones' will make a difference by paying another tax???
Christ, people are naive.
Last edited by gobbledock; 20th Nov 2011 at 21:54.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: gold coast QLD australia
Age: 86
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dutch Roll, my old man was a Physicist, he was a Astrologer, he spent most of his life looking up the arse end of a telescope, he took us kids to look up the arse ends of telescopes as often as he could, he was a Professor of Physics at the Uni of Sydney, and he often told me all his fellow scientists were nuts. He used to say they could not agree on a cup of coffee, much less a solution. Now I can see he was right. Absolutely pointless in telling me what some Scientist said, especially some goose like Flannery (who has just built a waterfront home). I spent most of my junior years when not in boarding school, listening to him and his mates arguing about power stations, using chemicals in medical treatment, Uranium (for and against) nuclear power, and the rest, yes even the evolution of the world, and if he was here now, he would say it was crap, he would agree the world was changing, he would agree that man probably adds to the change, but he would say Gillard and her tax, will do sweet bugger all.(He hated pollies except Menzies). There lies the crux of the problem, we cannot do it alone, and most show no interest in following, most are trying to keep their countries from going belly up, and this dill of a woman is off to save the world, at the expense of the population of which so many are already struggling.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: gold coast QLD australia
Age: 86
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You got me there Flying Fox excuse my mix up, my only excuse was a earlier conversation with my wife who firmly believes in the "Stars". My old man would be horrified. He was a Astronomer. The rest I stand behind.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Mydadsbag
Posts: 1,113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gobbledock, you are making way too much sense!!!!
Better be careful, some peace loving, whale kissing moon maiden will have you silenced.
It's the green way you see.
If a righty is gay, he/she keeps to himself and goes about life.
If a lefty is gay, he/she pushes to have laws changed and the world altered to suit him by way of public protest and rock hurling.
If a righty is against fur clothes, they don't buy furs.
If a lefty is against fur, they push for law change, protest in public and smear bloody images in our faces.
If a righty cares for the environment, he/she does their bit at home and at work to make a small difference.
If a lefty cares for the environment.... Well how many jobs are there in The great Australian conservatory (tassie) these days?
Bbbbbbbbzzzzzzbbbb
Better be careful, some peace loving, whale kissing moon maiden will have you silenced.
It's the green way you see.
If a righty is gay, he/she keeps to himself and goes about life.
If a lefty is gay, he/she pushes to have laws changed and the world altered to suit him by way of public protest and rock hurling.
If a righty is against fur clothes, they don't buy furs.
If a lefty is against fur, they push for law change, protest in public and smear bloody images in our faces.
If a righty cares for the environment, he/she does their bit at home and at work to make a small difference.
If a lefty cares for the environment.... Well how many jobs are there in The great Australian conservatory (tassie) these days?
Bbbbbbbbzzzzzzbbbb
Last edited by Mr.Buzzy; 20th Nov 2011 at 22:01.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: on the edge
Posts: 823
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The idea was raised in a discussion paper by Robert S McNamara in the 60's.
doctrine of cold war era. He was Sec for Defense 61-68?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blackhand, take a look at this official extract from "The Creature From Jekyll Island" by G.Edward Griffin discussing the Report From Iron Mountain, commissoned by McNamara in the 60's, draw your own conclusions.
THE REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN This is taken from Chapter 24 of The Creature from Jekyll Island © 2002 by G. Edward Griffin
THE REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN This is taken from Chapter 24 of The Creature from Jekyll Island © 2002 by G. Edward Griffin
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If a righty is gay, he/she keeps to himself and goes about life.
If a lefty is gay, he/she pushes to have laws changed and the world altered to suit him by way of public protest and rock hurling.
If a righty is against fur clothes, they don't buy furs.
If a lefty is against fur, they push for law change, protest in public and smear bloody images in our faces.
If a righty cares for the environment, he/she does their bit at home and at work to make a small difference.
If a lefty cares for the environment.... Well how many jobs are there in The great Australian conservatory (tassie) these days?
If a lefty is gay, he/she pushes to have laws changed and the world altered to suit him by way of public protest and rock hurling.
If a righty is against fur clothes, they don't buy furs.
If a lefty is against fur, they push for law change, protest in public and smear bloody images in our faces.
If a righty cares for the environment, he/she does their bit at home and at work to make a small difference.
If a lefty cares for the environment.... Well how many jobs are there in The great Australian conservatory (tassie) these days?
If a lefty cares for the environment, he/she votes a tax in to make everyone pay.
Seasonally Adjusted
And you really thinking little old Australia sitting down at the arse end of the planet with a handful of residents being lead by 'a Welsh carrot top who walks like a man and talks like she has just smoked three cones' will make a difference by paying another tax???
Why then do the Coalition persist with their Direct Action Plan? They say it will reduce CO2 emissions by 5 per cent by 2020, based on 1990 levels.
Why bother if it won't 'make a difference'?
Direct Action will cost taxpayers $11 billion a year and effectively pay industry to pollute less.
Oh dear.
Have you heard of the Log Cabin Republicans, an activist/advocacy group for gay rights within the Republican party? Theyre certainly not the only right-leaning group interested in equal rights for individuals regardless of their sexual orientation, but they are one of the best known, and were involved in a US Federal Court lawsuit aimed at repealing the "Dont Ask, Dont Tell" policy in the US military. If you called them "lefties" they may well exercise their individual freedoms and rights to bear firearms in your general direction 
!
Extremists of both sides of politics protest in obnoxious fashions and smear bloody images in our faces, this is most obvious whenever you walk past an abortion clinic - regardless of the fact you're simply walking past an anonymous building in a major city as part of your daily commute you can see graphic, bloodstained imagery. If you're lucky theyll even do letterbox drops for the local kids to find when they check the mailbox. Again, these people certainly dont vote Greens/Labour!
The answers you seek are here:Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations , in summary the Taswegian unemployment rate is 4.7%, which is less than Victoria, Queensland, New South Wales and South Australia, but more than Canberra, WA and the NT. It is lower also than the Australian average of 5.2%.
Aaaanyway, dragging this kicking and screaming back onto topic, any idea might be a good one or a bad one but simply ignoring it with fingers crammed firmly into ears because it comes from a different side of politics or from a scientist is foolish and short-sighted. Tony Abbott initially supported a carbon tax as a market-led way to provide an incentive to less polluting business processes, while Julia Gillard said that there wouldnt be a carbon tax. When Julia Gillard said she would introduce a carbon tax, Tony Abbott then said it was a bad idea and he'd repeal it at the first opportunity. I think this highlights the poor standard of politicians that we have rather than any inherent merit or otherwise of the carbon tax.
If a righty is gay, he/she keeps to himself and goes about life.
If a lefty is gay, he/she pushes to have laws changed and the world altered to suit him by way of public protest and rock hurling.
If a lefty is gay, he/she pushes to have laws changed and the world altered to suit him by way of public protest and rock hurling.
!
If a righty is against fur clothes, they don't buy furs.
If a lefty is against fur, they push for law change, protest in public and smear bloody images in our faces.
If a lefty is against fur, they push for law change, protest in public and smear bloody images in our faces.
If a righty cares for the environment, he/she does their bit at home and at work to make a small difference.
If a lefty cares for the environment.... Well how many jobs are there in The great Australian conservatory (tassie) these days?
If a lefty cares for the environment.... Well how many jobs are there in The great Australian conservatory (tassie) these days?
Aaaanyway, dragging this kicking and screaming back onto topic, any idea might be a good one or a bad one but simply ignoring it with fingers crammed firmly into ears because it comes from a different side of politics or from a scientist is foolish and short-sighted. Tony Abbott initially supported a carbon tax as a market-led way to provide an incentive to less polluting business processes, while Julia Gillard said that there wouldnt be a carbon tax. When Julia Gillard said she would introduce a carbon tax, Tony Abbott then said it was a bad idea and he'd repeal it at the first opportunity. I think this highlights the poor standard of politicians that we have rather than any inherent merit or otherwise of the carbon tax.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The thing that gets me worked up most about this tax is.
I like my way of life. I like having my aircon on when I'm hot and I like switching lights on at home to see. I love driving my car when I go somewhere.
If you think that Global Warming is a real threat then don't do all the things I do. Make an example of yourself. Ride a push bike, get the electricity disconnected from your house, plant some trees. Thats all free to do and there is no arguing that you will make a difference.
But don't go sit on the fence and say "Oh I support a carbon tax because it will save the world" while your still driving your car to work and flying aircraft that burn tons of fuel. Sitting at home typing "I support the carbon tax" on a computer most likey running on coal power.
I don't push my way of life onto anyone......yet I'm going to have other peoples way of life pushed onto me in the form of a tax.
I like my way of life. I like having my aircon on when I'm hot and I like switching lights on at home to see. I love driving my car when I go somewhere.
If you think that Global Warming is a real threat then don't do all the things I do. Make an example of yourself. Ride a push bike, get the electricity disconnected from your house, plant some trees. Thats all free to do and there is no arguing that you will make a difference.
But don't go sit on the fence and say "Oh I support a carbon tax because it will save the world" while your still driving your car to work and flying aircraft that burn tons of fuel. Sitting at home typing "I support the carbon tax" on a computer most likey running on coal power.
I don't push my way of life onto anyone......yet I'm going to have other peoples way of life pushed onto me in the form of a tax.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this the same Robert S McNamara that devised the "Mutual Assured Destruction" doctrine of cold war era. He was Sec for Defense 61-68?
But I will answer your question so that you can arm yourself with a decent retort - Yes, it is the same McNamara. A brilliant strategist with a brilliant mind, but like all intelligent men he reflected later in life on some of his actions, ideas, strategies and concepts, The Fog Of War is a DVD worthy of viewing.
Towering Q, thanks for the 'bogan compliment'. Obviously you don't approve of my speach, nonetheless I say things the way I see it, whether people like it or not I don't tailor my speach, thoughts or beliefs to suit the desires or acceptability of others. But that apllies in reverse, and I am equally accepting of others viewpoints regardless of how they express it.
Why then do the Coalition persist with their Direct Action Plan? They say it will reduce CO2 emissions by 5 per cent by 2020, based on 1990 levels.Why bother if it won't 'make a difference'?
their snouts in the trough.
Direct Action will cost taxpayers $11 billion a year and effectively pay industry to pollute less
Last edited by gobbledock; 21st Nov 2011 at 00:42.
The 'elephant in the room' is population. Why should I be pressured to live like a Bangladeshi and hand over my 'hard earned', while other cultures and religions encourage producing more polluters and consumers?
Instead, of this meaningless carbon w-ank, Australia should be:
Actively encouraging and subsidising birth control and education as the only form of its overseas aid
Reviewing its immigration policy with regard to the number of humans that our continent can sustain
Pursuing the idea that those who oppose birth control, small families and education for all are committing a crime against humanity
In the world's most geologically and politically stable continent that has about 1/3 of the world's uranium, pursuing and promoting the use of nuclear power for its own people.
But I suppose the likelihood of all this happening would be about the same as Julia Dillard speaking like the Queen...
Instead, of this meaningless carbon w-ank, Australia should be:
Actively encouraging and subsidising birth control and education as the only form of its overseas aid
Reviewing its immigration policy with regard to the number of humans that our continent can sustain
Pursuing the idea that those who oppose birth control, small families and education for all are committing a crime against humanity
In the world's most geologically and politically stable continent that has about 1/3 of the world's uranium, pursuing and promoting the use of nuclear power for its own people.
But I suppose the likelihood of all this happening would be about the same as Julia Dillard speaking like the Queen...
I like my way of life too. I'd like to have lights on around the house, I drive to work and I really enjoy flying a plane that does burn quite a lot of fuel. I even enjoy discussing things online on my electrically powered computer, and noone is going to stop anyone doing any of those things. If you want to drag-race V8s you'll be free to, and I'll watch it on my tv. Your costs may go up a few dollars a week to reflect the fact that you are using finite natural resources and producing carbon dioxide in doing these things, but the carbon tax cost is insignificant relative to the other costs, paying 2 or 3 dollars on a $100 cheap air ticket is a lot less than the other costs involved - $3 wont buy you a coffee, and purchases maybe 9 minutes of parking at the short-term carpark when you get dropped off.
The News Limited press are serial offenders claiming "we'll all be rooooned" by a carbon tax, they recently had an article which described the hardship a family was facing. The family in question was a single-income family making ~$150,000 per year, with 3 kids and a stay-at-home mum, and talked about how hard it was paying a mortgage on a big house in a nice area in Sydney. The article was complete with a photo of the family, sitting in their luxurious open-plan house on a nice leather couch and talking about how the government wasnt providing enough compensation to struggling families such as themselves. It appears to have disappeared from the website after people asked questions about the 4 high-end tv/audio and Foxtel remotes visible on the couch next to the cute little kids, and whether the projected cost of around $700 per year (or looking at it differently, $13.46 a week) worst case scenario, would cause such hardship to people who were already paying well above that for their pay-tv subscription alone and still complaining about the lack of government welfare support.
The News Limited press are serial offenders claiming "we'll all be rooooned" by a carbon tax, they recently had an article which described the hardship a family was facing. The family in question was a single-income family making ~$150,000 per year, with 3 kids and a stay-at-home mum, and talked about how hard it was paying a mortgage on a big house in a nice area in Sydney. The article was complete with a photo of the family, sitting in their luxurious open-plan house on a nice leather couch and talking about how the government wasnt providing enough compensation to struggling families such as themselves. It appears to have disappeared from the website after people asked questions about the 4 high-end tv/audio and Foxtel remotes visible on the couch next to the cute little kids, and whether the projected cost of around $700 per year (or looking at it differently, $13.46 a week) worst case scenario, would cause such hardship to people who were already paying well above that for their pay-tv subscription alone and still complaining about the lack of government welfare support.