I'll give you the tip... if these business leaders were going to make money by using windmills rather than coal they'd be doing it without encouragement from a carbon tax.
Julia - How much longer? (Part III)
- Thread starter dr nick
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I'll give you the tip... if these business leaders were going to make money by using windmills rather than coal they'd be doing it without encouragement from a carbon tax.
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
Especially when they realise things like this
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ing-new-tax-work/story-e6frg6z6-1226095571092
the carbon price will rise 5 per cent above inflation every year after, according to Treasury modelling
By 2020, Australia's domestic emissions actually would grow from 578 million tonnes last year to 621 million tonnes. "Australia's domestic emissions increase around 10 per cent from 2010 to the late 2020s," Treasury says. By 2050, we will rely on foreign permits for about half our abatement.
Especially when they realise things like this
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ing-new-tax-work/story-e6frg6z6-1226095571092
the carbon price will rise 5 per cent above inflation every year after, according to Treasury modelling
By 2020, Australia's domestic emissions actually would grow from 578 million tonnes last year to 621 million tonnes. "Australia's domestic emissions increase around 10 per cent from 2010 to the late 2020s," Treasury says. By 2050, we will rely on foreign permits for about half our abatement.
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
Neil Mitchell has a good piece in today's Herald-Sun about the general pathology engulfing the Labor Party. Joolya's pathological lying and dishonesty has now cast her in the lead role of "V-I-C-T-I-M"
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion...-popularity-woes/story-e6frfhqf-1226097177246
IF Julia Gillard was any less popular she'd rival typhoid.
Any less credible and she'd be on par with those blokes whose long-dead uncles tip the winner of the Melbourne Cup each year.
But she still has her cheer squad and it is crafting a new defence: sexism.
This is creeping into the commentary and dribbling from the mouths of political sycophants. But it shouldn't be allowed to spread unchallenged
Neil Mitchell has a good piece in today's Herald-Sun about the general pathology engulfing the Labor Party. Joolya's pathological lying and dishonesty has now cast her in the lead role of "V-I-C-T-I-M"
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion...-popularity-woes/story-e6frfhqf-1226097177246
IF Julia Gillard was any less popular she'd rival typhoid.
Any less credible and she'd be on par with those blokes whose long-dead uncles tip the winner of the Melbourne Cup each year.
But she still has her cheer squad and it is crafting a new defence: sexism.
This is creeping into the commentary and dribbling from the mouths of political sycophants. But it shouldn't be allowed to spread unchallenged
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
Well tazzie would be with 75% of the rest of us and growing
Gillard has managed to alienate 40% of the rusted on base of the alp
Well tazzie would be with 75% of the rest of us and growing
Gillard has managed to alienate 40% of the rusted on base of the alp
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
It would be dishonest if the inference as you state it could properly be drawn. The broader inference you draw does not follow from the ad. It is appropriate for the ad to make the claim that other countries are taking action on climate change. That is true, they are. The ad says no more. These other countries are just not doing it in the constructive, efficient, economy-renewing way we are. More fool them.
It would be dishonest if the inference as you state it could properly be drawn. The broader inference you draw does not follow from the ad. It is appropriate for the ad to make the claim that other countries are taking action on climate change. That is true, they are. The ad says no more. These other countries are just not doing it in the constructive, efficient, economy-renewing way we are. More fool them.
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
So where did I hear these themes: "plenty of job losses", "real wage cuts", "huge numbers with a big tax increase"? Oh yes, Tony Abbott and the local shock jocks. Is this the source of your disinformation? There is no credible economic evidence that there will be any significant net job losses. Whilst GDP continues to climb (as it is forecast to) the only way there will be "real wage cuts" is if a Government implements "industrial reform" that distributes wealth less evenly. And "huge" numbers with a "big" tax increase. Give me a break, who are you trying to kid? Try telling us what that "big" tax increase is that will hit "huge" numbers of people before burrowing down to eat your next meal of disinformation you are so happy to impart.
These hysterical lies emphasise the lack of credibility (scientific and economic) in the anti-carbon tax position. And the inherent dishonesty of the alternative "direct action" policy.
So where did I hear these themes: "plenty of job losses", "real wage cuts", "huge numbers with a big tax increase"? Oh yes, Tony Abbott and the local shock jocks. Is this the source of your disinformation? There is no credible economic evidence that there will be any significant net job losses. Whilst GDP continues to climb (as it is forecast to) the only way there will be "real wage cuts" is if a Government implements "industrial reform" that distributes wealth less evenly. And "huge" numbers with a "big" tax increase. Give me a break, who are you trying to kid? Try telling us what that "big" tax increase is that will hit "huge" numbers of people before burrowing down to eat your next meal of disinformation you are so happy to impart.
These hysterical lies emphasise the lack of credibility (scientific and economic) in the anti-carbon tax position. And the inherent dishonesty of the alternative "direct action" policy.
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
It might be misleading to those like you who don't give a toss no matter what but to those who have an open mind perhaps it might enlighten them.
It might be misleading to those like you who don't give a toss no matter what but to those who have an open mind perhaps it might enlighten them.
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
Kill the witch and ditch the bitch is sexist ?
Could be a male witch/bitch I suppose
Kill the witch and ditch the bitch is sexist ?
Could be a male witch/bitch I suppose
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
It's misleading to those with even half a brain, what ever their opinion.
And BTW, isn't this another Rudd/Gillard broken promise re political advertising?
It's misleading to those with even half a brain, what ever their opinion.
And BTW, isn't this another Rudd/Gillard broken promise re political advertising?
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
There is nothing enlightening in that add. It insinuates that Australia is catching up with the likes of China, and that we are going nuts using sustainable energy.
There is nothing enlightening in that add. It insinuates that Australia is catching up with the likes of China, and that we are going nuts using sustainable energy.
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
Hi
This is my first time on the politics board, because usually I don't care too much about politics. However I have become interested in this carbon debate, and so I've read quite a bit of the thread. To sum up the debate, it seems to go like this:
For: Reasoned point about action on climate change
Against: Liberal party slogan, liberal party slogan
For: Discussion, and quotation of facts about climate change and the action we're taking
Against: Emotive language, hahaing about polls, liberal party slogan
Is this how it always goes?
Hi
This is my first time on the politics board, because usually I don't care too much about politics. However I have become interested in this carbon debate, and so I've read quite a bit of the thread. To sum up the debate, it seems to go like this:
For: Reasoned point about action on climate change
Against: Liberal party slogan, liberal party slogan
For: Discussion, and quotation of facts about climate change and the action we're taking
Against: Emotive language, hahaing about polls, liberal party slogan
Is this how it always goes?
tazzietiger
Premiership Player
- Sep 10, 2010
- 4,808
- 508
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
I believe people are against it because they are already feeling the pressures of cost of living and don't want it to rise. But if you rather just blame everyone for being a simpleton and deciding there vote and opinions based on slogans than that's okay.
I believe people are against it because they are already feeling the pressures of cost of living and don't want it to rise. But if you rather just blame everyone for being a simpleton and deciding there vote and opinions based on slogans than that's okay.
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
Yes, to ALP fanbois.
But tell us what effect the carbon tax will have on the world's carbon emissions?
Yes, to ALP fanbois.
But tell us what effect the carbon tax will have on the world's carbon emissions?
evo
Let's hit the f*ken road!
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
geeze, remember all the bleating by ALP acolytes during the workchoices advertising campaign? The silence is deafening now.
yep.
geeze, remember all the bleating by ALP acolytes during the workchoices advertising campaign? The silence is deafening now.
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
Talking of dams. The inclusion of footage of a dam in the ads is misleading and dishonest. Labor/Green policy is not build dams.
http://greens.org.au/policies/environment/water-inland-aquatic-environments
Talking of dams. The inclusion of footage of a dam in the ads is misleading and dishonest. Labor/Green policy is not build dams.
http://greens.org.au/policies/environment/water-inland-aquatic-environments
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
Yeah they had to have something to convince people there was such a thing as sustainable energy , even when its not windy.
Due to the Snowy Scheme, I'm pretty sure Australia's highest proportion of sustainable energy would have been around 1970.
As far as jobs go, I find it pretty amazing that Mortlake Power Station ( Capacity of 550 MW ) will have around 10 full time employee's ( its like a big aeroplane engine ), while Hazelwood has around 500 employee's for its 1400 MW, and there are probably more invovled in the coal mine.
The thing I find amazing is that Hazelwood can still be viable with this level of manning. Coal must be ****ing cheap.
Yeah they had to have something to convince people there was such a thing as sustainable energy , even when its not windy.
Due to the Snowy Scheme, I'm pretty sure Australia's highest proportion of sustainable energy would have been around 1970.
As far as jobs go, I find it pretty amazing that Mortlake Power Station ( Capacity of 550 MW ) will have around 10 full time employee's ( its like a big aeroplane engine ), while Hazelwood has around 500 employee's for its 1400 MW, and there are probably more invovled in the coal mine.
The thing I find amazing is that Hazelwood can still be viable with this level of manning. Coal must be ****ing cheap.
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
True, but 2 years is a long time in politics. And it is a long time to keep chanting "Bad tax, we need an election."
Hard to see at the moment, but the polls could be quite different by this time next year.
True, but 2 years is a long time in politics. And it is a long time to keep chanting "Bad tax, we need an election."
Hard to see at the moment, but the polls could be quite different by this time next year.
telsor
Hall of Famer
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
So, the ads are aimed at people based on how they're likely to vote..
Doesn't that pretty much define them as purely political advertising?
So, the ads are aimed at people based on how they're likely to vote..
Doesn't that pretty much define them as purely political advertising?
tazzietiger
Premiership Player
- Sep 10, 2010
- 4,808
- 508
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
It might fade out abit. But come election time Gillard is going to have a hard time explaining the difference between inflation and her carbon tax on prices. While Tony can just sit back and keep pointing to the cost of food and goods.
It might fade out abit. But come election time Gillard is going to have a hard time explaining the difference between inflation and her carbon tax on prices. While Tony can just sit back and keep pointing to the cost of food and goods.
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
Humbug, just a non-core promise.
Anyway mate concerning man made climate change i have come to the conclusion that you are a lost cause & even if you was standing on top of Uluru with sea water lapping at your feet you would still say "this is not happening it's just crap"
Humbug, just a non-core promise.
Anyway mate concerning man made climate change i have come to the conclusion that you are a lost cause & even if you was standing on top of Uluru with sea water lapping at your feet you would still say "this is not happening it's just crap"
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
True. But they are advertising a policy that breaks a core promise.
True. But they are advertising a policy that breaks a core promise.
Re: Julia - how much longer? (Part II)
So why do you support a tax that will do absolutely nothing to stop this happening
So why do you support a tax that will do absolutely nothing to stop this happening
Similar threads
