john howard has been in denial about global warning for ever,
but just the last few mounths ago has seen the light,
the right wing hard press was as recently as then also firmly ridiculing cobal warning ,yet now remains conspiciously silent.
the enviornmental expert scientists declaring the warning for over 20 years have suffered ridicule and cencure ,been hounded by the big money rebutals ,of other scientists ,forced to study and name ,relable changes clearly known.
when now the credentials despoiled they start talking about fixing things ,they mean fix it so we can keep on doing the same thing,
we had a minister for forestry ,who destroyed the forrests ,saying that is wyat forrestry is ,with the additional bonnus being the mates rate allaws the whole sale destryction of the flors and fauna to own the despoyaled lands as a reward for the destruction for ever,just destroy it lets you own it
now the new tax to subsidise the continuance of buisness as usual wants consumers anewtax
2 de reply
the question is
is carben trading a new tax whos purpose is to subsidise big buisness
in light of the sudden seeing of the light ,and in light of the consistant past steadfast denial of its reality ,.the sudden turn arround seems to be a spin they decided would make it look like the best of the options put before them
note they also want the nuclear option ,any option they know will just let it be buisness as usual,
i seek people to rebut my fears
they also plan to pump the co2 under ground [into the ground water] clever sold out politics or sensable politics?
we are in a huge drought maybe even need the ground water soon but they plan to poisen that too just cause they can
none of thier current solutions can be done any time soon
i just wanted it noted we need to get serious right now ,the price of buisness as usual is going to kill the tax payer in the long run
old men wanting money now is killing our future
greed is not good its killing our planet and us.
youmight be right
“The Demon-Haunted World” Carl Sagan pages 222 & 223
Report Spam/Abuse
SO, WHATS YOUR QUESTION?
“The Demon-Haunted World” Carl Sagan pages 222 & 223
Report Spam/Abuse
As a card carrying member of the liberal party I will give you a true analysis on the issue:
1 – John Howard is still just as skeptical about Global Warming as he has always been. The only difference is that now it scores him political points to be seen as doing something on the issue
2 – Scientific evidence is far from conclusive about global warming. Taking a risk averse position, the implication is that we should do something about it, if only for the fact that there is a chance it could cause catastrophic problems.
3 – Assuming that we are to do something about global warming, we need to be carefull to make sure that our response is measured and relative to the actual problem. This is John Howard’s main reason for promoting Nuclear Power. It is an energy source that is clean, but cheap enough (although far more expensive than coal) to sustain current levels of economic development. Any actions taken must be subject to a cost benefit analysis.
So to answer your question –
4 – No, carbon trading is not a new tax to subsidise big business. This is a highly ridiculous statement. Firstly a carbon emission program implies the trading of “Pollution Rights” between businesses, and therefore countries. It has no implication on taxation, and therefore cannot by nature be used to subsidise big business.
5 – Howard has only alluded to the fact that the major players in CO2 emmisions (China and India) are not required to ratify the Kytoto Protocol (or at least meet their targets). This makes a carbon trading system innefective as it does not achieve anything else apart from self gratification amongst western nations.
6 – Howard has indicated he would support a global carbon trading system should it include China and India. This would achieve real reductions in carbon emissions.
7 – You seem to be referring to a carbon tax rather than carbon trading. They are completely different things. The ALP are proposing to introduce a carbon tax. This is not a wise move, as we neither have the technology to replace coal, thus it will be an extra cost to business
8 – To get to the crux of you’re question – a reduction in company taxation would be good for the economy, unemployment, and economic growth. A socialist would fear business tax cuts, but then we’ve come a long way from Karl Marx havent we?
“The Demon-Haunted World” Carl Sagan pages 222 & 223
Report Spam/Abuse