You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “is carben trading sceme just a new tax to subsidise big buisness?”.
is carben trading sceme just a new tax to subsidise big buisness?
This entry was posted in Land For Sale and tagged buisness, carben, denial, global warning, howard, John, john howard, sceme, subsidise, tax, warning. Bookmark the permalink.
3 Responses to is carben trading sceme just a new tax to subsidise big buisness?
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