Over the last few months, the issue of a carbon tax has raged almost non stop, and continues to be debated within many communities – with a large percetage of traditional labour voters railing against it, despite the heavy promotion of it by the Gillard Government. I do agree, that there is a case for regulation, but, the carbon tax in my view is simply the wrong way to go about it, and will not result in any significant reductions in carbon emmissions. Ultimately, the industrialists will pay the carbon tax and keep on polluting. The other course of action that seems to have been over looked or ignored, is that of legislation, that would penalise the polluters from polluting in the first place - after all, DDT was banned along with many other nasties such as CFC’s and other ozone depleting substances. Throw in for good measure asbestos, that has been a very big killer and you realise that there is a good case for stopping the polluters in their tracks. Regulation would be affective, if it is backed up by the govenment and properly inforced.
There is another very important measure central to the whole debate ,that has been conveniently ignored and bypassed, and, that is the Zero Carbon Australia 2020 plan for establishing a 100% renwable energy system, that could be realised in ten years using existing technology. If the labor Government can spent $45 billion on the national broadband network, and 27 billion a year on the miltary and billions on the ongoing criminal adventure in Afghanistan, then surely, they can afford a transition to reneweable energy.
The carbon tax is a way to divert attention from the causes of the climate change crisis, to protect the capitalist system, and the huge profits that go with it. To expect the market to address the whole problem of pollution, is laughable. There is no doubt in my mind, the carbon tax is a huge con.
Thanks for your comment Allan. I can’t agree with your view that I misunderstand the concept of a carbon tax, and, that I have been confused by the deniers, screaming shock jocks and Mr Bolt. They are in my opinion, a breed of journalist, that sends objective reporting to the level of the gutter. Any opinions I have formed about the carbon tax, have been, without any influence from the right wing ravers.
I do hope that you took the time to consider the points I made in my posting, regarding the alternatives, (particuarly that of renewable energy) as there is no indication in your comment that you had.
There is no doubt, that mankind has fouled his own nest in many diffent ways, but on the question of global warming, even the scientific world are at loggerheads, so, if there is any confusion it comes not just via the media, but from the world of science itself, after all, people who work in other occupations are not scientists and niether am I.
As an example of what I am making reference to, is the open letter sent to the UN General Secretary, from one hundred and forty one scientists from around the world contradicting the United Nation Panel on Climate Change. In short part, this is what they had to say: “It is not possible to stop climate change as it is a natural phenomennon that has happened thoughout the ages. Recent obeservations of phenomena such as glacial retreats, sea level rises and the migration of temperature sensitive species are not evidence for abnormal climate change, for none of these changes has been to lie outside the bounds of natural variability.” So there you have it. Any wonder that their is an ongoing, raging debate. In my view the carbon tax is not the way to go and will not contribute to a reduction in carbon imissions.
You mention at the end of your posting, the pre determined gambling initiative. On that subject, it seems you and I are on the same wave length. Cheers Kevin.
Hi there Kevin, i think you’ve misunderstood the whole concept of the carbon tax and have been confused by angry, misinformed rhetoric as offered by deniers, screaming radio jocks and mr bolt. The user should pay in all aspects of modern life, some paid for by the Government, but essentially the user pays, hence the polluter pays. I respectfully recommend looking for the accurate detail, sadly not widely delivered by the Gillard Government, ( their lack of explanation is a cause for dismay ) but it is there.
The scare campaigns are ill-informed and designed to frighten the general population, bit like the pre-determined gambling initiative .. anyhow thanks for the opportunity to rant – cheers alan (tbaoo)