Bombertalk

Get off the grass !

There was a debate about this issue and its called the last election. Both major parties put forward an ETS scheme as policy to reduce carbon emissions. A price of carbon is a good method of reducing carbon emissions. Whilst the governments legistlation had its flaws it was a start.

The issue would have been bipartisan had those contrarians that are prisoners of the skeptic PR machine not got their way. Please be very aware that the skeptic machine is well organised and well funded by the likes of Exxon-Mobil and they have f-wits like Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones dribbling at the mouth to create doubt about the validity of the scientific consensus. The last time I looked Andrew Bolt, Alan Jones arent scientists and the crap they are spouting is just unbelievable.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2009/11/06/2735953.htm

The Opposition talk of sound bite politics but all I have heard this week from them is the same repeated mantras.

"Big New Tax On Everything"
"Money Go Round"

The ETS was designed to compesate householders hit with higher fuel costs. The Liberals are going round saying anything and doing anything to sound like they have some kind of alternative policy BUT there is no way you can significantly change behaviour without some pain - i.e. COST. Turnbull has said it the moderate Liberals know it.

Why are they now trotting out this new line that we shouldnt do anything unless the yanks do something. If every country in the world thinks like that then no one will do anything and we can just collectively put our heads in the sand and say its all too hard.

MH_Bomber wrote: there is no way you can significantly change behaviour without some pain - i.e. COST. Turnbull has said it the moderate Liberals know it.

Then why compensate for that cost? Doesn't that go against what this ETS is trying to achieve?

I have a significant problem with the ETS as I understand it. I assume that it would be similar to other financial derivatives, in that "carbon credits" are traded on the open market and the scarcity of these credits is what gives them their value. Now, of course, investors conduct themselves in financial markets to make a profit, and will no doubt use carbon credits to help them achieve their investment goals.

The problem I have with this is the impact that these actions would have on the price of credits. Carbon would be a cost of production, and I have no problem with this, but business will be paying a specific price based not on the carbon they produce, but also based on the suits on Wall Street or Exchange Square.

What is stopping investors speculating the f*** out of these derivatives and pushing the price up, as we have seen recently with Gold and Oil. And what are Governments going to do as a result, they'd have businesses significantly hurting because of added costs to conducting business, and investors with a significant amount of value tied up in a piece of paper (so they can't flood the market with credits to push the price down)

Filthy wrote:

MH_Bomber wrote:Get off the grass !

There was a debate about this issue and its called the last election. Both major parties put forward an ETS scheme as policy to reduce carbon emissions. A price of carbon is a good method of reducing carbon emissions. Whilst the governments legistlation had its flaws it was a start.

The issue would have been bipartisan had those contrarians that are prisoners of the skeptic PR machine not got their way. Please be very aware that the skeptic machine is well organised and well funded by the likes of Exxon-Mobil and they have f-wits like Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones dribbling at the mouth to create doubt about the validity of the scientific consensus. The last time I looked Andrew Bolt, Alan Jones arent scientists and the crap they are spouting is just unbelievable.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2009/11/06/2735953.htm

The Opposition talk of sound bite politics but all I have heard this week from them is the same repeated mantras.

"Big New Tax On Everything"
"Money Go Round"

The ETS was designed to compesate householders hit with higher fuel costs. The Liberals are going round saying anything and doing anything to sound like they have some kind of alternative policy BUT there is no way you can significantly change behaviour without some pain - i.e. COST. Turnbull has said it the moderate Liberals know it.

Why are they now trotting out this new line that we shouldnt do anything unless the yanks do something. If every country in the world thinks like that then no one will do anything and we can just collectively put our heads in the sand and say its all too hard.

This. Totally right and have a look at the rodents travels ALWAYS with his fat ugly slag of a Machiavellian bitch. And a photo opportunist? You have to be kidding. The poor old GG got the arse 1996-2007.

JimboC you need to stop reading Gruppenfuerher Von Bolt.

Come on Filth. Pope Rudd has to go OS at least once a month just to make sure they serve him the right meals. He is on a crusade to save the world. Pity we want him to run our country and maybe spend a bit of time in it.

Filthy wrote:JimboC you need to stop reading Gruppenfuerher Von Bolt.

HA HA...Hey Filth, its either him or the articles in the Australian...ha ha

Well, Rudd's been to Afghanistan a handful of times, and you yourself Filthy were pretty critical when Howard went out to the Middle East to visit the troops.

dom_105 wrote:Well, Rudd's been to Afghanistan a handful of times, and you yourself Filthy were pretty critical when Howard went out to the Middle East to visit the troops.

What a f***'n quagmire of a war that is turning out to be.

Good morning Vietnaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaam.

dom_105 wrote:Well, Rudd's been to Afghanistan a handful of times, and you yourself Filthy were pretty critical when Howard went out to the Middle East to visit the troops.

Ssshhh it was the ALP so it's ok.

Wonder if all the school kiddies have there laptops yet?

Wasn't St Kev going to take over the hospital system in mid 2009?

No screaming about lie lies lies on these boards. The reply will be all about Howard as it always is.

BERT wrote:

dom_105 wrote:Well, Rudd's been to Afghanistan a handful of times, and you yourself Filthy were pretty critical when Howard went out to the Middle East to visit the troops.

Ssshhh it was the ALP so it's ok.

Wonder if all the school kiddies have there laptops yet?

Wasn't St Kev going to take over the hospital system in mid 2009?

No screaming about lie lies lies on these boards. The reply will be all about Howard as it always is.

Bloody Howard....it's all his fault

No school kid I know have got there laptop yet.

Teachers I know have no idea when they are coming either.


Didn't he say by mid 2009 he would take over the hospitals? It is the end of 2009 and nothing has been done. I supose he forgot about it as he was overseas again for that time.

All he has done is get us into debt.

BERT wrote:
All he has done is get us into debt.

That is just plain BS Bert. He said sorry as well!

I am completely disillusioned. Apart from lip service he is Johnny mark 2.

Sismis wrote:

BERT wrote:
All he has done is get us into debt.

That is just plain BS Bert. He said sorry as well!

I am completely disillusioned. Apart from lip service he is Johnny mark 2.

And he went on Rove.

At least with Johnny you knew where he stood. You can't say that about Kevin.