Tell Me Again Why We Need Carbon Tax?

[Chimo]

Read this and apart from income redistribution and her membership of the Fabian society tell me why?

: http://www.theage.com.au/world/cold-comfort-as-himalayan-ice-caps-defy-melt-fears-20120209-1rvwn.html#ixzz1lv34JRfcAAAGlaciers.jpg

[PADDLES]

the ALP need it to get their shot to pieces budget back into surplus.

now it's looking like they are going to means test the private health cover rebate to try and recover some more money, just another hit (with the carbon tax) for middle australia!

[Axl]

Well there you have it thanks Chimo. I read some where that the earth has actually cooled down not warmed up thanks juLIAR.

Yep hear is a link http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/l...-1226267270284 to what PADDLES has mentioned above. This foolish woman obviously never wants to see the ALP lead this country again.

[TREVELLY]

It is just another tax for a government seeking more money to shore up mismanagement.

Mining industry could sustain the mining tax.

Nomadic industry will not sustain a carbon tax and as they leave Australia in droves so will go the employment they offer to farming and manufacturing.

We should make almost everything we consume but we are becoming like Russia who live off their mining and import almost all they consume in food and goods.

I do not see myself as rich by a long shot but will have to cop the loss of the private health rebate and most likely an increase again in private health cover as droves leave the system again - they have no idea - damn it's frustrating.

[robtarr]

I'll use today's news to help explain the hypocracy of this govt with it's introduction of the CO2 tax

Why won't Juliar admit the closure of the Point Henry Aluminium Smelter is exactly what the carbon tax is designed to achieve....does she think we're all stupid????

from pg.6 of today's AFR:

"Both Treasury modelling and federal govt climate change advisor Ross Garnaut have previously highlighted that under a carbon scheme, Australia's aluminium sector will decline."

And from the govt's own Grattan Institute:

"Australian aluminium smelters (with the exception of Bell Bay) emit two to three times as much greenhouse gases per tonne of aluminium produced compared to the global industry average, based on International Aluminium Institute surveys.. Full carbon pricing in conjunction with the expected expiry of subsidised state government electricity contracts would probably result in most Australian aluminium production moving offshore. In the medium term this would probably reduce global carbon emissions… Due to substantial increases in electricity costs once subsidised contracts end in 2014 and 2016, even with 94.5% free permits, Point Henry would appear to not be viable…"

Alcoa aren't stupid - they know what's coming and this is exactly what Juliars stinking alliance with the Greens will see happen....a steady decline in any industry that relies on large volumes of affordable electricity to stay in business....which is exactly what we were getting and what gave us our competitive advantage....and all in support of this stupid belief that we're warming the planet.....which isn't happenning by the way

Look out guys the cement industry are heading for the same fate....unless we bail them out as well with a "compensation package" now being re badged as "co-investment"

Be very careful guys who you vote for at the next election - socialism only works until it runs out of everyone else's money.

cheers Rob

[PinHead]

the ALP need it to get their shot to pieces budget back into surplus.

now it's looking like they are going to means test the private health cover rebate to try and recover some more money, just another hit (with the carbon tax) for middle australia!

I am in favour of that..I think the cut off point is 80k for a single and 160k for a couple..earning that much you can surely afford full price.

[TREVELLY]

I am in favour of that..I think the cut off point is 80k for a single and 160k for a couple..earning that much you can surely afford full price.

When they introduce this policy they will cause another exodus from the private insurance scheme and with that premiums will go up - those of us that have to stay in the private insurance will cop a double whammy.

Having spent 12 years in TAFE and then Uni and wife doing uni too, and both having to pay off a HECs debt, whilst at uni earning a small fraction of what a labourer earnt, I now work 45-50hrs a week to get a combined income that takes away about the only return we got from this miserable government.

DO I have the luxury of getting out of private cover NO!! I have a 7yo son who got a 1 in a million chance of getting cancer 18 months ago - we go private to give him the best chance.

Yeah right! Lets screw those fat rich lazy bastards!

[PinHead]

sorry trev..if you earn that much then I reckon you pay your way..I have no problem with it. Too many sucking on the public teat these days and it cannot go on like this forever.

[TREVELLY]

Paying that insurance is not sucking on the public teat - it is the opposite.
It is paying insurance to have private cover to not suck on the public teat - or public health sector.
Taking away the rebate will put more on the public system which will put more strain on the public system - it will encourage people onto the public teat as you put it.
Taking money away from the private system will put more strain on the insurance companies that will cause them to increase premiums as they have done a number of times in the past when it is less attractive to stay in these voluntary schemes.
My son went through a year of chemo and hospital on private cover - that injected money into the hospital system they would not have received if he were on public cover.
When people have a choice they exercise it, they will leave private cover in droves as they have done in the past.
Me - well I have to stay in private insurance even if I just miss the cut - too bad.
Health insurance is a fine balancing act that they keep stuffing up.
It is pure and simple mismanagement.
They seem to think people will cop the no refund and it is money saved - they don't think people will dump the insurance and wow look now we all have to pay for their health cover with the public teat through public funding not the insurance they once paid.
It is the same with the carbon tax - industry has a choice and will exercise it - they will leave Australia and take the jobs with them - it isn't the strong Australian dollar that is making them go offshore it is the addition of another tax. Wait and see when it comes in how poorly it will be managed as well. Will it save the planet - yeah right!
Oh and as for me - the fact that I spent best part of two decades earning less than half what a labourer did whilst I studied then paid off the course. I did then another decade later finally get to an income that pays it's way - here I am being accused of sucking off the public teat because I chose to pay private health insurance.

[Mike Delisser]

I am in favour of that..I think the cut off point is 80k for a single and 160k for a couple..earning that much you can surely afford full price.

83k isn't the cut of point for singles Greg, it's the starting point, it works on a sliding scale. From $83,000 the rebate reduces in % down to zero (cuts out) once the single starts to earn over $129,000 a year. A single earning $100,000 will still get close to 20% rebate on his health insurance. Couples can earn $160,000 before their rebate starts to reduce. $200,000 a year will see them still get a 20% rebate, the rebate cuts out once they earn over $258,000 a year.
Cheers

Edit- $100,000 a year for a single will get you a 10% rebate and not almost 20%

[Horse]

83k isn't the cut of point for singles Greg, it's the starting point, it works on a sliding scale. From $83,000 the rebate reduces in % down to zero (cuts out) once the single starts to earn over $129,000 a year. A single earning $100,000 will still get close to 20% rebate on his health insurance. Couples can earn $160,000 before their rebate starts to reduce. $200,000 a year will see them still get a 20% rebate, the rebate cuts out once they earn over $258,000 a year.
Cheers

I think that is more than fair

[Tangles]

so where do the savings go? thats my question..

if they actually took the 2 billion they save with this and put it back into the public health service to improve it for all, public and private, then thumbs up... if they take the it and spend it on crap dud schemes then thumbs down....

if you want private health then irrespective of govt policy its your decision to balance up, no ones being forced into it or not , take the levy hit or not.

Im getting past being interested or worked up in what the govt of the day does, life is too short. Politics is fast becoming a reality TV show

I switch channels as soon as i see Gillard, Newman or Bligh...Rudd is a cartoon character and worth a laugh for old times sake....like did australia really vote him in? it must of been a dream...then Wilke/Brown, Mr 17 mins and Windsor. Katter.... seriously what do the public expect with such astronauts like this running the joint.


mike

[TREVELLY]

The government has no idea of what a fair system is - they just add another list of rules to the already too onerous tax system and yes they make tax saving predictions that are way wide of the mark just to sell the idea to the masses.

Our tax system if it was fair would not have had people like Kerry Packer did fronting up to an enquiry and in answer to why he paid about $2500 personal tax when he resided over a company that made close to a billion dollars he said that any Australian citizen that pays one cent more than they should legally have to is a fool.

The poor get support, the very rich rort, the middle class get screwed.

And yes what Mike has shown above if accurate cannot be faulted except it is yet again another complication to an already onerous system - a balancing act they hope will bring results they predict - I bet though just like every other time they have played with the health system they screw up badly again by misreading the way people go on this.

As for me I have paid private health insurance for 35 years "top cover" not because I was rich. I paid it in the beginning 35 years ago when earning $7K a year and I pay it now for the same reason I paid it then - simply because I do not have faith in the government public system and cannot understand why people have to suffer so long for basic health needs - both parties have really let the Australian people down on health and we are all paying for it either with money or simply by suffering too long for too little.

I have had full private cover for decades where I have not called upon that insurance due to good health, but now with my little boy scoring a 1 in a million chance of cancer with no history of it in the family - then there you go I am now committed to keep the private cover no matter how much the government force up the cost. I have no choice.

When I was younger, single and healthy was I tempted to ditch it - you bet, but now, with a family and my son . . . NO way!

[robtarr]

in case you missed it old Alexander Downer presents a logical argument against the CO2 tax and the Gillard govt on Bolt on Sun - pity more MSM wasn't listening - Della Bosca had nowhere to hide

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5300ZhppjKE&feature=player_embedded

[Chimo]

Yipee........................................
Lets do a socialist income grab (for later redistribution so Fabian wise its OK) and give out subsidies in the meantime!

In the meantime class, here is today's lesson.

Classroom Socialism

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism (locally read ALP) worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all)..

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
It could not be any simpler than that. (Please pass this on)


Remember, there IS a test coming up. The 2012 elections. (Read 18 months for us little rabbits)


These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.