Given the last 5 - 10 years, some would argue we're already seeing more extreme weather events. Certainly that is the modelling the insurance companies are doing and how they are allowing for losses. Cyclones making it to Alice Springs being one example. All this being the case, what is the debate again? Let's just get on and do something about reducing carbon. I'm pretty sure this is in fact the biggest issue facing us.
I've heard you supporting The Bald Monk's anti carbon tax rants. He has no plans to do anything meaningful though so how is it that you propose we should reduce carbon? Someone has to move first. It will be something of a pyrrhic victory for the economic conservatives if, worried about the economic cost of acting first, we wait for everyone else to move on climate change and then, based on the only serious modelling as to the consequences of not acting or delayed action, it costs us far more than it would to act now.
Cutter,
Firstly, not sure you do your side of the debate any favours by calling someone a ‘Mad Monk’, and secondly, you clearly prefer to lecture rather than debate, as you seem intent on ignoring at least 50% of what I write about carbon dioxide taxation (we would do well to remember it is a carbon dioxide tax, not a carbon tax). I have previously suggested the way I would go forward in a few different posts, the fact that you ignore this and instead choose to question my attack on this particularly carbon tax plan says more about your inability to consider other options!
I have a question for you – Do you honestly believe that this carbon tax plan is going to make any real difference to the carbon dioxide output of this country?
These are the four worst policies of the Gillard and Rudd governments, and how I feel they could be done a lot better:
1. BER – Spend about 50% of what was spent, but allow the schools to spend it on what they feel they need the most (not just school halls to put a government sign on). Classrooms, tuckshops, airconditioning – anything regarding school infrastructure.
2. Mining Tax – It is truly to ensure we share in the proceeds of finite resources, then make it a tax on all mining – not just coal and iron and not just on ‘super profits’. Tax each resource at a set rate, and re-invest the money raised in R & D and manufacturing as well as infrastructure improvements. Don’t pick and choose winners and losers.
3. NBN – We don’t need fibre to the premises. Just spend the $5B or so to upgrade fibre to the hub then let any further extension of this be dictated by the market. Don’t rush out and spend $30 B odd more than what is required at a time where our finances are already on the edge (and the world is on the brink of a double dip recession).
4. Carbon Tax – Implement a small tax – no concessions and no rebates. How can behaviour change if sectors of society and business can go along on their merry way with no repercussions. Make no mistake, this tax plan will end up being more about wealth redistribution than reducing climate change. A small tax to be completely and solely invested into R&D in clean tech and energy efficiencies – geothermal, wind, wave, solar, nuclear etc. Find savings in other parts of the budget (some noted above) to further increase this investment.
Let’s say that you are correct, and this is biggest threat or issue of our time (what was Rudd’s line?). Starting at that basis, and considering how far down the track we are with increased emmissions already, it is my firm belief that the only thing that will save us is technology or the earth itself. We either come up with a way, via technology to reduce or convert emissions (eg taking emissions from coal power stations and feeding them into some sort of large scale greenhouse farm for increased yields – just a pie in the sky, but who knows), or the earth itself will find a new equilibrium and filter the system itself. This cannot be achieved by a minor tax that ends up being circled back through the system to low income earners or manufacturing companies, particularly when the rest of the world is not partaking (see how it is going for the likes of Spain).
Oh, and finally, build a couple of nuclear power stations. The ridiculousness of our situation in selling uranium but not using it is very difficult to understand.