Carbon emitters face up to $7.3b bill
Paul Osborne
February 28, 2012

AAP

Australia's top 50 carbon-polluting companies could have an initial carbon tax liability of up to $7.3 billion, new figures show.

The latest National Greenhouse and Energy Report, produced by the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, details the emissions of the nation's 430 biggest carbon dioxide emitters.

The companies will have to pay the full price of the $23 a tonne carbon tax which comes into effect on July 1, minus any assistance provided by the government.


Their final liabilities will also depend on other factors such as corporate structure.

The carbon tax bill for the top 50 of these companies would be up to $7.3 billion, based on the figures in the latest report.

The top 10 companies in the list alone will be liable for $3.9 billion, minus assistance and other changes to their reported emissions.

Among the biggest emitters on the register for 2010/11 are Macquarie Generation, Delta Electricity, Great Energy Alliance Corporation, International Power and TRUEnergy Holdings.

However the government has offered a range of assistance programs to the heaviest-hit industries, including cement works, petroleum refiners and steel and aluminium makers.

Climate Change Minister Greg Combet told parliament on Tuesday that for many of these businesses the effective carbon price, after free emissions permits were provided, would be reduced from $23 a tonne to $1.30 a tonne.

Mr Combet was announcing the start of regulations to establish the Jobs and Competitiveness Program under the government's clean energy laws.

The program would provide significant assistance to help emissions-intensive, trade-exposed industries manage the impact of the carbon price, while maintaining incentives for them to reduce their carbon pollution.

"Supporting energy efficiency and productivity in our emissions-intensive manufacturing industries is important to remaining globally competitive into the future," Mr Combet said.

The final list of companies to pay the full carbon price, and their liabilities, will be produced after the Clean Energy Regulator takes over the management of the emissions register and carbon pricing mechanism on April 2.

The department's greenhouse and energy data officer Ross Carter said it was not possible to calculate the exact carbon tax liabilities from the current data, as companies needed to use their own data.

But Mr Carter said it was important the companies understood their emission reporting and carbon pricing obligations.

© 2012 AAP

Thats far less money than the pokie barons make in pure profit in only one year.
They are always crying poor so it cant be a lot money.

The polluters will not pay one cent in the carbon tax, that bill will be paid by the consumer.


The title should read Australian consumers will pay $7.3 Billion for a carbon tax they did not want.

How do Australian pay for carbon exported overseas?

____ wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 6:53am:

How do Australian pay for carbon exported overseas?

Is that a green's policy, that Australian should foot the carbon bill for other countries?

We produce less than 2% of the world's total carbon output, but that is not enough for the greens, now you geniuses want us to pay for the carbon outputs of china, india and japan as well.

No wonder you people are rightly considered as economic morons.


We only pay for our carbon output, if those other countries want to stuff up their economy they will impose a useless tax on their consumers, it's not up to us to pay their bill.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 7:23am:

____ wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 6:53am: How do Australian pay for carbon exported overseas? Is that a green's policy, that Australian should foot the carbon bill for other countries? We produce less than 2% of the world's total carbon output, but that is not enough for the greens, now you geniuses want us to pay for the carbon outputs of china, india and japan as well. No wonder you people are rightly considered as economic morons. We only pay for our carbon output, if those other countries want to stuff up their economy they will impose a useless tax on their consumers, it's not up to us to pay their bill.

Still didn't answer my question.

you said



Quote:

The title should read Australian consumers will pay $7.3 Billion for a carbon tax they did not want.

How do Australians pay a carbon tax on carbon exported.

If they don't, most of the amount will not be passed on to Australians.

____ wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 7:32am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 7:23am: ____ wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 6:53am: How do Australian pay for carbon exported overseas? Is that a green's policy, that Australian should foot the carbon bill for other countries? We produce less than 2% of the world's total carbon output, but that is not enough for the greens, now you geniuses want us to pay for the carbon outputs of china, india and japan as well. No wonder you people are rightly considered as economic morons. We only pay for our carbon output, if those other countries want to stuff up their economy they will impose a useless tax on their consumers, it's not up to us to pay their bill. Still didn't answer my question. you said Quote: The title should read Australian consumers will pay $7.3 Billion for a carbon tax they did not want. How do Australians pay a carbon tax on carbon exported. If they don't, most of the amount will not be passed on to Australians.

How in the hell do you work that out, the top polluters are energy companies their consumers are Australians as we do NOT export electricitiy you moron.

The carbon tax is placed on Australian companies and paid for by Australian consumers.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 7:48am:

____ wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 7:32am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 7:23am: ____ wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 6:53am: How do Australian pay for carbon exported overseas? Is that a green's policy, that Australian should foot the carbon bill for other countries? We produce less than 2% of the world's total carbon output, but that is not enough for the greens, now you geniuses want us to pay for the carbon outputs of china, india and japan as well. No wonder you people are rightly considered as economic morons. We only pay for our carbon output, if those other countries want to stuff up their economy they will impose a useless tax on their consumers, it's not up to us to pay their bill. Still didn't answer my question. you said Quote: The title should read Australian consumers will pay $7.3 Billion for a carbon tax they did not want. How do Australians pay a carbon tax on carbon exported. If they don't, most of the amount will not be passed on to Australians. How in the hell do you work that out, the top polluters are energy companies their consumers are Australians as we do NOT export electricitiy you moron. The carbon tax is placed on Australian companies and paid for by Australian consumers.

BHP, Rio Tinto, Anglo American


How many here buy their exported ore and so will have to pay their carbon pollution cost?

Energy that goes into manufacturing exports ... which Australians pay for exports?

Qantas, do only Australians fly on this soon to be foreign airline.

Mars, McCain and Harvey Norman ... can these firms afford to lift their prices and so lose market share.

Or will they change their carbon pollution behaviour and cut the amount of carbon tax they pay?

Waste Disposal Sector, how may here buy retail off this sector ?

Council dumping, may go up a few cents ... yet if the coalition and their supporters are worried about this, why are they silent about the cost of sewage on all households directly and directly.

When will Liberal call for free dumping of shite for everyone beyond all the shite they, and their supporters tell about the carbon pricing scheme.







.

____ wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 8:06am:

BHP, Rio Tinto, Anglo American How many here buy their exported ore and so will have to pay their carbon pollution cost? Energy that goes into manufacturing exports ... which Australians pay for exports? Qantas, do only Australians fly on this soon to be foreign airline. Mars, McCain and Harvey Norman ... can these firms afford to lift their prices and so lose market share. Or will they change their carbon pollution behaviour and cut the amount of carbon tax they pay? Waste Disposal Sector, how may here buy retail off this sector ? Council dumping, may go up a few cents ... yet if the coalition and their supporters are worried about this, why are they silent about the cost of sewage on all households directly and directly. When will Liberal call for free dumping of shite for everyone beyond all the shite they, and their supporters tell about the carbon pricing scheme. .

You are truly one of the world's stupid people.

Mining companies don't pay the carbon tax on exports, their major production of carbon is fuel which is exempt from the tax, so why would you even mention them is beyond me.

The major producers of carbon emissions are energy producers, not harvey norman or the people who make mcain super fries.

You need to have your conversations with children as only they are tolerant enough for your level of stupidity.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 6:51am:

The polluters will not pay one cent in the carbon tax, that bill will be paid by the consumer. The title should read Australian consumers will pay $7.3 Billion for a carbon tax they did not want.

exactly and if one more idiot tells me my bill will only increase by 1 cent a week.. I will personally go down there and jump on him..with an icepick in my hand.

Its quite simple, businesses can find alternatives to carbon intensive goods and services and avoid paying the tax.
Its no different from householders being less wastefull and finding alternatives.
The modern Australian way is to squeal like a stuck pig instead of doing the hard work to make your business modern and viable into the future.

adelcrow wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 8:45am:

Its quite simple, businesses can find alternatives to carbon intensive goods and services and avoid paying the tax. Its no different from householders being less wastefull and finding alternatives. The modern Australian way is to squeal like a stuck pig instead of doing the hard work to make your business modern and viable into the future.

Actually crow it is much more simple than that; why totally re-engineer your whole industry to avoid a tax, you just pass it onto the consumer and have them pay it.

Anyone who believes the energy providers will do any different is as stupid as the government who introduced it.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 9:13am:

adelcrow wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 8:45am: Its quite simple, businesses can find alternatives to carbon intensive goods and services and avoid paying the tax. Its no different from householders being less wastefull and finding alternatives. The modern Australian way is to squeal like a stuck pig instead of doing the hard work to make your business modern and viable into the future. Actually crow it is much more simple than that; why totally re-engineer your whole industry to avoid a tax, you just pass it onto the consumer and have them pay it. Anyone who believes the energy providers will do any different is as stupid as the government who introduced it.

So you're saying that large industries don't look for every possible means to reduce their costs and so improve their efficiency? That they'll just pay the tax and say buggerit? Funny, that isn't my experience in working for all manner of large corporations over the past 30 years.

Gist wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 10:51am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 9:13am: adelcrow wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 8:45am: Its quite simple, businesses can find alternatives to carbon intensive goods and services and avoid paying the tax. Its no different from householders being less wastefull and finding alternatives. The modern Australian way is to squeal like a stuck pig instead of doing the hard work to make your business modern and viable into the future. Actually crow it is much more simple than that; why totally re-engineer your whole industry to avoid a tax, you just pass it onto the consumer and have them pay it. Anyone who believes the energy providers will do any different is as stupid as the government who introduced it. So you're saying that large industries don't look for every possible means to reduce their costs and so improve their efficiency? That they'll just pay the tax and say buggerit? Funny, that isn't my experience in working for all manner of large corporations over the past 30 years.

Actually that is nothing at all like what I said; hope these large corporations didn't employ you for anything to do with your comprehension skills.

In fact I stated in the affirmative, they will always look at their bottom line; why would they spend billions of dollars in infrastructure upgrades when they can easily pass on any and all costs (tax) to the consumer.

Jeez if you are going to resort to a reductio argument at least try get the starting point right.

____ wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 6:53am:

How do Australian pay for carbon exported overseas?

I am happy to answer that question once you answer my question about the murder and torture in immigration due Howard's and Abbott's policies

Gist wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 10:51am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 9:13am: adelcrow wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 8:45am: Its quite simple, businesses can find alternatives to carbon intensive goods and services and avoid paying the tax. Its no different from householders being less wastefull and finding alternatives. The modern Australian way is to squeal like a stuck pig instead of doing the hard work to make your business modern and viable into the future. Actually crow it is much more simple than that; why totally re-engineer your whole industry to avoid a tax, you just pass it onto the consumer and have them pay it. Anyone who believes the energy providers will do any different is as stupid as the government who introduced it. So you're saying that large industries don't look for every possible means to reduce their costs and so improve their efficiency? That they'll just pay the tax and say buggerit? Funny, that isn't my experience in working for all manner of large corporations over the past 30 years.

No one said they'd pay the tax, the comment was they'll pass it on.

Companies rely on ROI for improvement investment. It might be easier and cheaper to pass it on?

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 8:21am:

____ wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 8:06am: Energy that goes into manufacturing exports ... which Australians pay for exports? Qantas, do only Australians fly on this soon to be foreign airline. Mars, McCain and Harvey Norman ... can these firms afford to lift their prices and so lose market share. Or will they change their carbon pollution behaviour and cut the amount of carbon tax they pay? Waste Disposal Sector, how may here buy retail off this sector ? Council dumping, may go up a few cents ... yet if the coalition and their supporters are worried about this, why are they silent about the cost of sewage on all households directly and directly. When will Liberal call for free dumping of shite for everyone beyond all the shite they, and their supporters tell about the carbon pricing scheme. . You are truly one of the world's stupid people. Mining companies don't pay the carbon tax on exports, their major production of carbon is fuel which is exempt from the tax, so why would you even mention them is beyond me. The major producers of carbon emissions are energy producers, not harvey norman or the people who make mcain super fries. You need to have your conversations with children as only they are tolerant enough for your level of stupidity.

Then why are BHP, Rio Tinto and Anglo American included within the 500 list?


As for the list of 500 largest polluters


the first 299 are :

Macquarie Generation
Delta Electricity
Great Energy Alliance Corporation Pty Ltd
International Power (Australia) Holdings Pty Ltd
C S Energy Limited
TRUenergy Holdings Pty Ltd
Eraring Energy
BlueScope Steel Limited
Loy Yang Holdings Pty Ltd
OzGen Holdings Australia Pty Ltd
Electricity Generation Corporation T/A Verve
Woodside Petroleum Ltd.
Tarong Energy Corporation Limited
Alinta Energy Limited
Rio Tinto Limited
Stanwell Corporation Limited
NRG Victoria 1 Pty Ltd
Alcoa Australian Holdings Pty Ltd1
AZSA Holdings Pty Limited
BHP Billiton Limited
Anglo American Australia Limited
Qantas Airways Limited
Santos Ltd
Queensland Alumina Limited
Adelaide Brighton Ltd
Cement Australia Holdings Pty Ltd
Xstrata Holdings Pty Ltd
OneSteel Limited
Exxonmobil Australia Pty Ltd
Peabody Energy Australia Pty Ltd
HRL Limited
BM Alliance Coal Operations Pty Ltd
Wesfarmers Limited
Boral Limited2
BHP Billiton Aluminium Australia Pty Ltd
Orica Limited
Transfield Worley Power Services Pty Ltd
Alcan Gove Pty Limited
Centennial Coal Company Limited
Origin Energy Limited
Caltex Australia Limited
Virgin Blue Holdings Ltd
Conoco Phillips Australia Gas Holdings Pty Ltd
Burrup Fertilisers Pty Ltd
BP Regional Australasia Holdings Pty Ltd
Shell Australia Limited
AGL Energy Limited1
Queensland Nickel Pty Ltd
Rio Doce Australia Pty Limited
Transfield Services Limited
Power and Water Corporation
Energy Developments Limited
Asciano Limited
Incitec Pivot Limited1
Pechiney Consolidated Australia Pty Limited
BHP Billiton Energy Coal Australia Pty Ltd
Apache Energy Limited
Qenos Holdings Pty Ltd
ERM Kwinana Holding Pty Ltd
Gujarat NRE Coking Coal Limited
Transpacific Industries Group Ltd
Queensland Nitrates Pty Ltd
QR Limited
TransAlta Energy (Australia) Pty Ltd
Leighton Holdings Limited
Newcrest Mining Limited
Iluka Resources Limited
CSR Limited
Envestra Limited
Minara Resources Limited
SPI (Australia) Assets Pty Ltd
Tiwest Pty Ltd
Billiton Manganese Australia Pty Ltd
Amcor Limited
Owens-Illinois (Australia) Pty Ltd
Aurora Energy Pty Ltd
Wilpinjong Coal Pty Ltd
Axia Energy Australia Pty Ltd
Paper Australia Pty Ltd
Prosafe Production Services (Australia) Pty Ltd
Fortescue Metals Group Ltd
Idemitsu Australia Resources Pty Ltd
Toll Holdings Limited
Ecogen Holdings Pty Ltd
Enhance Place Pty. Limited
Waste Recycling and Processing Corporation
Tarong North Pty Ltd
Arrow Energy Ltd
Nyrstar Australia Pty Ltd
Comgen Australia Pty Ltd
Sembsita Australia Pty. Limited
Hydro Aluminium Kurri Kurri Pty Ltd
Newmont Australia Holdings Pty Ltd
Woolworths Ltd
DBNGP (WA) Transmission Pty Limited
Pratt Consolidated Holdings Pty. Ltd.
Honan Holdings Pty Ltd
Chevron Australia Holdings Pty Ltd
New Hope Corporation Limited
Unimin Asia Pacific Pty Ltd
Penrice Soda Holdings Limited
Macarthur Coal Limited
Whitehaven Coal Limited
APT Pipelines Limited
Brickworks Ltd
Multinet Group Holdings Pty Limited
CH2M Hill Australia Pty Ltd
Norske Skog Industries Australia Limited
Yancoal Australia Pty Limited
Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines Pty Ltd
Brisbane City Council
QMAG Limited
Big Ben Holdings Pty. Limited
Linfox Pty Ltd
Downer EDI Limited
Tiger Airways Australia Pty Limited
Goldfields Power Pty Ltd
Grange Resources Limited
Jellinbah Group Pty Ltd
Barrick (Australia Pacific Holdings) Pty Ltd
Melbourne Water Corporation
Holcim Participations (Australia) Pty Ltd.
JBS Holdco Australia Pty Ltd
Caledon Coal Pty Limited
Sonoma Mine Management Pty Ltd
New Zealand Milk (Australasia) Pty Ltd
Hanson Australia (Holdings) Proprietary Limited
ICC Holdings Pty Limited
Snowy Hydro Limited
CITIC Pacific Mining Management Pty Ltd
Farstad Shipping (Indian Pacific) Pty Ltd
Devereaux Holdings Pty Ltd
MMG Management Pty Ltd
Felix Resources Limited
Barrick (PD) Australia Limited
Xstrata Coal Queensland Pty Limited
TT-Line Company Pty Ltd
SPI Electricity & Gas Australia Holdings Pty Ltd
International Energy Services Pty Ltd
Koppers Australia Pty Ltd
AngloGold Ashanti Australia Limited
PaperlinX Limited
Murray Goulburn Co-operative Co. Limited
D.M. & M.T. Nolan Pty. Ltd
Auscan Holdings Pty Ltd
PTTEP Australia Perth Pty Ltd
Energex Limited
State Transit Authority of NSW
Cairnton Holdings Limited
Sydney Water Corporation
Roc Oil Company Limited
Peabody (Burton Coal) Pty Ltd
Baiada Pty Limited
BHP Billiton Nickel Operations Pty Ltd
Prime Infrastructure Holdings Limited
A.A. Scott Pty Ltd
Envirogen Pty Ltd
Millennium Inorganic Chemicals Limited
Water Corporation
A.C.N. 098 904 262 Pty Ltd
Jet Systems Pty Ltd
Kimberly Clark Pacific Holdings Pty Ltd
Teekay Holdings Australia Pty Ltd
Mount Gibson Iron Limited
A J Bush & Sons Pty Ltd
Lion Nathan National Foods Pty Ltd
Isaac Plains Coal Management Pty Ltd
Mitchell Corp Australia Pty Ltd
Food Investments P/L
Ergon Energy Corporation Limited
Gold Fields Australia Pty Ltd
OZ Minerals Limited
The Maddingley Mine Trust
BGC (Australia) Pty Ltd
Donaldson Coal Pty Limited
Building Supplies Group Holding Pty Ltd
Coalpac Pty Ltd
Silk Logistics Group Holdings Pty Limited
HCPH Holdings Pty Limited
Australian Postal Corporation
Rail Corporation New South Wales
Byrns Smith Unit Trust
Aditya Birla Minerals Ltd
Fletcher Building (Australia) Pty Ltd
A.C.N. 137 191 023 Pty Ltd
St Barbara Limited
V/Line Corporation
Simplot Australia (Holdings) Pty Limited
Foster’s Group Limited
Fulton Hogan Australia Pty/Ltd
Goodman Fielder Limited
Inghams Enterprises Pty Limited
CEVA Pty Ltd
Valemus Australia Pty Ltd
Cargill Australia Limited
Country Energy
ACTEW Corporation Ltd1
Telstra Corporation Limited
South Australian Water Corporation
Veolia Transport Australasia Pty Ltd
Nippon Meat Packers Australia Pty Ltd
Coca-Cola Amatil Limited
Graincorp Limited
SCA Tissue Australia Pty Limited
Cristal Australia Pty Ltd
Thales Australia Holdings Pty Ltd
Heinz Watties Pty Ltd
Toyota Motor Corporation Australia Ltd.
Kagara Ltd
Bega Cheese Limited
Nestle Australia Ltd
ALDI Stores (A Limited Partnership)
Cadbury Australia Limited
Oceanic Coal Australia Limited
Hunter Water Corporation
Boeing Australia Holdings Proprietary Limited
McCain Foods (Aust) Pty Ltd
Ford Motor Company of Australia Limited
Norton Gold Fields Limited
The Trustee for Costa’s Unit Trust
Gladstone Ports Corporation Limited
General Motors Australia Ltd
Coogee Chemicals Pty Ltd
Mars Australia Pty Ltd
Crown Limited
Silicon Metal Company of Australia Pty Ltd
Bradken Limited
EnergyAustralia
Northgate Australian Ventures Corp Pty Ltd
SP Australia Networks (Transmission) Ltd
Arnotts Biscuits Holdings Pty Ltd
BOC Limited
Harvey Norman Holdings Limited
Commonwealth Bank of Australia
Metropolitan Health Service
Lend Lease Corporation Limited
James Hardie Austgroup Pty Ltd
Parmalat Australia Ltd
MML Holdings Pty Ltd
Electricity Networks Corporation1
PMP Limited
Integral Energy Australia
CHEDHA Holdings Pty Limited
Stockland Corporation Ltd
LGL Australian Holdings Pty Ltd
Doral Mineral Industries Limited
Monash University
AAPC Limited
GPT Management Holdings Ltd
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research
IPMG Pty Limited
Crane Group Limited
TransGrid
Resolute Mining Limited
Ramsay Health Care Limited
The Uniting Church in Australia Property Trust (Q)
John Swire & Sons Pty Ltd
Holiday Inns Holdings (Australia) Pty Ltd
Competitive Foods Australia Pty Ltd
University of Melbourne
Sun Metals Holdings Limited
ETSA Utilities
Mirvac Limited
Healthscope Limited
Tabcorp Holdings Limited
National Australia Bank Limited
Westfield Holdings Limited
Perilya Limited
Public Transport Authority of Western Australia
St Vincent’s Health Australia Ltd
Salvage Pty Ltd
Queensland Electricity Transmission Corporation Limited
LyondellBasell Australia (Holdings) Pty Ltd
Dexus Holdings Pty Limited
Westpac Banking Corporation
AMP Limited
Fairfax Media Limited
Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd
United Energy Distribution Holdings Pty Limited
News Australia Holdings Pty Limited
Macquarie Group Limited
ISPT Pty Ltd
David Jones Limited
Southern Cross Airports Corporation Holdings Ltd
Air Liquide Australia Limited
Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd
The University of Queensland
Centro Properties Limited
McDonald’s Australia Ltd
Myer Holdings Limited
SunWater
QIC Limited
Frequency Infrastructure Australia Holdings Pty Ltd
ElectraNet Pty Ltd
IBM A/NZ Holdings Pty Limited
Port Waratah Coal Services Limited
Amalgamated

Now try again
Australians will not be paying the full amount.

so cut your bull

Maqqa wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 11:08am:

____ wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 6:53am: How do Australian pay for carbon exported overseas? I am happy to answer that question once you answer my question about the murder and torture in immigration due Howard's and Abbott's policies

Then I look forward to your answer since it has already been answered here

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1330220481/1

post 14

Consumption based economics and taxation is regressive, its killing jobs, killing economic activity, Killing commerce,  prosperity and incentive.
8-) 8-) 8-)

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 10:59am:

Gist wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 10:51am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 9:13am: adelcrow wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 8:45am: Its quite simple, businesses can find alternatives to carbon intensive goods and services and avoid paying the tax. Its no different from householders being less wastefull and finding alternatives. The modern Australian way is to squeal like a stuck pig instead of doing the hard work to make your business modern and viable into the future. Actually crow it is much more simple than that; why totally re-engineer your whole industry to avoid a tax, you just pass it onto the consumer and have them pay it. Anyone who believes the energy providers will do any different is as stupid as the government who introduced it. So you're saying that large industries don't look for every possible means to reduce their costs and so improve their efficiency? That they'll just pay the tax and say buggerit? Funny, that isn't my experience in working for all manner of large corporations over the past 30 years. Actually that is nothing at all like what I said; hope these large corporations didn't employ you for anything to do with your comprehension skills. In fact I stated in the affirmative, they will always look at their bottom line; why would they spend billions of dollars in infrastructure upgrades when they can easily pass on any and all costs (tax) to the consumer. Jeez if you are going to resort to a reductio argument at least try get the starting point right.

Yes, I understand what you said. Too bad your one remaining diseased brain cell can't understand what I said.

Yes they can pass on that cost and keep their profit steady. They can also increase prices and reduce their other costs. Therefore they increase their profit. Show me a company that doesn't do that. You may want to ask for help from a smart person.

Howard on pricing carbon.....The cheapest and most effective!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5jtiJPlv4Y&feature=related

Ditch the Carbon Tax and make the Greens get real jobs... ::) ::) ::)

Gist wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 12:28pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 10:59am: Gist wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 10:51am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 9:13am: adelcrow wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 8:45am: Its quite simple, businesses can find alternatives to carbon intensive goods and services and avoid paying the tax. Its no different from householders being less wastefull and finding alternatives. The modern Australian way is to squeal like a stuck pig instead of doing the hard work to make your business modern and viable into the future. Actually crow it is much more simple than that; why totally re-engineer your whole industry to avoid a tax, you just pass it onto the consumer and have them pay it. Anyone who believes the energy providers will do any different is as stupid as the government who introduced it. So you're saying that large industries don't look for every possible means to reduce their costs and so improve their efficiency? That they'll just pay the tax and say buggerit? Funny, that isn't my experience in working for all manner of large corporations over the past 30 years. Actually that is nothing at all like what I said; hope these large corporations didn't employ you for anything to do with your comprehension skills. In fact I stated in the affirmative, they will always look at their bottom line; why would they spend billions of dollars in infrastructure upgrades when they can easily pass on any and all costs (tax) to the consumer. Jeez if you are going to resort to a reductio argument at least try get the starting point right. Yes, I understand what you said. Too bad your one remaining diseased brain cell can't understand what I said. Yes they can pass on that cost and keep their profit steady. They can also increase prices and reduce their other costs. Therefore they increase their profit. Show me a company that doesn't do that. You may want to ask for help from a smart person.

And how exactly does an energy company with half a dozen coal fired generators do that?

P1ssing around the edges with cost tweaks is what some companies do, those with slim profit margins, but the major pollutors will just pass the tax onto us; it's quick, it's efficient and it makes no difference to their overall profit margin.

No-one is going to spend billions in infrastructure upgrades when offloading the tax will have the same effect.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 12:39pm:

And how exactly does an energy company with half a dozen coal fired generators do that? P1ssing around the edges with cost tweaks is what some companies do, those with slim profit margins, but the major pollutors will just pass the tax onto us; it's quick, it's efficient and it makes no difference to their overall profit margin. No-one is going to spend billions in infrastructure upgrades when offloading the tax will have the same effect.

Beats me I'm not an energy consultant! But I'm betting the power companies will be looking long and hard at how to do exactly that. Yes, they'll offload the tax. Nobody is expecting them to absorb the cost - that's why the scheme is structured to compensate the consumer. But you can bet the more a company is paying in tax, the longer and harder they'll stare at their business trying to find ways to cut that cost to improve their bottom line.

____ wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 11:42am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 8:21am: ____ wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 8:06am: Energy that goes into manufacturing exports ... which Australians pay for exports? Qantas, do only Australians fly on this soon to be foreign airline. Mars, McCain and Harvey Norman ... can these firms afford to lift their prices and so lose market share. Or will they change their carbon pollution behaviour and cut the amount of carbon tax they pay? Waste Disposal Sector, how may here buy retail off this sector ? Council dumping, may go up a few cents ... yet if the coalition and their supporters are worried about this, why are they silent about the cost of sewage on all households directly and directly. When will Liberal call for free dumping of shite for everyone beyond all the shite they, and their supporters tell about the carbon pricing scheme. . You are truly one of the world's stupid people. Mining companies don't pay the carbon tax on exports, their major production of carbon is fuel which is exempt from the tax, so why would you even mention them is beyond me. The major producers of carbon emissions are energy producers, not harvey norman or the people who make mcain super fries. You need to have your conversations with children as only they are tolerant enough for your level of stupidity. Then why are BHP, Rio Tinto and Anglo American included within the 500 list? As for the list of 500 largest polluters the first 299 are : Now try again Australians will not be paying the full amount. .

Nice of you to cut and paste the list without actually showing how and what those companies are being stung for. As the story says the top 10 polluters will pay nearly half the bill on their own and they're predominantly energy companies.

Australians and anybody that resides or visits here will pay all but a few bucks of of the tax regardless of where the company is from.

And if labor manages to squeeze a few bucks from other countries for our carbon tax it still won't make a rat's arse bit of difference we will always pay the bulk of the tax as consumers.

The rest of the world will be laughing its arse off as well fumble around trying to negate the less than 2% of carbon we put into the atmosphere.


Nothing will change other than everything will be more expensive as companies offset the tax with increased prices.

Gist wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 12:45pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 12:39pm: And how exactly does an energy company with half a dozen coal fired generators do that? P1ssing around the edges with cost tweaks is what some companies do, those with slim profit margins, but the major pollutors will just pass the tax onto us; it's quick, it's efficient and it makes no difference to their overall profit margin. No-one is going to spend billions in infrastructure upgrades when offloading the tax will have the same effect. Beats me I'm not an energy consultant! But I'm betting the power companies will be looking long and hard at how to do exactly that. Yes, they'll offload the tax. Nobody is expecting them to absorb the cost - that's why the scheme is structured to compensate the consumer. But you can bet the more a company is paying in tax, the longer and harder they'll stare at their business trying to find ways to cut that cost to improve their bottom line.

Unless the cost of change is vastly more expensive than the tax. Then nothing will happen other than power becoming more expensive.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 1:00pm:

Gist wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 12:45pm: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 12:39pm: And how exactly does an energy company with half a dozen coal fired generators do that? P1ssing around the edges with cost tweaks is what some companies do, those with slim profit margins, but the major pollutors will just pass the tax onto us; it's quick, it's efficient and it makes no difference to their overall profit margin. No-one is going to spend billions in infrastructure upgrades when offloading the tax will have the same effect. Beats me I'm not an energy consultant! But I'm betting the power companies will be looking long and hard at how to do exactly that. Yes, they'll offload the tax. Nobody is expecting them to absorb the cost - that's why the scheme is structured to compensate the consumer. But you can bet the more a company is paying in tax, the longer and harder they'll stare at their business trying to find ways to cut that cost to improve their bottom line. Unless the cost of change is vastly more expensive than the tax. Then nothing will happen other than power becoming more expensive.

Of course. In which case the consumer is still compensated for the increase. Meanwhile a competitor will have an opportunity to come in with better/more effective infrastructure, undercut the existing suppliers by being more efficient and so gain market share. The consumer wins.

Given you righties are always banging on about competition, free market forces, flexibility, blah, blah, blah, I would have thought that you'd understand that introducing a market based scheme is an effective way to do this thing. And that you'd support it. Instead, you all seem to want to install a Great Big New Tax to support welfare for major corporations. You guys are just becoming welfare suckholes worse than corpulant_whitey!

Gist wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 1:38pm:

Of course. In which case the consumer is still compensated for the increase. Meanwhile a competitor will have an opportunity to come in with better/more effective infrastructure, undercut the existing suppliers by being more efficient and so gain market share. The consumer wins. Given you righties are always banging on about competition, free market forces, flexibility, blah, blah, blah, I would have thought that you'd understand that introducing a market based scheme is an effective way to do this thing. And that you'd support it. Instead, you all seem to want to install a Great Big New Tax to support welfare for major corporations. You guys are just becoming welfare suckholes worse than corpulant_whitey!

Since when have I been a rightie? I have no political; allegiance other than to hate the greens. I am however, against random acts of stupidity that wastes everybodies time and effort.


No-one is just going to show up and build massive energy infrastructure just to compete against the current energy companies, this is not millions we're talking about, but multiple billions of dollars of spending. But if that happens there will be no savings for anyone, as low carbon power is hugely expensive on it's own, which is why it needs to be subsidised all around the world.

As for wanting a great big tax, I don't recall me ever saying i wanted a tax in fact I'm pretty sure if you read my posts you would find I'm against the tax.

But here is a little lesson in 'free market forces', there are no subsidies, there is no added tax burden, you sink or swim on your own; which is why the renewables need this tax and subsidies to survive.

'Cause god knows we need to get on top of that massive 2% carbon output we're generating, don't we.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 1:53pm:

Since when have I been a rightie? I have no political; allegiance other than to hate the greens. I am however, against random acts of stupidity that wastes everybodies time and effort. No-one is just going to show up and build massive energy infrastructure just to compete against the current energy companies, this is not millions we're talking about, but multiple billions of dollars of spending. But if that happens there will be no savings for anyone, as low carbon power is hugely expensive on it's own, which is why it needs to be subsidised all around the world. As for wanting a great big tax, I don't recall me ever saying i wanted a tax in fact I'm pretty sure if you read my posts you would find I'm against the tax. But here is a little lesson in 'free market forces', there are no subsidies, there is no added tax burden, you sink or swim on your own; which is why the renewables need this tax and subsidies to survive. 'Cause god knows we need to get on top of that massive 2% carbon output we're generating, don't we.

I see. So we may as well all give up on R&D because nobody is ever going to invest in new technology. What technology we have now is as good as it'll ever get. So no way we'll ever find cheaper ways to do renewables or more efficient ways to use fossil fuels.

And we don't have to worry about that because the fossil fuels will last forever so there's never any need to make a switch to renewables anyway.

That's a pretty interesting way of thinking.  :o

Gist wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 2:15pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 29th, 2012 at 1:53pm: Since when have I been a rightie? I have no political; allegiance other than to hate the greens. I am however, against random acts of stupidity that wastes everybodies time and effort. No-one is just going to show up and build massive energy infrastructure just to compete against the current energy companies, this is not millions we're talking about, but multiple billions of dollars of spending. But if that happens there will be no savings for anyone, as low carbon power is hugely expensive on it's own, which is why it needs to be subsidised all around the world. As for wanting a great big tax, I don't recall me ever saying i wanted a tax in fact I'm pretty sure if you read my posts you would find I'm against the tax. But here is a little lesson in 'free market forces', there are no subsidies, there is no added tax burden, you sink or swim on your own; which is why the renewables need this tax and subsidies to survive. 'Cause god knows we need to get on top of that massive 2% carbon output we're generating, don't we. I see. So we may as well all give up on R&D because nobody is ever going to invest in new technology. What technology we have now is as good as it'll ever get. So no way we'll ever find cheaper ways to do renewables or more efficient ways to use fossil fuels. And we don't have to worry about that because the fossil fuels will last forever so there's never any need to make a switch to renewables anyway. That's a pretty interesting way of thinking.  :o

Again with the reductio argument based on poor comprehension.

This tax isn't going to R&D is it or investing in new technology, the government isn't building new power stations is it?

No, it'll just end up on consolodated revinue with the rest of the money.

I made no comment at all on R&D or technology, just that this tax was a total waste of time and effort and will not achieve any positive outcomes. Because:

1. The tax will be passed onto the consumer as an added cost

2. Some consumers will be reimbursed by the government

3. The is no impetus to do anything at all, neither carrot nor stick

This has nothing to do with what i believe or want; this is just poor policy that's all.

If you want change, this ain't the way to do it.

Yes, the money will go into consolidated revenue. But there'll be an offsetting reduced intake due to lower tax rates plus increased outgoings due to pension increases. The remainder (which is still a sizeable chunk of money) goes into a fund for R&D into renewables. So there is an R&D component in this scheme.

Countries around the world are doing these things. China and India among them. Do you really want to be in a position down the track where we have to import energy technology from India?

If you have a better scheme then let's hear it. Never know, I may agree with you.