The Gillard camp has come out today telling us Abbott will not repeal the carbon tax.

Her reasons are:
(1) He'll crab walk - that's a real reason? just because she crab walked and lied when she said "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead" does not mean others will do it. You are disgraceful Gillard for pulling others down so low to your level.

(2) Wong says "it will be too difficult to repeal once you price it into the market". Lets be clear about this - this tax will go on for 50+ years. It will be easier to repeal it in the first year than in the 45th year!!! So if there was ever a time to repeal it - it's NOW!!!

(3) Combad says his "instincts" tells him Abbott won't do it. F#(K that's comforting isn't it? The Climate Change Minister says his "instincts"  Abbott won't do something that will sink him!!! It's more like he's "praying to God, Allah, Buddha and whatever other deity" will have him that he's not left holding the baby after the 2013 election.

(4) Who the F#(K is Gillard to say what the LIBs will or won't do when she does not even know what's going on in her own party? So you can get stuffed Gillard. You are desperate and we know it. 63% rejects your carbon tax with 57% wants it repealed. So suck it up princess


http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/13914897/abbott-wont-repeal-carbon-tax-gillard/

thread already in existence

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1339272123

i don't think is sensible a tax on Aussie people to fix a problem that is global and they do not make a contribution to the main problem.

I think it is a silly idea and not very fair to Aussie familys.

The ALP are getting desperate now trying to somehow convince the few that are still listening that Abbott wont repeal the CT. of course in their infinite stupidity - for which tehy are famed - all they have done is warmed the hearts of the fools still supporting them and driven a few thousand more away. it hasnt yet occured to them just how deeply unpopular and HATED the CT is.

if there is a worse political tactician than Gillard, I dont remember him/her.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 6:05pm:

The ALP are getting desperate now trying to somehow convince the few that are still listening that Abbott wont repeal the CT. of course in their infinite stupidity - for which tehy are famed - all they have done is warmed the hearts of the fools still supporting them and driven a few thousand more away. it hasnt yet occured to them just how deeply unpopular and HATED the CT is. if there is a worse political tactician than Gillard, I dont remember him/her.

The crazy thing is they think it actually work!!

We thought Keating and Hawke was bad - Gillard is the worse of the lot.

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 11:41pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:05pm: The ALP are getting desperate now trying to somehow convince the few that are still listening that Abbott wont repeal the CT. of course in their infinite stupidity - for which tehy are famed - all they have done is warmed the hearts of the fools still supporting them and driven a few thousand more away. it hasnt yet occured to them just how deeply unpopular and HATED the CT is. if there is a worse political tactician than Gillard, I dont remember him/her. The crazy thing is they think it actually work!! We thought Keating and Hawke was bad - Gillard is the worse of the lot.

I wouldn't have a clue what Hawke was like, way before my time, but I don't see how ANYONE could be worse than Gillard. She's an inept, incompetent, pathetic lying disgrace. Her and the rest of her cronies saying that the carbon tax will not be repealed demonstrates the height of arrogance, conceit, deception and contempt for the public, all to familiar and akin to this divided and directionless government.

Just do a few reruns of Gillard, Swann and Wong.

The alcho's in labor are drunk with stupidity.

After the reruns, ask the question. Do you really believe these idiots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crkTPDQlnUc

Tony Abbott famously said "labor will obsolutely bring in a carbon tax"

@ prog

Just looking at QT where Bishop confronted Swan about his promise that every dollar raised by the carbon tax will go to Australian householders but then ALP committed some of the money to the UN Climate Fund.

Swan then goes ahead and told Parliament that this contribution is helping Australians  ;D ;D ;D

The arrogance of Swan is incredibly stupid at best

Maqqa wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 8:02am:

@ prog Just looking at QT where Bishop confronted Swan about his promise that every dollar raised by the carbon tax will go to Australian householders but then ALP committed some of the money to the UN Climate Fund. Swan then goes ahead and told Parliament that this contribution is helping Australians  ;D ;D ;D The arrogance of Swan is incredibly stupid at best

not so much arrogance as just plain stupid. Swan is easily the stupidest Treasurer we have had in a long time.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 11:51am:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 8:02am: @ prog Just looking at QT where Bishop confronted Swan about his promise that every dollar raised by the carbon tax will go to Australian householders but then ALP committed some of the money to the UN Climate Fund. Swan then goes ahead and told Parliament that this contribution is helping Australians  ;D ;D ;D The arrogance of Swan is incredibly stupid at best not so much arrogance as just plain stupid. Swan is easily the stupidest Treasurer we have had in a long time.

Thats why he managed to do a complete budget for australia. We may not agree with it but he did it. And it apparently works. Well it does what he wanted it to anyway.

SOB

There is one major reason that Abbnott will not repeal the Carbon tax - He can't do it.

Maqqa wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 8:02am:

@ prog Just looking at QT where Bishop confronted Swan about his promise that every dollar raised by the carbon tax will go to Australian householders but then ALP committed some of the money to the UN Climate Fund.

Not Like the Proposed Abbnott carbon tax where all the Money was going to the Biggest emitters and nothing to the people impacted.

That was going to be a great system he had recomended as the best option, an incentive for the poluters to increase carbon output in order to qualify for a greater share of the government hand out.

Better get prepared for that closet Communist Bob Brown's curse on Australia the farcical "CO₂" tax which was "justified" on the basis of a, now well established, lie about "poisonous" CO₂ gas and spectacular climate fortune telling to wreak havoc on the Australian economy by increasing the cost of living by 10% and rising by Christmas.

Miss Gillard will be waddling with joy at seeing its FABIAN fantasy for Australia "moving forward" and crippling "working families".


$46m carbon tax bill for hospitals, schools
EXCLUSIVE BY SIMON BENSON The Daily Telegraph June 11, 2012 12:00AM

THE average Sydney hospital will be hit with a $120,000 annual carbon bill after the $23-a-tonne tax kicks in on July 1.

Local public schools will also be forced to come up with an extra $9000 a year on their power bills to pay their carbon liability.

Revised analysis from NSW Treasury dated May 4, 2012, reveals that NSW hospitals and schools would have the highest carbon tax liabilities of any government agency.

The new modelling of the carbon tax impact on government services included in tomorrow's state budget reveals NSW Health would have a $106 million carbon cost over the four-year forward estimates - or $27 million a year.

The budget will confirm a cumulative four-year carbon impact of $948 million.

With 220 hospitals across NSW, the average cost to power each hospital will increase by $120,000 a year, according to the budget papers.

How carbon tax will hurt small business. STRUGGLING small businesses face punishing power bill rises of up to 25 per cent due to the carbon tax and are warning of job losses and flow-on price hikes.

Even schools, hospitals feel carbon tax

Implementation of the carbon tax is now just 20 days away, and still the surprises continue about just how wide-ranging the new tax will be.

Carbon tax payments for students. THE latest round of carbon tax compensation payments - advances of up to $190 for eligible students - are being rolled out from today.

Hospitals are particularly energy intensive due to the hi-tech operating, diagnostic and emergency equipment and the fact they are open 24 hours a day.

But the education department will also have a four-year liability of $77 million - or $19.25 million a year. With 2177 schools across the state, the average bill increase per year for every school will be $9000.

Railcorp will pay an extra $57 million over four years, or $9000 a year for every one of its 1650 train carriages.

Even NSW Police will be slapped with an annual $4 million increase to power bills for its 500 police stations.

The state's jails would pay an extra $58,000 a year each to cover the carbon tax, while State Transit would pay an extra $1 million a year to run city buses.

The federal government has overcompensated almost 90 per cent of households to assist with bills. Low to middle income families are expected to be up to $5000 a year better off due to tax cuts and increases to family payments.

NSW government agencies will not be compensated and the federal government has in the past accused the O'Farrell government of fudging its figures.

However, the documents obtained from sources in the NSW Treasury reveal the revised modelling is based on the federal government's own carbon modelling which assumes a "cost pass through rate" of about 9 per cent for electricity.

The estimates under this approach are based on conservative assumptions about the effect of the carbon tax on electricity prices, the budget document says.

Premier Barry O'Farrell has already planned to recoup the cost from an increase in mining royalties - a move likely to provoke retaliatory action from the federal government through its royalty rebate scheme under the mining tax.

State Treasury officials are angered by federal government claims their figures are wrong and claim they have been politicised by the Gillard government despite having advised a former Labor state government for 17 years.

Climate Change Minister Greg Combet yesterday attacked Opposition Leader Tony Abbott for a tax scare campaign, claiming he would be proven wrong. "It has been the most ridiculous, deceitful campaign in politics I can remember."


Comments on this story

Chris of Sydney Posted at 1:09 PM Today
An our standard of living will take a massive nosedive. Aged pensioners will die of heat exhaustion in summer and freeze in winter. Good night Australia, thanks for coming.

David of Sydney Posted at 12:59 PM Today
Labor! What else can you expect from these twits! Champions at wasting tax payers money! The money they gouge from the public with this "Carbon Dioxide Tax" they will waste in an instant! Be prepared for big donations to third world countries ( run by dictators ) and heaps going to the United Nations! Gillard and Brown should hang their heads in shame for thinking up this swindle!

Doug Posted at 12:48 PM Today
What a great opportunity for the Govt to show leadership and start reducing energy use and saving money.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/m-carbon-tax-bill-for-hospitals-schools/story-e6freuy9-1226390600021

Dnarever wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 12:25pm:

There is one major reason that Abbnott will not repeal the Carbon tax - He can't do it.

really? he cant put up legisltaion in the lower house and then submit it to the senate? not really hard at all. if they reject it twice then it goes to a DD and a joint sitting in which case it WILL be passed. Not simple for sure, but a long way short of impossible.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:05pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 12:25pm: There is one major reason that Abbnott will not repeal the Carbon tax - He can't do it. really? he cant put up legisltaion in the lower house and then submit it to the senate? not really hard at all. if they reject it twice then it goes to a DD and a joint sitting in which case it WILL be passed. Not simple for sure, but a long way short of impossible.

Abbnott does not care about a carbon price after all a Tax is his idea of the best method - all his spluttering in reality is about political opportunism and has nothing to do with what he thinks is best for Australia.

In the most likely time frame for a DD election Tnoy would be well aware that to pull the trigger is going to cost him at least 15 seats and probably over 20.

He will not take that risk over a policy which in reality he agrees with.

Dnarever wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:12pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:05pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 12:25pm: There is one major reason that Abbnott will not repeal the Carbon tax - He can't do it. really? he cant put up legisltaion in the lower house and then submit it to the senate? not really hard at all. if they reject it twice then it goes to a DD and a joint sitting in which case it WILL be passed. Not simple for sure, but a long way short of impossible. Abbnott does not care about a carbon price after all a Tax is his idea of the best method - all his spluttering in reality is about political opportunism and has nothing to do with what he thinks is best for Australia. In the most likely time frame for a DD election Tnoy would be well aware that to pull the trigger is going to cost him at least 15 seats and probably over 20. He will not take that risk over a policy which in reality he agrees with.

thats a bit presumptuous, is it not? you have zero ability to know that and conventional wisdom  would actually suggest the opposite. After Whitlams flogging in 1975, Fraser went to an early election in 1977 with zero particular reason and Whitlam was flogged again but virtually the same margin. Abbott would be taking no chance at all. It would be a hated carbon tax that labor senators refuse to remove even with a massive mandate. And you want to think that Abbott woudl suffer in that environment? There is actually a possibility he could gain seats and especially in the senate. Its a small risk to Abbott but a HUGE risk the Labor not to pass the repeal.

But What Id really like you to answer is why you think Labor isnt obligated to support the repeal in line with a massive mandate just as they demanded the coalition support the workchoiecs repeal? This isnt a question of politics or timeing of DD etc. This is an issue about the conventions and principles of parliament. If they breach that convention then they will destroy themselves for a generation.

Do you not yet realise thatr much of the opposition to a CT is not on the tax itself but rather the breathtaking breach of an election promise? She was reneging on it withing days of the election. THAT is what people are really hating. The deceitful manner in which it was brought about. And that is why labor supporters are among the large number of people demanding it be repealed. And you really dont want to antagonise them by encouraging them to vote Liberal in the senate while maintaining their lower house allegiance to Labor.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:19pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:05pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 12:25pm: There is one major reason that Abbnott will not repeal the Carbon tax - He can't do it. really? he cant put up legisltaion in the lower house and then submit it to the senate? not really hard at all. if they reject it twice then it goes to a DD and a joint sitting in which case it WILL be passed. Not simple for sure, but a long way short of impossible. Abbnott does not care about a carbon price after all a Tax is his idea of the best method - all his spluttering in reality is about political opportunism and has nothing to do with what he thinks is best for Australia. In the most likely time frame for a DD election Tnoy would be well aware that to pull the trigger is going to cost him at least 15 seats and probably over 20. He will not take that risk over a policy which in reality he agrees with. thats a bit presumptuous, is it not? you have zero ability to know that and conventional wisdom  would actually suggest the opposite. After Whitlams flogging in 1975, Fraser went to an early election in 1977 with zero particular reason and Whitlam was flogged again but virtually the same margin.

The 77 election was needed to bring the senate elections back in line following the 75 election as well as a predicted deterioration of economic conditions with Whitlam still at the Labor helm - Fraser thought it was his best chance..

The government offering tax cuts to voters and ran advertisements with the slogan "fistful of dollars". The tax cuts were never delivered; instead a "temporary surcharge" was imposed in 1978. The election coincided with the retirement of the Governor-General, Sir John Kerr. Kerr had appeared drunk at the Melbourne Cup in November and the public outcry resulted in the cancellation of his appointment as Ambassador to UNESCO.

http://australianpolitics.com/elections/1977/

Typical of Liberals go to an election promising tax cuts and in power deliver a new tax instead. Apparently it is only a lie if told by Labor.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:19pm:

thats a bit presumptuous, is it not? you have zero ability to know that and conventional wisdom  would actually suggest the opposite. After Whitlams flogging in 1975, Fraser went to an early election in 1977 with zero particular reason and Whitlam was flogged again but virtually the same margin. Abbott would be taking no chance at all. It would be a hated carbon tax that labor senators refuse to remove even with a massive mandate. And you want to think that Abbott woudl suffer in that environment? There is actually a possibility he could gain seats and especially in the senate. Its a small risk to Abbott but a HUGE risk the Labor not to pass the repeal. But What Id really like you to answer is why you think Labor isnt obligated to support the repeal in line with a massive mandate just as they demanded the coalition support the workchoiecs repeal? This isnt a question of politics or timeing of DD etc. This is an issue about the conventions and principles of parliament. If they breach that convention then they will destroy themselves for a generation. Do you not yet realise thatr much of the opposition to a CT is not on the tax itself but rather the breathtaking breach of an election promise? She was reneging on it withing days of the election. THAT is what people are really hating. The deceitful manner in which it was brought about. And that is why labor supporters are among the large number of people demanding it be repealed. And you really dont want to antagonise them by encouraging them to vote Liberal in the senate while maintaining their lower house allegiance to Labor.

It would be a hated carbon tax that labor senators refuse to remove even with a massive mandate.

By 2013 not many will care about a carbon price - by a DD election towards 2015 I doulbt they will even remember there was a problem.

If Abbnott has a large majority the electorate will more than likely look at moderating the excess and the natural tendancy will be to move toward a more normalised position, they will not keep the rage particularly since it is only manufactured and not genuine.

support the repeal in line with a massive mandate just as they demanded the coalition support the workchoiecs repeal? This isnt a question of politics or timeing of DD etc. This is an issue about the conventions and principles of parliament.

You did not look at Abbnott scuttling the ETS in the same light with a huge mandate supported by Labor and the Liberals in place? You rather have the horse in front of the cart - first lets see if there really is a mandate of any type and if so would it naturally lead the Greens or Labor to abandon their position because of the dishonest opposition we have seen.

It may well end up a good idea to support the change as I am fairly certain that it is the last thing the Liberals would want, Technically it would be very difficult to remove at that time (almost impossible) and the Liberals clearly can not afford to do it let alone replace it with their new costly ineffective system.

The Liberals I suspect would be very happy to be forced to keep the carbon price as is till the new trading system commences. In reality they would be more likely to try and modify the transition more in line with their preferences.

You make a big deal about a broken promise which if it was broken it wasn't by much and had little impact, it is interesting the way people who go on about this were happy to stand behind the Howard government and an absolute mountain of lies on almost any topic they approached.

We have a fixed price as an interim solution which is called a tax - a tax where nobody ever pays any tax at all. Labor always indicated they were moving towards a price on carbon with a preferred ETS, the difference is miniscule, well the difference is that it can by the smallest margin be label as a tax by the guy who believed that a real tax is the best option.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:19pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:05pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 12:25pm: There is one major reason that Abbnott will not repeal the Carbon tax - He can't do it. really? he cant put up legisltaion in the lower house and then submit it to the senate? not really hard at all. if they reject it twice then it goes to a DD and a joint sitting in which case it WILL be passed. Not simple for sure, but a long way short of impossible. Abbnott does not care about a carbon price after all a Tax is his idea of the best method - all his spluttering in reality is about political opportunism and has nothing to do with what he thinks is best for Australia. In the most likely time frame for a DD election Tnoy would be well aware that to pull the trigger is going to cost him at least 15 seats and probably over 20. He will not take that risk over a policy which in reality he agrees with. thats a bit presumptuous, is it not? you have zero ability to know that and conventional wisdom  would actually suggest the opposite. After Whitlams flogging in 1975, Fraser went to an early election in 1977 with zero particular reason and Whitlam was flogged again but virtually the same margin. Abbott would be taking no chance at all. It would be a hated carbon tax that labor senators refuse to remove even with a massive mandate. And you want to think that Abbott woudl suffer in that environment? There is actually a possibility he could gain seats and especially in the senate. Its a small risk to Abbott but a HUGE risk the Labor not to pass the repeal. But What Id really like you to answer is why you think Labor isnt obligated to support the repeal in line with a massive mandate just as they demanded the coalition support the workchoiecs repeal? This isnt a question of politics or timeing of DD etc. This is an issue about the conventions and principles of parliament. If they breach that convention then they will destroy themselves for a generation. Do you not yet realise thatr much of the opposition to a CT is not on the tax itself but rather the breathtaking breach of an election promise? She was reneging on it withing days of the election. THAT is what people are really hating. The deceitful manner in which it was brought about. And that is why labor supporters are among the large number of people demanding it be repealed. And you really dont want to antagonise them by encouraging them to vote Liberal in the senate while maintaining their lower house allegiance to Labor.

presumptious is this idea that you have that if Abbott were to win the next election the ALP and the greens would support him in removing the carbon tax .... why would they want to remove something  they fought so hard for? ....

Dnarever wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:50pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:19pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:05pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 12:25pm: There is one major reason that Abbnott will not repeal the Carbon tax - He can't do it. really? he cant put up legisltaion in the lower house and then submit it to the senate? not really hard at all. if they reject it twice then it goes to a DD and a joint sitting in which case it WILL be passed. Not simple for sure, but a long way short of impossible. Abbnott does not care about a carbon price after all a Tax is his idea of the best method - all his spluttering in reality is about political opportunism and has nothing to do with what he thinks is best for Australia. In the most likely time frame for a DD election Tnoy would be well aware that to pull the trigger is going to cost him at least 15 seats and probably over 20. He will not take that risk over a policy which in reality he agrees with. thats a bit presumptuous, is it not? you have zero ability to know that and conventional wisdom  would actually suggest the opposite. After Whitlams flogging in 1975, Fraser went to an early election in 1977 with zero particular reason and Whitlam was flogged again but virtually the same margin. The 77 election was needed to bring the senate elections back in line following the 75 election as well as a predicted deterioration of economic conditions with Whitlam still at the Labor helm - Fraser thought it was his best chance.. The government offering tax cuts to voters and ran advertisements with the slogan "fistful of dollars". The tax cuts were never delivered; instead a "temporary surcharge" was imposed in 1978. The election coincided with the retirement of the Governor-General, Sir John Kerr. Kerr had appeared drunk at the Melbourne Cup in November and the public outcry resulted in the cancellation of his appointment as Ambassador to UNESCO. http://australianpolitics.com/elections/1977/ Typical of Liberals go to an election promising tax cuts and in power deliver a new tax instead. Apparently it is only a lie if told by Labor.

seriously...  L.A.W. tax cuts anyone??? and lets not forget the carbon tax!

FROM DNA:

---

Quote:

By 2013 not many will care about a carbon price - by a DD election towards 2015 I doulbt they will even remember there was a problem. If Abbott has a large majority the electorate will more than likely look at moderating the excess and the natural tendancy will be to move toward a more normalised position, they will not keep the rage particularly since it is only manufactured and not genuine.

nothing you have said fits historical experience nor any reasonable expectation of behaviour among voters. Youve been at the forefront for the last 2.5 years saying that the coalitions vote will wane etc and instead it is at almost record levels. You really dont get that the CT is not so much OPPOSED as it is HATED. Not so much because if what it is but rather the arrogant decietful manner in which it was brought about. Just as they hate labor in 75 they still hated them just as badly in 77.

get used to it.

John Smith wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:33pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:19pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:05pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 12:25pm: There is one major reason that Abbnott will not repeal the Carbon tax - He can't do it. really? he cant put up legisltaion in the lower house and then submit it to the senate? not really hard at all. if they reject it twice then it goes to a DD and a joint sitting in which case it WILL be passed. Not simple for sure, but a long way short of impossible. Abbnott does not care about a carbon price after all a Tax is his idea of the best method - all his spluttering in reality is about political opportunism and has nothing to do with what he thinks is best for Australia. In the most likely time frame for a DD election Tnoy would be well aware that to pull the trigger is going to cost him at least 15 seats and probably over 20. He will not take that risk over a policy which in reality he agrees with. thats a bit presumptuous, is it not? you have zero ability to know that and conventional wisdom  would actually suggest the opposite. After Whitlams flogging in 1975, Fraser went to an early election in 1977 with zero particular reason and Whitlam was flogged again but virtually the same margin. Abbott would be taking no chance at all. It would be a hated carbon tax that labor senators refuse to remove even with a massive mandate. And you want to think that Abbott woudl suffer in that environment? There is actually a possibility he could gain seats and especially in the senate. Its a small risk to Abbott but a HUGE risk the Labor not to pass the repeal. But What Id really like you to answer is why you think Labor isnt obligated to support the repeal in line with a massive mandate just as they demanded the coalition support the workchoiecs repeal? This isnt a question of politics or timeing of DD etc. This is an issue about the conventions and principles of parliament. If they breach that convention then they will destroy themselves for a generation. Do you not yet realise thatr much of the opposition to a CT is not on the tax itself but rather the breathtaking breach of an election promise? She was reneging on it withing days of the election. THAT is what people are really hating. The deceitful manner in which it was brought about. And that is why labor supporters are among the large number of people demanding it be repealed. And you really dont want to antagonise them by encouraging them to vote Liberal in the senate while maintaining their lower house allegiance to Labor. presumptious is this idea that you have that if Abbott were to win the next election the ALP and the greens would support him in removing the carbon tax .... why would they want to remove something  they fought so hard for? ....

its called PRINCIPLE. it is where you do something you dont personally like becuase it is the RIGHT thing to do. it is where you recognise that as REPRESENTATIVES of the people you are honour bound to reflect their opinions.

I personally expect the labor party to support the repeal either officially or via a crossing of the floor. Not everyone in labor is so stupid as to wish upon themselves a generation in opposition all for the price of refusing to repeal hated legisltiaon that will end up being removed in a joint sitting anyhow.

The real reason is that our society wants action on climate change, and all the alternatives are worse for our economy.

freediver wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:11pm:

The real reason is that our society wants action on climate change, and all the alternatives are worse for our economy.

really? care to support that using REAL statistics and not a poll that asks 'do you believe in climate change'?

Regardless of your opinion on ACC, it is not reasonable to state that  a mjority agree with you. 5 years ago maybe, but not now. The tide has turned and liek it or not, it is the truth.

freediver wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:11pm:

The real reason is that our society wants action on climate change, and all the alternatives are worse for our economy.

Why does society want action on climate change when there is no proof this action will lower global temperature

The problem for labor is they want us to pay to breath. They want the poor to freeze. They want us to swallow a lie. They dont listen to us about the lie.

And most of all, they dont listen to us when we vote for a certain criteria in an election. This will not be forgotten.

Maqqa wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:16pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:11pm: The real reason is that our society wants action on climate change, and all the alternatives are worse for our economy. Why does society want action on climate change when there is no proof this action will lower global temperature

Lol, maqqa has founded a lost argument again!!  :D :D :D  :-*

Maqqa wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:16pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:11pm: The real reason is that our society wants action on climate change, and all the alternatives are worse for our economy. Why does society want action on climate change when there is no proof this action will lower global temperature

Because most people understand rational risk management.

freediver wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:22pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:16pm: freediver wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:11pm: The real reason is that our society wants action on climate change, and all the alternatives are worse for our economy. Why does society want action on climate change when there is no proof this action will lower global temperature Because most people understand rational risk management.

They understand BS pseudo science too and opportunistic socialists.

progressiveslol wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:22pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:22pm: Maqqa wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:16pm: freediver wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:11pm: The real reason is that our society wants action on climate change, and all the alternatives are worse for our economy. Why does society want action on climate change when there is no proof this action will lower global temperature Because most people understand rational risk management. They understand BS pseudo science too and opportunistic socilaists.

progs lol has nada!

Hows that strategy of chewing up the worlds entire internet address space going mate?

Ya been sleeping well I trust....!!???!!!  :-* :-* :-* :-* :-*

progressiveslol wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:22pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:22pm: Maqqa wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:16pm: freediver wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:11pm: The real reason is that our society wants action on climate change, and all the alternatives are worse for our economy. Why does society want action on climate change when there is no proof this action will lower global temperature Because most people understand rational risk management. They understand BS pseudo science too and opportunistic socialists.

You are right. The public is seeing through the transparent anti science BS from the 'business as usual' financial interests.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:47pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:19pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:05pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 12:25pm: There is one major reason that Abbnott will not repeal the Carbon tax - He can't do it. really? he cant put up legisltaion in the lower house and then submit it to the senate? not really hard at all. if they reject it twice then it goes to a DD and a joint sitting in which case it WILL be passed. Not simple for sure, but a long way short of impossible. Abbnott does not care about a carbon price after all a Tax is his idea of the best method - all his spluttering in reality is about political opportunism and has nothing to do with what he thinks is best for Australia. In the most likely time frame for a DD election Tnoy would be well aware that to pull the trigger is going to cost him at least 15 seats and probably over 20. He will not take that risk over a policy which in reality he agrees with. thats a bit presumptuous, is it not? you have zero ability to know that and conventional wisdom  would actually suggest the opposite. After Whitlams flogging in 1975, Fraser went to an early election in 1977 with zero particular reason and Whitlam was flogged again but virtually the same margin. Abbott would be taking no chance at all. It would be a hated carbon tax that labor senators refuse to remove even with a massive mandate. And you want to think that Abbott woudl suffer in that environment? There is actually a possibility he could gain seats and especially in the senate. Its a small risk to Abbott but a HUGE risk the Labor not to pass the repeal. But What Id really like you to answer is why you think Labor isnt obligated to support the repeal in line with a massive mandate just as they demanded the coalition support the workchoiecs repeal? This isnt a question of politics or timeing of DD etc. This is an issue about the conventions and principles of parliament. If they breach that convention then they will destroy themselves for a generation. Do you not yet realise thatr much of the opposition to a CT is not on the tax itself but rather the breathtaking breach of an election promise? She was reneging on it withing days of the election. THAT is what people are really hating. The deceitful manner in which it was brought about. And that is why labor supporters are among the large number of people demanding it be repealed. And you really dont want to antagonise them by encouraging them to vote Liberal in the senate while maintaining their lower house allegiance to Labor. presumptious is this idea that you have that if Abbott were to win the next election the ALP and the greens would support him in removing the carbon tax .... why would they want to remove something  they fought so hard for? .... its called PRINCIPLE. it is where you do something you dont personally like becuase it is the RIGHT thing to do. it is where you recognise that as REPRESENTATIVES of the people you are honour bound to reflect their opinions. I personally expect the labor party to support the repeal either officially or via a crossing of the floor. Not everyone in labor is so stupid as to wish upon themselves a generation in opposition all for the price of refusing to repeal hated legisltiaon that will end up being removed in a joint sitting anyhow.

its called PRINCIPLE.

Yes but to the conservatives PRINCIPLES are something that they can take advantage of other people having while having no understanding of the concept themselves.

freediver wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:22pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:16pm: freediver wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:11pm: The real reason is that our society wants action on climate change, and all the alternatives are worse for our economy. Why does society want action on climate change when there is no proof this action will lower global temperature Because most people understand rational risk management.

excuse me....??????

SINCE WHEN??? People are notriously AWFUL at risk management nevermind mitigation.

FD, that is probably the silliest thing Ive heard you say in ages.

freediver wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:30pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:22pm: freediver wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:22pm: Maqqa wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:16pm: freediver wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:11pm: The real reason is that our society wants action on climate change, and all the alternatives are worse for our economy. Why does society want action on climate change when there is no proof this action will lower global temperature Because most people understand rational risk management. They understand BS pseudo science too and opportunistic socialists. You are right. The public is seeing through the transparent anti science BS from the 'business as usual' financial interests.

wow you are living in a place called DENIAL. the support for ACC has dropped and there is a increasing level of scepticism in the community. You can like it or not but you dont get to pretend it isnt true.

Dnarever wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:48pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:47pm: John Smith wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:19pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:05pm: Dnarever wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 12:25pm: There is one major reason that Abbnott will not repeal the Carbon tax - He can't do it. really? he cant put up legisltaion in the lower house and then submit it to the senate? not really hard at all. if they reject it twice then it goes to a DD and a joint sitting in which case it WILL be passed. Not simple for sure, but a long way short of impossible. Abbnott does not care about a carbon price after all a Tax is his idea of the best method - all his spluttering in reality is about political opportunism and has nothing to do with what he thinks is best for Australia. In the most likely time frame for a DD election Tnoy would be well aware that to pull the trigger is going to cost him at least 15 seats and probably over 20. He will not take that risk over a policy which in reality he agrees with. thats a bit presumptuous, is it not? you have zero ability to know that and conventional wisdom  would actually suggest the opposite. After Whitlams flogging in 1975, Fraser went to an early election in 1977 with zero particular reason and Whitlam was flogged again but virtually the same margin. Abbott would be taking no chance at all. It would be a hated carbon tax that labor senators refuse to remove even with a massive mandate. And you want to think that Abbott woudl suffer in that environment? There is actually a possibility he could gain seats and especially in the senate. Its a small risk to Abbott but a HUGE risk the Labor not to pass the repeal. But What Id really like you to answer is why you think Labor isnt obligated to support the repeal in line with a massive mandate just as they demanded the coalition support the workchoiecs repeal? This isnt a question of politics or timeing of DD etc. This is an issue about the conventions and principles of parliament. If they breach that convention then they will destroy themselves for a generation. Do you not yet realise thatr much of the opposition to a CT is not on the tax itself but rather the breathtaking breach of an election promise? She was reneging on it withing days of the election. THAT is what people are really hating. The deceitful manner in which it was brought about. And that is why labor supporters are among the large number of people demanding it be repealed. And you really dont want to antagonise them by encouraging them to vote Liberal in the senate while maintaining their lower house allegiance to Labor. presumptious is this idea that you have that if Abbott were to win the next election the ALP and the greens would support him in removing the carbon tax .... why would they want to remove something  they fought so hard for? .... its called PRINCIPLE. it is where you do something you dont personally like becuase it is the RIGHT thing to do. it is where you recognise that as REPRESENTATIVES of the people you are honour bound to reflect their opinions. I personally expect the labor party to support the repeal either officially or via a crossing of the floor. Not everyone in labor is so stupid as to wish upon themselves a generation in opposition all for the price of refusing to repeal hated legisltiaon that will end up being removed in a joint sitting anyhow. its called PRINCIPLE. Yes but to the conservatives PRINCIPLES are something that they can take advantage of other people having while having no understanding of the concept themselves.

You do realise that a PRINCIPLE is something you adhere to no matter whatthe cost or what your opponents do. If you really had a principle, you wouldnt care what the opposition do. You'd stick to yours.

And yet your only response to the question of repealing the CT is a tit-for-tat UNPRINCIPLED position.

Ive said befoer that very few people on here (both sides) would know 'principle' if it fell on them. Apparently you are included in that lot.