Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 12
Send Topic Print
GREEN TAX SHIFT (Read 54080 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 37808
I like fish
GREEN TAX SHIFT
Jan 6th, 2007 at 12:51pm
 
taken from this thread:

http://ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1164007195

in response to:

Quote:
Do you have an environmental policy? Does it recommend or support alternative energy sources or mainstream, coal, gas and nuclear? Or do you intend to keep quiet on this issue?

The next election will involve Industrial and environmental policies. These policies will make or break you.

An answer for WorkPlace agreements need to be found as well as energy needs have to be answered along with a planned reduction of greenhouse emmissions. Please don't say Green Shift Tax. Green Shift Tax, like carbon tax, only hides the problem it doesn't solve it.


A green tax shift reduces carbon emissions. How does that 'not solve' the problem? It is only the method that may be hidden (to some). The outcome is just as real.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 25th, 2007 at 8:18pm by ozadmin »  

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
enviro
Senior Member
****
Offline


Taking Out The Trash

Posts: 323
Weethalle NSW
Gender: male
Re: Australian peoples Party
Reply #1 - Jan 6th, 2007 at 1:22pm
 
Green Shift Tax is a bandaid. Consumption will increase due to population growth. Alternative energy sources can negate any bandaid tax.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 37808
I like fish
Re: Australian peoples Party
Reply #2 - Jan 6th, 2007 at 1:25pm
 
A green tax shift will give you alternative sources. The only difference is that it is more thorough and will take advantage of other ways to reduce emissions as well. You are assuming that energy consumption needs to continue as it currently is, thereby ignoring the very attractive options for reducing emissions by reducing consumption and improving efficiency.
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
enviro
Senior Member
****
Offline


Taking Out The Trash

Posts: 323
Weethalle NSW
Gender: male
Re: Australian peoples Party
Reply #3 - Jan 6th, 2007 at 1:30pm
 
freediver wrote on Jan 6th, 2007 at 1:25pm:
A green tax shift will give you alternative sources. The only difference is that it is more thorough and will take advantage of other ways to reduce emissions as well. You are assuming that energy consumption needs to continue as it currently is, thereby ignoring the very attractive options for reducing emissions by reducing consumption and improving efficiency.


It is not an assumption. Population is growing in this country by over 4% each year. If Green Shift Tax reduces emissions by 12% it would only have a minimal lifespan and as I said it just becomes a bandaid.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 37808
I like fish
Re: Australian peoples Party
Reply #4 - Jan 6th, 2007 at 1:50pm
 
How is this argument any different to the one you made?

If alternate sources reduce emissions by 12% it would only have a minimal lifespan and just becomes a bandaid.
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
enviro
Senior Member
****
Offline


Taking Out The Trash

Posts: 323
Weethalle NSW
Gender: male
Re: Australian peoples Party
Reply #5 - Jan 6th, 2007 at 2:22pm
 
Sorry, should have explained properly.

What you save today will grow back due to population increase to a point of their is no saving to todays standards. There is no need for a new tax, just a new energy source.

Energy output increases when there is growth.

On the note of growth, your proposal is to restrict industry growth to the energy they can afford. If they want growth they would have to increase their prices to achieve this. Increased costs would eventually mean increased prices to the consumer.
Shocked

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 37808
I like fish
Re: Australian peoples Party
Reply #6 - Jan 6th, 2007 at 2:47pm
 
There is no need for a new tax, just a new energy source.

But the tax is the best way to achieve that new energy source, if it is even necessary to do so. What if we could reduce consumption by 90% for less than the cost of switching to new enerrgy sources?

your proposal is to restrict industry growth to the energy they can afford.

No it isn't. My proposal is to encourage industry to restrict emissions without direct government interference. Forcing a specific solution will harm industry growth more than an equivalent tax system would. I am not promoting an energy tax. I am proposing a carbon tax. Renewable sources would be exempt and would be taken up if necessary. The only difference is that industry would not be restricted to that option, which is actually rather expensive.

Increased costs would eventually mean increased prices to the consumer.

On the whole costs would not necessarily increase. Some costs would go down. Any price rises would be far less than the price rises caused by forcing a switch to alternative energy sources.
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
enviro
Senior Member
****
Offline


Taking Out The Trash

Posts: 323
Weethalle NSW
Gender: male
Green Shift Tax
Reply #7 - Jan 6th, 2007 at 3:54pm
 
freediver wrote on Jan 6th, 2007 at 2:47pm:
There is no need for a new tax, just a new energy source.

But the tax is the best way to achieve that new energy source, if it is even necessary to do so. What if we could reduce consumption by 90% for less than the cost of switching to new enerrgy sources?

Where do you get 90% from? I was being liberal with my estimate in surmising 12%


your proposal is to restrict industry growth to the energy they can afford.

No it isn't. My proposal is to encourage industry to restrict emissions without direct government interference. Forcing a specific solution will harm industry growth more than an equivalent tax system would.

Industry is about making money, restricting emmisions will ruin small to medium level business's. Yes a specific solution would harm industry growth in the coal sector, gas sector and oil sector but these are negative growth areas for us.


I am not promoting an energy tax. I am proposing a carbon tax. Renewable sources would be exempt and would be taken up if necessary. The only difference is that industry would not be restricted to that option, which is actually rather expensive.

Carbon Tax is Energy Tax however you want to disguise it. Hot Rocks Energy is not expensive


Increased costs would eventually mean increased prices to the consumer.

On the whole costs would not necessarily increase. Some costs would go down. Any price rises would be far less than the price rises caused by forcing a switch to alternative energy sources.


Once you install a new tax it then becomes an object for manipulation by future governments as a revenue maker not as a deterent.


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 37808
I like fish
Re: Green Tax Shift
Reply #8 - Jan 6th, 2007 at 4:05pm
 
Where do you get 90% from? I was being liberal with my estimate in surmising 12%

It all depends on how much tax you put on it. You could reduce emissions by 100% if the tax was high enough. It is a very flexible approach.

restricting emmisions will ruin small to medium level business's

You'd be surprised at how creative people can get when their bottom line is at risk. Furthermore, I am not proposing that we restrict emissions. I am proposing that we tax them - and reduce other taxes so as not to do that kind of harm.

Yes a specific solution would harm industry growth in the coal sector, gas sector and oil sector

It would harm the same people who would have to pay the carbon tax. The price of electricity would go up. Either that, or the government would have to start subsidising energy consumption, which would be even worse.

Carbon Tax is Energy Tax

No it isn't. Carbon and energy are very different things. The tax you pay on a given unit of energy would vary wildly depending on how it was produced. A carbon tax is also a tax on other non-energy products.

Once you install a new tax it then becomes an object for manipulation by future governments as a revenue maker not as a deterent

So? As least they would be raising revenue from an activity you want to restrict. Would you be complaining if emissions were reduced by 80% instead of 40% due to revenue raising? Without this tax, society is actually subsidising carbon emissions.
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 37808
I like fish
Re: Green Tax Shift
Reply #9 - Jan 6th, 2007 at 4:17pm
 
For the same reduction in emissions, a carbon tax would increase the marginal cost of electricity by less than government enforced solutions like wind, solar, geothermal etc.

If you mandate say 10% renewable energy (it is now less than 1% in Australia), it won't stop energy consumption going up. They will keep building coal fired plants as well as the odd wind farm.

Also, please check the FAQ I put up: http://www.ozpolitic.com/green-tax-shift/green-tax-shift-FAQ.html

I think that explains it better.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jan 6th, 2007 at 4:41pm by freediver »  

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
enviro
Senior Member
****
Offline


Taking Out The Trash

Posts: 323
Weethalle NSW
Gender: male
Re: Green Tax Shift
Reply #10 - Jan 7th, 2007 at 9:55am
 
What your saying is that Green Shift Tax is only there as an alternative to Carbon Trading hence your arguments support a tax on emissions.

I say NO to Carbon Trading and No to new taxes.

Energy is consumed. This Consumption Tax, Energy Tax or Green Shift Tax focuses on reducing consumption by penalising with a new tax. By penalising I mean, "hurt them in the old hip pocket". As previously stated solving the problem is by creating NO greenhouse emissions in the first place. By changing the power source allows this to happen. We still need energy and the more we have dictates our growth.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 37808
I like fish
Re: Green Tax Shift
Reply #11 - Jan 7th, 2007 at 12:37pm
 
What your saying is that Green Shift Tax is only there as an alternative to Carbon Trading.

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying it is better than carbon trading, but certainly not that it is 'only' an alternative to that option.

This Consumption Tax, Energy Tax or Green Shift Tax focuses on reducing consumption by penalising with a new tax.

Only to the extent that reducing consumption is the best way to reduce emissions.

As previously stated solving the problem is by creating NO greenhouse emissions in the first place.

However quickly you want to reduce emissions, and however far you want to go, a green tax shift is the best way to achieve that. Unless you want to suddenly ban emissions completely - anything short of that and a green tax shift is the best way to go.

By changing the power source allows this to happen.

And a green tax shift is the best way to achieve that.

We still need energy and the more we have dictates our growth.

Energy does not dictate our growth any more.

You keep assuming that a green tax shift will give you only one type of solution and that we really need other solutions. Neither of these assumptions are correct.
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
enviro
Senior Member
****
Offline


Taking Out The Trash

Posts: 323
Weethalle NSW
Gender: male
Re: Green Tax Shift
Reply #12 - Jan 7th, 2007 at 4:33pm
 
freediver wrote on Jan 7th, 2007 at 12:37pm:
What your saying is that Green Shift Tax is only there as an alternative to Carbon Trading.

This Consumption Tax, Energy Tax or Green Shift Tax focuses on reducing consumption by penalising with a new tax.

Only to the extent that reducing consumption is the best way to reduce emissions.

You keep assuming that a green tax shift will give you only one type of solution and that we really need other solutions. Neither of these assumptions are correct.



I agree that Green Shift Tax is a viable option for two reasons;

one, being that it can force industry to look at alternative power sources.

Two, Industry will look at ways to run economically by being more aware of power consumption.

Yes these things will reduce gas emissions. The argument I present is Zero gas emissions and no restraint on consumption which is called freedom.

Instead of pushing a tax we should be pushing an alternative energy in competition to nuclear. You may get your tax but we'll get nuclear to run with it.
Cool

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 37808
I like fish
Re: Green Tax Shift
Reply #13 - Jan 10th, 2007 at 9:18pm
 
This is an interesting idea - tracking vehicles and charging them for distace travelled. It is being discussed in Britain. It has the advantage that you can charge people more during peak hour and so use it to reduce the amount of infrastructure required. The drawbacks are that the government tracks your every move, and it is a less direct measure of carbon emissions and wear. It would be suitable as an additional tax only for those who use the roads when they are most congested, thus adding to infrastructure costs, but petrol taxes should cover wear and tear and greenhouse emissions, and should be implimented first given that the economic systems are already in place to tax petrol.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/UK-road-pricing-petition-wins-backers/2007/01/10/1168105051101.html

A petition which calls for plans to introduce road pricing to be scrapped has attracted more than 165,000 signatures since it was launched on Prime Minister Tony Blair's Downing Street web site.

Initial estimates suggest it could cost drivers up to STG1.34 ($A3.30) a mile to drive in the busiest areas at rush hour.

Transport chiefs argue that unless radical action is taken there will be gridlock on some of Britain's roads in 20-30 years.
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
enviro
Senior Member
****
Offline


Taking Out The Trash

Posts: 323
Weethalle NSW
Gender: male
Re: Green Tax Shift
Reply #14 - Jan 11th, 2007 at 1:12pm
 
freediver wrote on Jan 10th, 2007 at 9:18pm:
The drawbacks are that the government tracks your every move, and it is a less direct measure of carbon emissions and wear.


Obviously the Brits don't put as much value on freedom as what Australia does. This concept has been around for years, it won't happen in Australia.

Stck to your Green Tax Shift as atleast it has merit over Carbon Trading and can provide a window of opportunity for businesses to actually start to look at alternative energy sources.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 12
Send Topic Print