Australian Politics Forum - Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #60 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 11:15am

Dsmithy70 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 11:12am:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 11:09am:

Gist wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 11:04am:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 10:55am:

MOTR wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 10:53am:

It's no good hoping, we need Abbott to start articulating his beliefs and his vision for our future. If we don't like it, the Libs have an alternative leader who does have vision, integrity and respect for others.

I am sure the party itself would know where Abbott is headed. They dont need your help in order to tell them they are not going in the direction you like.

The evidence is that the party hasn't a clue where Abbott is headed or what their policies are. If in any doubt just watch Qanda last night where Grahame Morris seemed to have a better grasp of coalition policies than their front bencher Mirabella who had all the wit and grasp of a house brick.

Yes I did watch it, no he didnt.

Quite right Progs, Morris & Mirrabella seemed to have no idea what the policies were or how they are to be achieved.
A Front Bencher & major strategist
Really makes me want to trust that they will be better just because they are Liberal.
What a joke!

They don't know how it is going to work because they have no real plan. They have no direction because they have a leader driven only by political ambition.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

Gist

Gold Member

Offline

I am not a sock, I am
a human being!

Posts: 5476

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #61 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 11:19am

MOTR wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 11:15am:

They don't know how it is going to work because they have no real plan. They have no direction because they have a leader driven only by political ambition.

They don't know how it is going to work ... it just is...

If in doubt, just ask lolly who has made that answer his stock in trade. And even HE knows more about Lieberal policies than Mirabella the house brick!

Back to top

"When our military goes to war it should be for purposes and objectives clearly in Australia’s interests, not merely because the Americans want some company" - Malcolm Fraser (2012 Whitlam Oration)

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #62 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 11:21am

Dnarever wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 11:13am:

Avram Horowitz wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2012 at 10:14pm:

____ wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2012 at 10:11pm:

Show Lib's policy of Direct Action the light of day and the policy and the economics crumbles.

We have direct action in my country. We do not tax our people and we have government action to play our part.

Why do you want people to pay more to live? You should want cost of living to be lower not higher?

This is a case where there is no real tax with the carbon tax but the direct action plan is fully funded by tax.

Figure that out the method which is claimed to not be a tax is absolutly nothing else in any terms.

Moving to a lower carbon economy now will very likely save everyone a lot of money and result ultimatly in a lower cost of living than the other option.

At the end of the day it may not be a case of paying more to live, if the temp increases as expected the equation may quickly change from paying more to live to just to live.

The expectation is that if temperature were to rise by 4 or 5 degrees we would no longer have the capacity to feed around 50% of the worlds population.

Paying more to live could become a literal fact.

There are massive long term economic advantages that stem from starting the transition today. What Abbott is advocating will turn Australia into an economic backwater. The man has no vision.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

Paki gob on a stick

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 103787

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #63 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 11:46am

Shane B wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2012 at 11:03pm:

You are only obsessed with Abbott's direct action plan because you know he will be PM by theend of 2013. Why keep harping on about it otherwise?

That's right, Shane B. These leftards want to find out what the future policy will be - how pathetic.

They should just suck it up.

Back to top

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #64 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:15pm

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 8:21am:

Shane B wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2012 at 11:03pm:

You are only obsessed with Abbott's direct action plan because you know he will be PM by theend of 2013. Why keep harping on about it otherwise?

Coal will always be required for baseload power, unless we go nuclear.

Bullshit.....Natural Gas can be used to deliver base load power and Geothermal has potential for the same base load capacity.....The problem is with the Liberal Parties refusal to debate the merits of their Direct Action policy!!!

Direct Action relies on storing carbon in soil to achieve 60 % of their emissions targets.....Storing carbon in soil is not counted towards the protocol.....Is experimental and will not achieve the reductions claimed by the Opposition.....How do Coalition voters justify these glaring failures in the Abbott Direct Action policy???

Any Liberal voters care to support Direct Action and explain how it will achieve 5% reduction in emissions by 2020 when its core element is not even counted towards targets......Anyone???

Roll Eyes

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2804206.html

Still no Coalition supporter can defend Direct Action and the fact it will not work.....Why am I not surprised???

How will Abbott defend his crap policy once he must cost it and explain how it will work....60% of Abbott's emissions are unachievable.....The policy is pure crap and the faithful are to scared to debate its merits.....You have been warned!!!

Roll Eyes

Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything.
Frank Dane

Back to top

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #65 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:18pm

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:15pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 8:21am:

Shane B wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2012 at 11:03pm:

You are only obsessed with Abbott's direct action plan because you know he will be PM by theend of 2013. Why keep harping on about it otherwise?

Coal will always be required for baseload power, unless we go nuclear.

Bullshit.....Natural Gas can be used to deliver base load power and Geothermal has potential for the same base load capacity.....The problem is with the Liberal Parties refusal to debate the merits of their Direct Action policy!!!

Direct Action relies on storing carbon in soil to achieve 60 % of their emissions targets.....Storing carbon in soil is not counted towards the protocol.....Is experimental and will not achieve the reductions claimed by the Opposition.....How do Coalition voters justify these glaring failures in the Abbott Direct Action policy???

Any Liberal voters care to support Direct Action and explain how it will achieve 5% reduction in emissions by 2020 when its core element is not even counted towards targets......Anyone???

Roll Eyes

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2804206.html

Still no Coalition supporter can defend Direct Action and the fact it will not work.....Why am I not surprised???

How will Abbott defend his crap policy once he must cost it and explain how it will work....60% of Abbott's emissions are unachievable.....The policy is pure crap and the faithful are to scared to debate its merits.....You have been warned!!!

Roll Eyes

Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything.
Frank Dane

How is the carbon tax going to achieve the 5% reduction. Redistribution of wealth. Buy carbon credits.

No-one is slowing their use of carbon dioxide. The poor can carry on as they are compensated and the rest have enough money for it not to be a crisis in order to slow down.

So how exactly.

Back to top

IP Logged

Doctor Jolly

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3808

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #66 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:22pm

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:18pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:15pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 8:21am:

Shane B wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2012 at 11:03pm:

You are only obsessed with Abbott's direct action plan because you know he will be PM by theend of 2013. Why keep harping on about it otherwise?

Coal will always be required for baseload power, unless we go nuclear.

Bullshit.....Natural Gas can be used to deliver base load power and Geothermal has potential for the same base load capacity.....The problem is with the Liberal Parties refusal to debate the merits of their Direct Action policy!!!

Direct Action relies on storing carbon in soil to achieve 60 % of their emissions targets.....Storing carbon in soil is not counted towards the protocol.....Is experimental and will not achieve the reductions claimed by the Opposition.....How do Coalition voters justify these glaring failures in the Abbott Direct Action policy???

Any Liberal voters care to support Direct Action and explain how it will achieve 5% reduction in emissions by 2020 when its core element is not even counted towards targets......Anyone???

Roll Eyes

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2804206.html

Still no Coalition supporter can defend Direct Action and the fact it will not work.....Why am I not surprised???

How will Abbott defend his crap policy once he must cost it and explain how it will work....60% of Abbott's emissions are unachievable.....The policy is pure crap and the faithful are to scared to debate its merits.....You have been warned!!!

Roll Eyes

Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything.
Frank Dane

How is the carbon tax going to achieve the 5% reduction. Redistribution of wealth. Buy carbon credits.

No-one is slowing their use of carbon dioxide.

Its been in place 2 days. What evidence do you have no-one is slowing their use of co2.

Quote:

The poor can carry on as they are compensated and the rest have enough money for it not to be a crisis in order to slow down.

So how exactly.

Stupid people may do this. Smart people will reduce co2 generation and pocket the difference.

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #67 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:23pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:22pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:18pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:15pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 8:21am:

Shane B wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2012 at 11:03pm:

You are only obsessed with Abbott's direct action plan because you know he will be PM by theend of 2013. Why keep harping on about it otherwise?

Coal will always be required for baseload power, unless we go nuclear.

Bullshit.....Natural Gas can be used to deliver base load power and Geothermal has potential for the same base load capacity.....The problem is with the Liberal Parties refusal to debate the merits of their Direct Action policy!!!

Direct Action relies on storing carbon in soil to achieve 60 % of their emissions targets.....Storing carbon in soil is not counted towards the protocol.....Is experimental and will not achieve the reductions claimed by the Opposition.....How do Coalition voters justify these glaring failures in the Abbott Direct Action policy???

Any Liberal voters care to support Direct Action and explain how it will achieve 5% reduction in emissions by 2020 when its core element is not even counted towards targets......Anyone???

Roll Eyes

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2804206.html

Still no Coalition supporter can defend Direct Action and the fact it will not work.....Why am I not surprised???

How will Abbott defend his crap policy once he must cost it and explain how it will work....60% of Abbott's emissions are unachievable.....The policy is pure crap and the faithful are to scared to debate its merits.....You have been warned!!!

Roll Eyes

Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything.
Frank Dane

How is the carbon tax going to achieve the 5% reduction. Redistribution of wealth. Buy carbon credits.

No-one is slowing their use of carbon dioxide.

Its been in place 2 days. What evidence do you have no-one is slowing their use of co2.

Quote:

The poor can carry on as they are compensated and the rest have enough money for it not to be a crisis in order to slow down.

So how exactly.

Stupid people may do this. Smart people will reduce co2 generation and pocket the difference.

But as you guys think Australians are stupid (polls, remember them), then you are screwed

Back to top

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #68 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:26pm

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:18pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:15pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 8:21am:

Shane B wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2012 at 11:03pm:

You are only obsessed with Abbott's direct action plan because you know he will be PM by theend of 2013. Why keep harping on about it otherwise?

Coal will always be required for baseload power, unless we go nuclear.

Bullshit.....Natural Gas can be used to deliver base load power and Geothermal has potential for the same base load capacity.....The problem is with the Liberal Parties refusal to debate the merits of their Direct Action policy!!!

Direct Action relies on storing carbon in soil to achieve 60 % of their emissions targets.....Storing carbon in soil is not counted towards the protocol.....Is experimental and will not achieve the reductions claimed by the Opposition.....How do Coalition voters justify these glaring failures in the Abbott Direct Action policy???

Any Liberal voters care to support Direct Action and explain how it will achieve 5% reduction in emissions by 2020 when its core element is not even counted towards targets......Anyone???

Roll Eyes

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2804206.html

Still no Coalition supporter can defend Direct Action and the fact it will not work.....Why am I not surprised???

How will Abbott defend his crap policy once he must cost it and explain how it will work....60% of Abbott's emissions are unachievable.....The policy is pure crap and the faithful are to scared to debate its merits.....You have been warned!!!

Roll Eyes

Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything.
Frank Dane

How is the carbon tax going to achieve the 5% reduction. Redistribution of wealth. Buy carbon credits.

Here is a link to help you understand!!!

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1133092/How-does-the-ETS-work

Now how will Direct Action achieve a 5% reduction in emissions Progs???

Huh

Back to top

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged

Doctor Jolly

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3808

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #69 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:28pm

Direct action has major holes:

It plans on reducing co2 by absorbing co2 from atmosphere, rather than reducing the amount generated.
On current estimates, that would mean re-foresting all arable land in Australia.

Imagine the costs of that. Not only for the green-army, but loss of productivity of farm land.

This may let us hit our 2020 target, but what then. The country is at full co2 storage capacity (no new land for trees), and we are still increasing our co2 generation ?
We may be 5% down by 2020, but 2030 is likely to be 30% higher.

No new taxes will pay for it. The cost of just seedlings would be in the billions of dollars for these tree's, if you could get volunteer planters. But no farmer will volunteer, and no greeny will volunteer. And will the farmer require compulsary aquisition of his land. That will cost trillions of dollars. Probably more than many years of GDP.

This is why the libs wont answer any questions about it.

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #70 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:28pm

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:26pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:18pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:15pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 8:21am:

Shane B wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2012 at 11:03pm:

You are only obsessed with Abbott's direct action plan because you know he will be PM by theend of 2013. Why keep harping on about it otherwise?

Coal will always be required for baseload power, unless we go nuclear.

Bullshit.....Natural Gas can be used to deliver base load power and Geothermal has potential for the same base load capacity.....The problem is with the Liberal Parties refusal to debate the merits of their Direct Action policy!!!

Direct Action relies on storing carbon in soil to achieve 60 % of their emissions targets.....Storing carbon in soil is not counted towards the protocol.....Is experimental and will not achieve the reductions claimed by the Opposition.....How do Coalition voters justify these glaring failures in the Abbott Direct Action policy???

Any Liberal voters care to support Direct Action and explain how it will achieve 5% reduction in emissions by 2020 when its core element is not even counted towards targets......Anyone???

Roll Eyes

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2804206.html

Still no Coalition supporter can defend Direct Action and the fact it will not work.....Why am I not surprised???

How will Abbott defend his crap policy once he must cost it and explain how it will work....60% of Abbott's emissions are unachievable.....The policy is pure crap and the faithful are to scared to debate its merits.....You have been warned!!!

Roll Eyes

Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything.
Frank Dane

How is the carbon tax going to achieve the 5% reduction. Redistribution of wealth. Buy carbon credits.

Here is a link to help you understand!!!

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1133092/How-does-the-ETS-work

Now how will Direct Action achieve a 5% reduction in emissions Progs???

Huh

Ask Tony Abbott lol. It matters not if it works or not as far as im concerned, but seeing as the carbon tax has no chance in hell of achieving the 5% reduction simply by way of its compensation, then I find it remarkable that you are concerned about direct action achieving it.

Back to top

IP Logged

philperth2010 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21097 Perth Gender:	Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action Reply #71 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:28pm I will say this for Progs at least he is prepared to make a fool of himself.....The rest of the Liberal faithful are to scared to debate Direct Action and be exposed as having no idea!!!
Back to top	If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992) IP Logged

Doctor Jolly

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3808

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #72 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:30pm

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:28pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:26pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:18pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:15pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 8:21am:

Shane B wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2012 at 11:03pm:

You are only obsessed with Abbott's direct action plan because you know he will be PM by theend of 2013. Why keep harping on about it otherwise?

Coal will always be required for baseload power, unless we go nuclear.

Bullshit.....Natural Gas can be used to deliver base load power and Geothermal has potential for the same base load capacity.....The problem is with the Liberal Parties refusal to debate the merits of their Direct Action policy!!!

Direct Action relies on storing carbon in soil to achieve 60 % of their emissions targets.....Storing carbon in soil is not counted towards the protocol.....Is experimental and will not achieve the reductions claimed by the Opposition.....How do Coalition voters justify these glaring failures in the Abbott Direct Action policy???

Any Liberal voters care to support Direct Action and explain how it will achieve 5% reduction in emissions by 2020 when its core element is not even counted towards targets......Anyone???

Roll Eyes

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2804206.html

Still no Coalition supporter can defend Direct Action and the fact it will not work.....Why am I not surprised???

How will Abbott defend his crap policy once he must cost it and explain how it will work....60% of Abbott's emissions are unachievable.....The policy is pure crap and the faithful are to scared to debate its merits.....You have been warned!!!

Roll Eyes

Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything.
Frank Dane

How is the carbon tax going to achieve the 5% reduction. Redistribution of wealth. Buy carbon credits.

Here is a link to help you understand!!!

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1133092/How-does-the-ETS-work

Now how will Direct Action achieve a 5% reduction in emissions Progs???

Huh

Ask Tony Abbott lol. It matters not if it works or not as far as im concerned....

So you have no idea how it will work or how much it will cost ?

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #73 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:31pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:30pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:28pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:26pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:18pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:15pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 8:21am:

Shane B wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2012 at 11:03pm:

You are only obsessed with Abbott's direct action plan because you know he will be PM by theend of 2013. Why keep harping on about it otherwise?

Coal will always be required for baseload power, unless we go nuclear.

Bullshit.....Natural Gas can be used to deliver base load power and Geothermal has potential for the same base load capacity.....The problem is with the Liberal Parties refusal to debate the merits of their Direct Action policy!!!

Direct Action relies on storing carbon in soil to achieve 60 % of their emissions targets.....Storing carbon in soil is not counted towards the protocol.....Is experimental and will not achieve the reductions claimed by the Opposition.....How do Coalition voters justify these glaring failures in the Abbott Direct Action policy???

Any Liberal voters care to support Direct Action and explain how it will achieve 5% reduction in emissions by 2020 when its core element is not even counted towards targets......Anyone???

Roll Eyes

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2804206.html

Still no Coalition supporter can defend Direct Action and the fact it will not work.....Why am I not surprised???

How will Abbott defend his crap policy once he must cost it and explain how it will work....60% of Abbott's emissions are unachievable.....The policy is pure crap and the faithful are to scared to debate its merits.....You have been warned!!!

Roll Eyes

Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything.
Frank Dane

How is the carbon tax going to achieve the 5% reduction. Redistribution of wealth. Buy carbon credits.

Here is a link to help you understand!!!

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1133092/How-does-the-ETS-work

Now how will Direct Action achieve a 5% reduction in emissions Progs???

Huh

Ask Tony Abbott lol. It matters not if it works or not as far as im concerned, but seeing as the carbon tax has no chance in hell of achieving the 5% reduction simply by way of its compensation, then I find it remarkable that you are concerned about direct action achieving it.

So you have no idea how it will work or how much it will cost ?

You seem to think that it matters to me. I am very happy to wait until the election.

Back to top

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male

Re: Qanda Panel Exposes Direct Action
Reply #74 - Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:31pm

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:28pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:26pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:18pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 1:15pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2012 at 8:21am:

Shane B wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2012 at 11:03pm:

You are only obsessed with Abbott's direct action plan because you know he will be PM by theend of 2013. Why keep harping on about it otherwise?

Coal will always be required for baseload power, unless we go nuclear.

Bullshit.....Natural Gas can be used to deliver base load power and Geothermal has potential for the same base load capacity.....The problem is with the Liberal Parties refusal to debate the merits of their Direct Action policy!!!

Direct Action relies on storing carbon in soil to achieve 60 % of their emissions targets.....Storing carbon in soil is not counted towards the protocol.....Is experimental and will not achieve the reductions claimed by the Opposition.....How do Coalition voters justify these glaring failures in the Abbott Direct Action policy???

Any Liberal voters care to support Direct Action and explain how it will achieve 5% reduction in emissions by 2020 when its core element is not even counted towards targets......Anyone???

Roll Eyes

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2804206.html

Still no Coalition supporter can defend Direct Action and the fact it will not work.....Why am I not surprised???

How will Abbott defend his crap policy once he must cost it and explain how it will work....60% of Abbott's emissions are unachievable.....The policy is pure crap and the faithful are to scared to debate its merits.....You have been warned!!!

Roll Eyes

Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything.
Frank Dane

How is the carbon tax going to achieve the 5% reduction. Redistribution of wealth. Buy carbon credits.

Here is a link to help you understand!!!

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1133092/How-does-the-ETS-work

Now how will Direct Action achieve a 5% reduction in emissions Progs???

Huh

Ask Tony Abbott lol. It matters not if it works or not as far as im concerned, but seeing as the carbon tax has no chance in hell of achieving the 5% reduction simply by way of its compensation, then I find it remarkable that you are concerned about direct action achieving it.

Yet economists have stated an ETS will work and is the cheapest way to reduce emissions.....Do you have any evidence to support your claim that an ETS will not work but Direct Action will or are we just supposed to accept your word for it???

Roll Eyes

Back to top

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged