Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Author

OT - new carbon tax


Gavo

4-Mar-2011
12:04:00 PM

On 4/03/2011 gordoste wrote:
>If we don't do anything, China and India can say "We are devoting our
>resources to improve our people's quality of life, and fully developed
>countries like Australia who use much more carbon per person aren't doing
>anything. Why should we?" If we take strong steps then our chances of getting
>India and China to do something are much improved.

I think China gets a bit of a bad wrap on this actually. They used to be very anti-change but have changed their stance and I do not think this is known very well. They are actually taking massive steps at reducing their emissions. They are commiting to reductions of 40-45% and have already started doing things like closing down heavily polluting factories.

Im not saying anyones right or wrong, just this is again, where I think we are not always current on the situation.

China are actually being very ambitious though and are presently leading the world on reducing the carbon emissions with their plan (so I hear at least).

source: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/scienceshow/stories/2011/3101365.htm


gordoste

4-Mar-2011
2:27:59 PM

Yes, so if we also commit to action it makes the U.S. even more isolated and more likely to do something.

citationx

10-Mar-2011
10:55:16 AM

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/save-the-envrionment-whats-the-point-20110309-1bo3a.html

"When it comes to concern, Australians are among the most worried."

"But Australians are relatively unprepared to believe we can do anything about it. Almost 5 per cent think there's no point in taking action as an individual or a household, more than in any nation surveyed, and twice the 2.5 per cent in Canada and 2 per cent in Mexico."

Can't understand their findings reading through this thread... ;-)

(And one more http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/polar-ice-melt-raising-sea-levels-rapidly-study-20110309-1bnp9.html )


billk

18-Mar-2011
3:57:21 PM

We had a more fun rally last weekend than the opposition did!


evanbb

19-Mar-2011
5:59:28 AM

This made me laugh:
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-k3sryTwoCJw/TYHf8co7LRI/AAAAAAAAAEI/DMJ7WyU4AoU/s1600/Bishop+survey+March+11.PNG

A survey run on Julie Bishops web page on whether or not there should be a carbon tax. It was pulled a day or 2 after this, after the numbers swung wildly back in 'their' direction.

TonyB

19-Mar-2011
8:28:04 AM

The climate change scam is good for many reasons - it gives politicians an opportunity to get more tax money, and win elections. Scientists love it because it gets them research grants for the most obscure projects, no matter how ridiculous. People love it because they can do something to feel good about helping the environment (but only until it costs them money, and they realise that it makes no difference to the environment). The media loves it because it sells lots of TV time and newspapers. Industry loves it because they can get lots of government assistance to upgrade equipment if they paint it "green". Industry also loves being able to close down plants with lots of CO2 emissions, send manufacturing offshore (like Pachauri did with his steel mills) and get millions more in government donations for doing so. Solar and wind companies love it because they are getting rich on government subsidy. Nuclear power companies love it for the same reason ... pity about Japan though. Undeveloped countries love it because the developed countries are going to give them lots of penalty money (agreed to by Rudd) so they can build more coal fired power stations without penalty.

The only people who don't like it are those who are smart enough to see that the carbon scam doesn't have a single scrap of evidence to support the theory. The tax is just more hard earned money going down the drain rather than being spent on the plethora of real environmental problems.

spicelab

19-Mar-2011
10:28:07 AM

On 19/03/2011 TonyB wrote:

>The only people who don't like it are those who are smart enough to see
>that the carbon scam doesn't have a single scrap of evidence to support
>the theory.

Awww come on Tony. Surely even an anti-science zealot as divorced from reality as yourself would acknowledge that it might be just a tad heroic describing over 100 years of accumulated knowledge from chemistry, biology, physics and mathematics as 'not a single scrap of evidence'.


Gavo

19-Mar-2011
12:11:40 PM

TonyB... wow. Just.... wow

I recently watched comedian Bill Maher talk about how Sarah Palin (and others of the cuckcoo persuasion) saying "They want us to shuttup" or "They want to shut us up"... to which Bill Maher says:

"Oh no! We LOVE it when you say things!"...

Keep talking TonyB, I think you help advocate our (people who take the time to know of, review, and understand the science of climate change, or any other valid science for that matter!) position better than we ever could! Thanks!

kieranl

19-Mar-2011
9:30:41 PM

The current Fed Govt proposal isn't actually a tax so anyone referring to it as a tax is talking complete rubbish no matter which side they're on.


billk

19-Mar-2011
10:33:07 PM

On 19/03/2011 TonyB wrote:
>
>The only people who don't like it are those who are smart enough to see
>that the carbon scam doesn't have a single scrap of evidence to support
>the theory. The tax is just more hard earned money going down the drain
>rather than being spent on the plethora of real environmental problems.
>

For 200 years now, carbon dioxide has been recognized as a greenhouse gas. Basic physics and chemistry establishes that.

For around 50 years now, carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere have been measured. They have been steadily increasing. They are now estimated to be over 30% higher than pre-industrial levels.

There are just a couple of things to go on with.

The research has been going on for much longer than the competitive grant application process so I hardly think that explains why so many scientists are interested in doing climate research and concerned about the findings they are turning up.

I can see that you put a lot of effort into this and I'm sure you sincerely believe what you write but none of us should spend too much time blowing our own trumpets about how smart we are.


Gavo

20-Mar-2011
9:06:27 PM

On 19/03/2011 billk wrote:
>I can see that you put a lot of effort into this and I'm sure you sincerely
>believe what you write but none of us should spend too much time blowing
>our own trumpets about how smart we are.

How can you say that to him? That he put alot of effort into it?

He could read a single damned document on the matter and would lose his whole argument! He doesnt... he reads quacks and crackpots and then tries to convince others.

I appreciate your mediator position, but I personally dont think its warranted here because while he does seem to believe what hes saying, its clearly not coming from any time spent actually investigating the matter.

Sorry Billk, certainly not picking on you in any way. I just really find this type of thing infuriating and I personally of the belief that no slack should be given in certain circumstances.. like this.


evanbb

21-Mar-2011
6:35:15 AM

On 20/03/2011 Gavo wrote:
>I just really find
>this type of thing infuriating and I personally of the belief that no slack
>should be given in certain circumstances.. like this

Come and work for the Government. You can get heaps more infuriated then, but get paid while you're doing it.


Gavo

21-Mar-2011
8:24:00 AM

Already do :)

widewetandslippery

21-Mar-2011
9:20:06 AM

I don't like any change to government systems of moving money. They always end up with me paying more protection money for no benefit.


billk

24-Mar-2011
12:11:35 PM

On 18/03/2011 billk wrote:
>

>
>We had a more fun rally last weekend than the opposition did!

The opposition seemed to have a lot of fun yesterday with their banners and chants but maybe have a little less PR savvy than our side.


Eduardo Slabofvic

24-Mar-2011
12:46:17 PM

On 21/03/2011 evanbb wrote:
>Come and work for the Government. You can get heaps more infuriated then,
>but get paid while you're doing it.

Singing while you work is a good way to pass the time.

http://www.complaintschoir.org/history.html


Superstu

25-Mar-2011
9:47:07 AM

On 19/03/2011 TonyB wrote:
>The climate change scam is good for many reasons - it gives politicians
>an opportunity to get more tax money, and win elections. Scientists love
>it because it gets them research grants for the most obscure projects,
>no matter how ridiculous. People love it because they can do something
>to feel good about helping the environment (but only until it costs them
>money, and they realise that it makes no difference to the environment).
>The media loves it because it sells lots of TV time and newspapers. Industry
>loves it because they can get lots of government assistance to upgrade
>equipment if they paint it "green". Industry also loves being able to
>close down plants with lots of CO2 emissions, send manufacturing offshore
>(like Pachauri did with his steel mills) and get millions more in government
>donations for doing so. Solar and wind companies love it because they are
>getting rich on government subsidy. Nuclear power companies love it for
>the same reason ... pity about Japan though. Undeveloped countries love
>it because the developed countries are going to give them lots of penalty
>money (agreed to by Rudd) so they can build more coal fired power stations
>without penalty.
>
>The only people who don't like it are those who are smart enough to see
>that the carbon scam doesn't have a single scrap of evidence to support
>the theory. The tax is just more hard earned money going down the drain
>rather than being spent on the plethora of real environmental problems.

Interesting musings on the carbon price protest movement in canberra from Bernard Keane on crikey.com:

The abridged version...

"What was interesting about the crowd wasn’t so much its average age — 60, at least, meaning most of them would likely 1. be over-compensated for a carbon price and 2. never live to see the really serious effects of climate change — but its colour. If you didn’t know that climate denialism was primarily a feature of the over-55 demographic, you could explain the age thing away by saying it was a weekday rally and lots of other supporters would have been at work. But there was no multiculturalism here, and not just among the small One Nation contingent forlornly holding up “Pauline was right” signs. This was a monocultural crowd, overwhelmingly Anglo-Celtic in the old phrase.

Why don’t people from European backgrounds reject climate science at the same rate as old white people? Why not Asians? Why weren’t there elderly Italian women railing against Ju-liar (and one assumes, out of respect for Christopher Pyne, that’s not a subtle anti-Semitic reference).

It’s the same reason that Pauline Hanson showed up, trying to parasite off another cause as part of her campaign to live off public election funding for, apparently, the rest of her life. These were once her people, not because there’s any endogenous link between xenophobia and climate denialism, but because it’s not really about climate change or immigration, but about social change and the social and economic transformation of Australia in a way that older, white Australians resent. This crowd grew up in a monocultural, British country that relied on protected industries — particularly the “real jobs” to be found in manufacturing. They grew up with a political system dominated by old white men. Australia has changed beyond recognition for them and because of their education levels and their age, they aren’t as well equipped to handle it as others are. They therefore feel disoriented, dispossessed and resentful, particularly because they don’t hold the same pre-eminent position they used to hold socially, economically or politically.

This is why there’s such a strong conspiracy theory fringe to climate denialism. The placards about UN and IMF plots yesterday weren’t coincidental. Like most conspiracy theories, they’re driven less by paranoia than by a desperate search for reassurance that someone, somewhere, however evil, is actually in control of what’s going on, and the right order of things could be restored.

In the end, it’s not even really about climate change for these people. It was immigration for One Nation. It was the republic before that. People disoriented by rapid change will always find an issue to take up in their search for reassurance."

The full article and commentry here...
http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/24/placards-not-the-only-thing-on-display-as-the-denialists-gather/


billk

25-Mar-2011
5:52:21 PM

On 25/03/2011 superstu wrote:
They therefore feel disoriented,
>dispossessed and resentful,

Mostly on the money IMHO.

What has struck me is that most of the people you meet who are rolling in it and have a garage full of fancy cars and a boat don't seem to have any trouble believing in human-induced climate change. It's the not so successful and maybe downwardly mobile who are the vehement denialists.


IdratherbeclimbingM9

25-Mar-2011
6:05:31 PM

On 25/03/2011 billk wrote:
>What has struck me is that most of the people you meet who are rolling
>in it and have a garage full of fancy cars and a boat don't seem to have
>any trouble believing in human-induced climate change. It's the not so
>successful and maybe downwardly mobile who are the vehement denialists.
>
& there is a whole 3rd world (?) of them out there, that are looking to catch up...
... can't say I blame them!


evanbb

26-Mar-2011
7:50:25 AM

On 25/03/2011 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>On 25/03/2011 billk wrote:
>>What has struck me is that most of the people you meet who are rolling
>>in it and have a garage full of fancy cars and a boat don't seem to have
>>any trouble believing in human-induced climate change. It's the not so
>>successful and maybe downwardly mobile who are the vehement denialists.
>>
>& there is a whole 3rd world (?) of them out there, that are looking to
>catch up...
>... can't say I blame them!

I've also heard that any tax is a massive concern for the self-funded retirees, because the amount of money they've got is always shrinking.

There are 111 messages in this topic.