Posts tagged ‘carbon price’

April 11, 2012

Carbon Price Not Evil, says Church

Despite misleading headlines in the Murdoch media (Dumping on charities – Salvation Army says the carbon tax will be a costly load of rubbish, story repeated in the daily newspapers in the capitals), it turns out this may not be the case after all.

Paul Bongiorno, a reporter on channel 10 tweeted: The Salvos tell me they have been misrepresented on the carbon tax in today’s News Ltd tabloids. They do not see the tax as evil.

Later on, in promo for his piece on the news tonight, Paul Bongiorno tweeted again: Australians dump thousands of tonnes of rubbish on charities and there is a carbon price link. Soon on Ten News

And, this time around, as pointed out by @GenGusface – Bongiorno called it by its correct name, Carbon Price, rather than its Murdoch name of Carbon Tax

Being misrepresented by the Murdoch media, who would have thought!

The Salvation Army issued a press release, clarifying their position and they way they were represented in the media: The Salvation Army Responds to Carbon Tax Reform (11 Apr 2012)

But the question is why are millions of tonnes of rubbish being dumped on charities, transferring cost of proper disposal to the charities?

text by @redglitterx
use of quotes and tweets is in no way intended to imply that the people quoted would in any way endorse the contents of this post or blog

April 7, 2012

The Truth About Carbon Pricing (or carbon “Tax” if you read Murdoch papers)

There are many lies being spread about carbon pricing, usually by those with an agenda, either that or they can’t read.

First of all: it is not being applied yet – any business that claims it is sacking workers or raising prices now because of the carbon pricing, is blatantly lying and ripping off consumers. The pricing goes into affect from 1 July 2012.

Second: Unlike the GST which put a 10% tax on just about everything you buy, with little options for finding non-GST affected products; Carbon pricing will only be on the top 500 polluting companies. If you don’t want to pay for a product which has carbon pricing attached, simple… buy a product that is Less polluting.

If you don’t want to pay carbon pricing, choose products with less impact. Simple. Third: opponents of Carbon pricing say that it is unfair, unlike GST which is fair and balanced. No. The reverse is true. GST disproportionately affects those on lower incomes, who spend a larger proportion of their income on GST taxable products, while those that attract no-GST tend to be luxury items (which had other taxes removed in exchange for the GST). If you don’t want to pay carbon pricing, choose products with less impact. Simple. If you want to continue to screw-up the environment, that is your choice. But you pay for the privilege.

Our planet should belong to all of us, not just those who can afford to pollute it. As it is now, those who can afford to buy more things, are doing a greater proportion of damage to our air, our water, our limited resources, our planet, our life-support system. That would like saying: it is okay for a rich person to beat the stuffing out of you, because if you can afford to sue them, they have can afford the compensation. Ignoring the damage done in the meantime.

Fourth: But what about our pensioners? They worked hard all their lives and now they won’t be able to afford heating or food? WRONG. Those on low-incomes, including pensioners will be compensated. And like each and every one of us, as consumers they have a mighty power, it’s called the dollar vote – the power of choice, if they don’t want to pay for the carbon price, all they have to do is choose a different product.

Fifth: Prime Minister Gillard is not personally benefiting from this – We Are. Our children, our grandchildren, our nation, our Pacific neighbours whose countries are disappearing under water, even as I type.

Australia has about 0.3% of the world’s population, but contributes about 1.5% of total greenhouse gas emissions. This puts Australians among the highest per capita emitters (source: Australian Bureau of Statistics). We are the country that is creating the mess, it is our responsibility to clean it up.

For much more detailed – and legally accurate – information, see ACCC – Australian competition & Consumer Commission: Carbon price claims

And if you think you are getting balanced, accurate information from an unbiased media, because media is neutral – read this: How Murdoch’s Aussie Papers Cover Climate Change by NPR in US America
Here is just a taste of that article…

The Australian has aggressively opposed the Green Party’s agenda of addressing climate change through greater regulation and taxation of pollution. Two years ago, the paper vowed in an editorial that it would seek to destroy the party at the ballot box.

text by @redglitterx
use of Sir Henry Parkes image, or the coin, is in no way intended to imply that Parkes, or the treasury would in any way endorse the contents of this post or blog

April 2, 2012

Tony Abbott: If you want to put a price on carbon why not just do it with a simple tax (video)

Tony Abbott advocating putting a tax on … well, on carbon.

March 29, 2012

Gillard promised, Gillard delivered, Gillard vilified in Murdoch media

The federal election that elected the Gillard government was held on 21 August 2010. On 20 August 2010, The Australian ran a piece by Paul Kelly and Dennis Shanahan under the headline Julia Gillard’s carbon price promise.

The opening three sentences of this piece was:

JULIA Gillard says she is prepared to legislate a carbon price in the next term.

It will be part of a bold series of reforms that include school funding, education and health.

In an election-eve interview with The Australian, the Prime Minister revealed she would view victory tomorrow as a mandate for a carbon price, provided the community was ready for this step.
source: Julia Gillard’s carbon price promise; 20 Aug 2010, The Australian

So, where is the Lie?

text by @redglitterx
additional text by The Australian

March 26, 2012

Australia: punching above our weight in sport is good, but in saving the planet is bad? ok

During those long, cold, dark years when JW Howard ruled the land, he often bragged that Australia was punching above its weight when it came to sporting events.

We were world leaders when it came to showering largesse on athletes in the hopes that for a couple of minutes every four years at least some of them could stand on a podium and increase their personal brand value to advertisers – I mean, win an Olympic™ medal.

Yet, when it comes to saving the planet, oh we cannot do anything, until everyone else does. When it comes to the planet that supports life, we get very selfish indeed.

However, under Prime Minister Gillard, Australia is making a difference, in saving our planet.

John Rice, vice chairman of GE, one of the worlds largest companies says:

I applaud the Australian government for having the courage to go through with it because I think over the long run, the world is going to be better served if there is a cost associated with the production of carbon…

It takes gutsy politicians and so we applaud the Australian government, the prime minister for following through.

It takes leadership and if you wait for the world to act in unison, it will never happen.
Source: here

Bill Gates, one of the worlds richest people, likes the carbon package:

I wish the world at large found it easier to get together on this because a carbon tax is a very important tool to encourage the invention of low-cost energy technologies that don’t emit carbon… To help that happen, a carbon tax really is a key piece.
Source: here

The CSIRO, (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation) Australia’s national body for scientific research says that the impact of a tax on carbon will have less impact than a tax on all goods-and-services, and in other data modelling:

compared the impact of the carbon price with the introduction of the GST, the mining boom and disasters such as cyclone Yasi. It found the carbon price would have one-quarter of the 2.5 per cent impact on prices than the introduction of the GST. It would also be smaller than the 1.6 per cent effect of the trade and exchange rates that came with the mining boom in 2007.
Source: here

Which means, mining has a bigger impact on the rise in the cost of living than a carbon price would. Thanks Clive, Gina, Twiggy.

Australia is home to 0.5% of the worlds population, yet produces 1.5% of the worlds greenhouse gases. When it comes to destroying our life support system, we are truly punching above our weight. Then lecture nations of that can barely feed their populations that they have to pay the price, make the sacrifices for cleaning up the mess we created.

The Carbon Package (or Tax if you listen to Alan Jones and read Murdoch media) is not the monster it has been made out to be. And yet the Murdoch media empire is running a campaign against it… or rather the government that introduced it.

Why? There is a rabid fear of this carbon-package, I do not know.

However, when there is an anti-climate change rally, one thing you can be sure, there will be busloads of pensioners brought in to complain it. I wish they had been as vocal about opposing the GST.

image of Prime Minister, I forget the source, used for illustrative purposes and is no way meant to suggest the PM or the copyright holders in anyway endorse the contents of this post
text by @redglitterx