The logic - ‘I can mess things up because the size of my mess is small’ is offensive to me.
Its about leadership and taking responsibility - either we are part of the solution or we are part of the problem.
3 Likes
Again, if you’re going to take that position, I’d like you to give the reason why you believe CO2 emissions have risen ‘naturally’ by…sigh, what was the figure again? It’s a lot. Something like… 25% over the last seventy years.
That needs explaining. Especially in contrast to the massive increase of human caused CO2 emissions over that same period.
And it needs explaining because it completely junks the rest of your statement.
Edit: Oh, and also why this pace of increase hasn’t happened before in human history. In fact we have to go back three million years to find the same levels of CO2, and even that wasn’t sudden.
Please and thank you.
My Greeny in me says
- we should look at investing in solar/natural power products due to better for our local atmosphere. And you can use power and not feel guilty for burning coal - better peace of mind.
- investment in better air conditioners that emit less heat into the enviornment - or better australian standards .
- make it easier for people who have invested in solar to get a better reduction in power bills without having to install solar batterys. I.e minimum australian standard price for selling solar back to electricity provider.
- better management of our water resources - has been tipped wars will be fought over water in the future, so don’t waste it.
- plant more trees - less C02
- lock up more forests or create more natural habitats for our local animals. However i would allow selective logging like how it was done in the olden days where they cut a massive tree down and take it out with little fuss.
- have less zoos, and more natural spaces with Australian animals.
so even if we dont change weather patterns the enviornment we can make Australia a better place to live now and for future generations.
Agreed we are not going to solve the worlds problems but we can do our bit.
2 Likes
Spot on.
These are good points. I’d add, the capitalist in me says that renewables are cheaper. Remove the subsidies to dirty energy providers and the anti-renewables policies in place and the economics of coal simply don’t add up.
1 Like
It’s morally bankrupt logic to boot. Is this the message we’re trying to teach our kids? “Johnnie it’s OK, you can steal that mars bar because the man ahead of us just did it too”
1 Like
My take is dont make it us vs them
save the planet reduce carbon change the weather
just make it - make Australia a nicer place to live in.
where there is less polution, less wastage, better use of natural resources
more care for nature and the environment and its animals.
Because whats better for the enviornment, is generally better for us, we all benefit.
If the weather did not change it would still be worthwhile changing our thinking/impact on the place.
I see Plastics (especially in the oceans) as more of a issue personally than the heat, but I guess thats cause i’m in Tassie lol.
1 Like
This is exactly the message we are trying to teach our kids. Those of us who voted for the Liberal National Clive Palmer One Nation party. Skin it any way it’s what it comes back to, and plays just as well in Scumo’s profit gospel church - “get mine and stuff the rest”. Guess what, it works! If you want a perpetually angry, depressed, atomised society to live in. It’s no surprise that the people who welcome this state of affairs generally lack the imagination to envisage anything better.
4 Likes
Wow. I’m not sure i like this idea. I have no issues on paying tax on cash inheritance, no matter what size. But not everything is about money. Imagine inheriting a property that had been in your family for generations and having to offload it because you can’t swing the tax.
*I’m saying this as somebody that will inherit absolutely nothing in my lifetime. Not out of self interest.
How much thermal coal is exported to that consumed domestically? The value of such exports is in decline as investors move away from coal fired power plants. What will that mean for the profitability of coal production for the domestic market, given that renewable power plants are becoming less expensive to produce and maintain
And, where will the jobs be in the energy sector? What will we replace with thermal coal in our export mix.?
I can still see the dispassionate argument for it.
As much as the depressing Randians would have it otherwise, profits aren’t made in a vacuum.
They’re as a result of opportunity, and law, and workers and consumers and society.
So, again from a completely dispassionate point of view, the idea that the children of the most successful players in this system are more entitled to wealth created than the society that actually enabled it, intellectually, is a pretty hard sell.
But this isn’t a dispassionate argument, it’s an emotional one.
And on that level, the gummint taking my inheritance is going to trump all of that, every time.
2 Likes
Something just clicked for me.
I’ve been a huge proponent for policies that tackle climate change. And the outcome of climate change is the extinction of the human species, which I am 100% in favour of.
So by that stretch I should be firmly against anything addressing climate change.
Can’t believe I’ve only just worked that out.
9 Likes
And if we’re all going to die, why not steal rich peoples money first.
5 Likes
Rarely is it ever mentioned that Australia succesfullly negotiated lower Kyoto obligations, on the basis of our economic dependence on coal. Made the Paris targets easy.
1 Like
Why? As long as the tax-free threshold is set at a fair level, why shouldn’t some of that accumulated wealth be returned to society?
Anyone who is honestly legit about fairness and equality shouldn’t be opposed to it. It is a tax on accumulated wealth. Why shouldn’t Gina’s four progeny be forced to return a chunk of the $20 billion plus Aussie dollars they will receive via inheritance if she were to kick the bucket tomorrow? 5 billion each - bang! No tax. And considering that the majority of that wealth has been created from minerals dug up in our backyard and sold abroad - hell - yeah - I am all in favour of inheritance taxes on estates valued at a certain point.
Let’s say you cap it at $1 million dollars (tax-free threshold) for the entire estate. A loved one dies and their estate is valued at $1.1m. And two children will inherit the estate. Assume the deceased has no liquid assets. Only a house worth $1.1m. And the inheritance tax is set at 40%. The total tax liability is 40% x $100,000 (1.1m - 1m tax-free threshold). In other words, $40,000. So each child has to kick back 20 grand each on a property worth $1.1m. I have no problem with that. They are still going to walk away with 1/2 million each. Death taxes scare people, but they are really only frightening for those families who have accumulated massive wealth over a lifetime/ several generations.
The practical problem here for Japanese who live in cities and inherit a farmhouse/land in a rural area that has been in the family for generations is being able to sell that asset to meet the inheritance tax liability. Almost impossible to sell, as there is zero demand. As such, the asset is valued very cheaply, so the liability isn’t a massive issue. Most can fund the liability, but are then stuck with an asset that may hold some sentimental value, but is completely unproductive. And it will just sit there - as an ‘akiya’ (abandoned house) for decades.
5 Likes
‘Our bit is tiny’ argument really annoys me. China could no doubt be whittled down to states or provinces and USA down to states or counties or whatever, each similar in population to us. In the end each of our personal contribution is down to each of us. Same with tax, or helping in a world war. You do your little bit because the whole is made up of all those teensy Weensy divided-up meaninglessly* little bits.
No one soldier -not even a VC winner - individually won a war. Why would Alan Jones celebrate them?
(*not really meaningless).
How do you do that fairly. Woolies and Coles have gigantic turnovers but their profit margins are tiny. Something like Tiffany will make probably 200-300% on each item sold. Surely cost of sales has to come into it somewhere.
If the reports today are to believed, W Shorten should pull his head in.
So would you suggest increasing the GST and lowering income taxes?
Or somebody should cut it off for him.
He’s the turd that just won’t flush. Bangs on about “unity” then actively campaigns against the left wing candidate that even the right wing faction supports.
Fark off, Shorten. You screwed the pooch and you’ve cost this country with your incompetence. Slither off and die your inevitable political death.
4 Likes