Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
24 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Irony - Australia repeals carbon tax rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
James Webb Space Telescope in 2018!
United States
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25919-australia-will-p...

Australia is already suffering more than most, with droughts from climate change. And it will get worse since it's predicted that eventually the rain patterns will move out to sea and miss their continent altogether.

This is the problem with climate change solutions - do we take a hit economically now for something that will make for a better, but unseen and yet unfelt, future. And everyone has to do their part, which means that every little part doesn't actually count, just the whole of all the parts
2 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jeremy cobert
United States
cedar rapids
Iowa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So a real tax on a fake problem is not popular ? Wow , who'd a thunk it !

let's all go green to be seen !
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sweden
Stockholm
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mb
Koldfoot wrote:
Your contention is they can tax away a drought?


Hehe, good one. Can you imprison a murder? I'd like to see that!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Connellan
United States
Binghamton
New York
flag msg tools
badge
I am the white void. I am the cold steel. I am the just sword.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Even if global warming/climate change is not caused primarily by man's recklessness, why is it so bad to want to make initiatives designed to treat the earth better? I mean, even if the global warming crowd is completely debunked, will we really lose so much by switching to low-flow toilets and cutting down on burning fossil fuels?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Connellan
United States
Binghamton
New York
flag msg tools
badge
I am the white void. I am the cold steel. I am the just sword.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
galad2003 wrote:
The main issue is that the carbon tax did nothing to reduce pollution. It just penalized penalized developed countries for polluting and undeveloped countries, especially China, got a free ride. Therefore making it a tax incentive to ship your production overseas.

For example, you start a business in Australia and on top of everything else you have to pay a carbon tax. Meanwhile China doesn't have that. So not only do you save money on labor by sending your operation overseas but now you don't pay the carbon tax. So what manufacturer would want to open a plant in Australia. Meanwhile global warming is a global phenomena (assuming it actually exists) so those factories in China are fucking it up for everyone.

Quote "undeveloped" countries received so many bonuses and incentives the whole concept was clearly corrupted by the super rich in order to make it more attractive to send jobs overseas.


Yes, as an initiative, carbon tax is useless unless all possible feasible places to do business with are similarly taxed, I agree.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Lexington
Kentucky
flag msg tools
admin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Drew1365 wrote:
I just wish you climate deniers would stop denying climate change. It's changing all right. We had lows in the 40s the other night. (That's Fahrenheit, American-style!) My tomatoes won't ripen if the climate keeps changing like this.

What are you a weather denier now, or did you suddenly forget the difference between climate and weather?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
ɹǝsɐɹɟ
Australia
Melbourne
flag msg tools
admin
designer
Back in the days when there were less maps we played every map back to back
badge
Ooh a little higher, now a bit to the left, a little more, a little more, just a bit more. Oooh yes, that's the spot!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Irony is not the word many Australians would use for this week's events in parliament. It would be somewhat less polite.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Snowball
Belgium
n/a
flag msg tools
badge
Gender: pot*ato. My opinion is an opinion.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Drew1365 wrote:
tesuji wrote:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25919-australia-will-p...

Australia is already suffering more than most, with droughts from climate change. And it will get worse since it's predicted that eventually the rain patterns will move out to sea and miss their continent altogether.

This is the problem with climate change solutions - do we take a hit economically now for something that will make for a better, but unseen and yet unfelt, future. And everyone has to do their part, which means that every little part doesn't actually count, just the whole of all the parts


So, . . . these extra taxes were supposed to be monetary offerings to Gaia? Or what?



What is done with the tax money is important, but what is more important is that the tax should dissuade people to do certain things; tax also represent (a too small part) of the real cost of an activity.

Part of the misunderstanding comes from the fact that it is called a tax; a better solution would be to actually value (or "moneytize", or valuate) ecoservices. Some people object philosophically to the latter, explaining that not everything has a monetary value, or that it's in fact impossible to value ecoservices exactly. To them I reply that we live in a world where money is king, and it is better to underestimate a brook than assigning it no value at all.
Let me be a little pedantic and cite Dorian Gray: "Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing."
(Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray)

Ecoservices valuation projects do actually exist and some are funded by the EEC for instance. Whether these project exist to soothe the green minded voters or will be actually implemented is actually debatable.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve K
United States
flag msg tools
bjlillo wrote:
Pintsizepete wrote:
Even if global warming/climate change is not caused primarily by man's recklessness, why is it so bad to want to make initiatives designed to treat the earth better? I mean, even if the global warming crowd is completely debunked, will we really lose so much by switching to low-flow toilets and cutting down on burning fossil fuels?


If anyone should understand the concept of opportunity cost, it's a board gamer.


snap
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Not sure it is ironic, just am acceptance it does not work.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Drew1365 wrote:
HavocIsHere wrote:
. . . but what is more important is that the tax should dissuade people to do certain things; . . .


No. Wrong.
I agree, tax should not be used to encourage people to act in a certain way that benefits society, the courts should.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sweden
Stockholm
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mb
[/q]I agree, tax should not be used to encourage people to act in a certain way that benefits society, the courts should.[/q]

We can still emit a lot of CO2 without hurting anything so it's just a matter of distributing this CO2 quota to where it's needed the most, and a tax is the most practical and efficient way to do that. Having courts deciding who gets to emit how much would be a planned economy, with judges and juries as planners.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mondainai wrote:
I agree, tax should not be used to encourage people to act in a certain way that benefits society, the courts should.[/q]

We can still emit a lot of CO2 without hurting anything so it's just a matter of distributing this CO2 quota to where it's needed the most, and a tax is the most practical and efficient way to do that. Having courts deciding who gets to emit how much would be a planned economy, with judges and juries as planners. [/q]Do we need to omit CO2?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew White
Australia
Sydney
NSW
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
This is very interesting perspective from Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz. He touches on the carbon tax.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Pz...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sweden
Stockholm
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mb
Quote:
Do we need to omit CO2?

Do we need to eat rice? Up to a certain threshold, CO2 is completely harmless. So not emitting anything at all would be an unnecessary cost to society.

And even if zero emissions would be a goal, we'd need to get there in stages, and CO2 tax is a fine way for the market to work out which emissions to get rid of first. There are areas with good substitutes and those with poor (or no) substitutes.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mondainai wrote:
Quote:
Do we need to omit CO2?

Do we need to eat rice? Up to a certain threshold, CO2 is completely harmless. So not emitting anything at all would be an unnecessary cost to society.

And even if zero emissions would be a goal, we'd need to get there in stages, and CO2 tax is a fine way for the market to work out which emissions to get rid of first. There are areas with good substitutes and those with poor (or no) substitutes.
So no, we do not need to.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sweden
Stockholm
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mb
We don't "need" anything but potatoes, shelter and freshwater.

What's your point? That we should outlaw CO2 emissions starting tomorrow?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.