Originally Posted by
silentC
Wongo, I have reduced our consumption by about 8 to 10 kwh per day, but our bills have gone UP.
That's because the price of electricity has increased from 15 cents per kwh 6 years ago to 22 cents per kwh today. And it's going to go up by another 50% over the next 5 years. We will cut back and cut back but there is only so far you can go without radical changes to the way we live. We'll need to re-open the local abbatoirs because no-one will be able to afford refrigeration. We'll be reading by candle light and washing our clothes by hand. That's where it is heading.
What frustrates me about this carbon tax debate is the inability of some to separate out the two issues of a) do we need to do something and b) what is the best thing to do. They seem to think that if you are against the carbon tax, then you are a climate change denier. The argument goes "we need to do something so we should support the carbon tax". Wrong. We need to do something but the carbon tax as proposed by the Gillard government is not necessarily the best thing to do. Even if you believe that there's anything at all we can do to change what's happening, which many don't, and many believe it's too late.
I happen to think that it is a largely ineffectual policy designed to create the appearance of doing something without actually doing anything at all. It's just a big money-go-round - as someone put it on Q&A the other night, just a big pile of money being burned. Taxing from the top, compensating at the bottom, how is that going to change anyone's behaviour. It makes no sense to me at all. Julia Gillard tried to explain how it would work and the best she could do was "the person with the extra $250 compensation in their hand might decide to spend it on something different". What the? In all seriousness, if anyone here can explain how it will work, I'm sure plenty would like to hear it.
No you can count on government getting this way wrong. It will push prices up and people will suffer and lose their jobs. You could almost handle the downside if there was going to be an upside, but as far as I can see, there won't be one.
If they put it to the vote, it will fail. It's like the republican referendum: a lot of people voted against it, not because they didn't want a republic, but because they didn't like the model that was proposed. This is the same.