Saturday, December 20, 2008

My ETS Question

THE Rudd Government’s own climate adviser has lashed its compensation deal for heavy polluters in the climate change white paper as ‘‘ over the top’’, arguing it could outstrip collections from the emissions trading scheme and force taxpayers to foot the bill.
Sorry I have to swear here.

Who the fuck does Garnaut think will be footing the ETS bill anyway? The fairies?

Garnaut attacks climate compensation

11 comments:

Boy on a bike said...

Some people have a view of government as this alien thing separate to the populace or the country in general. The government pays for nothing. Taxpayers pay instead. It sounds much nicer when "the government" compensates people, rather that "you and you and you" will have to pay via your income tax etc etc.

Skeeter said...

The other place you, you and you will have to pay extra is every time you hand over money for any goods or services that involve energy.
This is already happening, and the additional costs on everything that moves will steadily increase as this madness progresses.
The only way to avoid it is to draw up a list of goods and services that do not use energy in their design, development, production, transport, marketing, retailing, repair, maintenance, disposal, insurance etc, then confine your expenditure to only those energy-free items.
To start the ball rolling, here is my suggested list:
.
.
.
.
Hmmmm
.
.
.
There must be something
.
.
Help!

splice said...

Help is at hand, Skeeter. The best things in life are free. You forgot… Love!

Uh oh.

On second thoughts, I think it’s me who forgot a few things like flowers and chocolates and the energy component in their production and transport. Then there’s the diapers. And the school bus. And the carbon footprint of lawyers when it all goes wrong.

You know, maybe it’s women who cause climate change after all. In fact, the probability is so high this merits a research grant!

kae said...

No, Splice. Love is free.

It's just the excess baggage that costs.

splice said...

Oh, what am I saying?!!!

There’s no need for further research. The science is sound and the debate is over.

Let’s balance the ETS with an EST (Expensive Sheila Tax).

kae said...

Splice
If you have an ETS and an EST imagine the taxes for emissions on top of the EST!

splice said...

How about we smooth the edges with a small addition of LUST (Leftist Unexplained Snogging Tax)?

The important thing is that emissions are reduced. If it gets too complicated, the Labor government can always spawn another department to administer the initiative and another to oversee it and so on.

kae said...

I dunno, Splice.
I was always quite partial to a bit of lust, but now I know the full story I might be a little more cautious about it.

Skeeter said...

Heh! When I was young (and single), I used to skite that I had never paid for sex.

kc said...

Skeeter, EVERYONE pays for sex...and sometimes it's worth the price...

Kaboom said...

Even Bob Brown has had an epipany about having to pay.......