After seeing some of the recent TV propaganda show Q&A, where the questions were all approved beforehand, if not actually written by the ‘carbon tax’ team, I am in a very critical frame of mind. This, together with an ‘on-side’ audience which applauded Julia continuously, is low politics. They even clapped when Julia said the carbon tax was necessary because the planet is still warming. Perhaps not true?
Who funded the excercise? Taxpayers?
Now I come to the latest attempt to support the argument that the carbon tax is appropriate and correct.
“JULIA Gillard has seized on a $4.7 billion coal takeover bid as proof of the industry’s ongoing viability as it emerged Tony Abbott repeatedly questioned the purchasing company’s prospects under a carbon tax. ”
Would Julia please explain why a business investment interest in continued “pollution” can make sense unless the industry plans to continue to pollute? Why does Julia think this is a good thing?
If interest in coal production was waning, that would mean that polluting is not a successful future industry, and that the ‘carbon emission reduction’ policy is working . But No! Julia spins the web of deceit larger and wider.
OR does this mean that the industry expects to be making more money from the tax-payer rebates, IMF or whoever, by being paid not to pollute? Another gravy train, perhaps?
Our government has sunken to an all-time low, IMHO.
- Australia Implements Carbon Tax Scam (tipggita32.wordpress.com)
- Would you buy a carbon tax from this woman? (noplaceforsheep.com)
- BERSIH and Carbon Tax (godsmustardseed.com)
- Australia’s carbon tax – Hysteria and hype (pdalbury.wordpress.com)
- Abbott challenges PM to carbon tax debate (news.theage.com.au)
- The Carbon Tax: It’ll Cost An Extra $172 To Power Your Gadgets (gizmodo.com.au)
- Australia to tax carbon polluters (sayou.wordpress.com)
- Tumbling Stocks, Protests Greet Australia’s Carbon Tax (reason.com)
- Qantas sees $122m carbon tax cost (bbc.co.uk)