Carbon Tax Corruption Scandal; Part 1 - series by the Galileo Movement

You`ll probably never know until they ring a bell bugs.

 

Thankyou for confirming my ealier assessment of your fanaticism.

 

If this was a genuine carbon tax then why is the troll queen giving 3% of the revenue raised by the carbon tax to the UN? Any why has the troll queen not committed 100% of the revenue raised to building and funding 100% green sustainable projects in Australia?

 

Juilar and the flim-flam-man have credibility? LMFAO

 

Because it's not a carbon tax, it's an ETS.

 

Why is Juliar giving 3% ($3billion) of revenue raised from the ETS to the UN?

Is this not a tax on the Australian people and Australian businesses. So what the hell has it got to do with the UN?

 

Maybe you can tell me where is say's ETS and not carbon tax, becasue the Bills introduced into Parliament by Juliar were under a Carbon tax; not ETS. FFS, stop dancing for your puppet queen; you are just looking stupid with this hyperbole you're constantly typing.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-into-parliament/story-fn59niix-1226135743707

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax

To tax (from the Latin taxo; "I estimate") is to impose a financial charge or other levy upon a taxpayer (an individual or legal entity) by a state or the functional equivalent of a state such that failure to pay is punishable by law. Taxes are also imposed by many subnational entities. Taxes consist of direct tax or indirect tax, and may be paid in money or as its labour equivalent (often but not always unpaid labour).

A tax may be defined as a "pecuniary burden laid upon individuals or property owners to support the government [...] a payment exacted by legislative authority."[1] A tax "is not a voluntary payment or donation, but an enforced contribution, exacted pursuant to legislative authority" and is "any contribution imposed by government [...] whether under the name of toll, tribute, tallage, gabel, impost, duty, custom, excise, subsidy, aid, supply, or other name."[1]

 

What happened to the deluded souls who have been trying to pull the old, "it`s not a carbon tax" swindle?
Don`t they know that when they try to cover one lie with another lie, they just dig a deeper hole for themselves?

 

The more these lot like "Ziggy" carry-on with this non sense about Gillard saying this is an EST tax instead of a carbon tax, the more I feel sorry for their kids if they have any.

Imagine trying to make conversation with someone so asinine like Ziggy; you would certainly only want to do Easter & Xmas. LOL LOL

 

I never said anything about those two. Pay attention.

 

WTF? Bit early in the day for alcohol isn't it?

 

That's ironic seeing how you are the one struggling with basic reading comprehension.

 

LOL LOL LOL Wow man, can I have a light? Just bringing it down to your level!!

 

bugs, have you worked out yet, that a carbon tax under another name, is a carbon tax?

 

What don't you understand here?

 

I`m guessing, how anyone can have enough inteligence to digest their own food, while having such illogical thinking?

 

Another thing I have never even spoke about. Try again.

 

Are you saying that it's NOT an ETS with an initial fixed price period of three years? No doubt that during that time it functions similar to a tax, in that it raises government revenue. But it's significantly more complicated than that, and to call it a 'tax' is simply inaccurate.

 

LOL LOL

And where are the clowns
Quick send in the clowns
Don't bother, they're here

LOL LOL

 

Just own it Bugs, Lepper or which ever sox/personality you are enjoying playing dress-up in at the moment!!

 

Own what? That you were exposed talking nonsense and have been deflecting and making ad hominem remarks ever since?

And any mOderator could tell you me and bugs are different people. Address my arguments or admit you were wrong because your posts are Becoming even more boring, inane and childish. Any moron (particularly morons) can snap off inane one liners and laugh at their own jokes. Try putting in some substance every now and then.

 

This is not a difficult concept. Maintaining blind ignorance really is not necessary:

An ETS works by setting a cap on emissions and requiring emitters to hold a permit for each tonne of CO₂ that they emit. The level of the cap determines the number of permits available.
...
A carbon tax is sort of the opposite. A cost is added to all emissions, equal to the level of the tax, and this causes people to cut back.

There is no cap on emissions in a tax-based system. People are free to emit as much or as little as they like, but if they do emit, they must pay the tax.

Unlike an ETS, under a carbon tax it is the price that determines the level of emissions.
http://theconversation.edu.au/explainer-the-difference-between-a-carbon-tax-and-an-ets-1679

Personally, I would prefer a tax.

But we don't have one. We have an ETS.

Continuing to deny this is just silly

 

Exactly right.

Read your definition:

...A tax may be defined as a "pecuniary burden laid upon individuals or property owners to support the government...

The purpose of the ETS is not to raise revenue. It is not a tax. It's purpose is to reduce emissions by placing a cap on emissions. It is not a pecuniary burden laid upon individuals or property owners to support the government. It is a market-based mechanism that places a cap on emissions and creates tradable rights to emit.

 

Isn't this the guy i already pointed (a long time ago) out has massive coal history/interests?

Yep: http://www.politicalforum.com/australia/197387-found-great-site-truth-about-co2.html#post4247332

I have decided that you're not actually a forum goer. You may in fact be one of these dodgy characters. Because no one could be so *sigh* as to continue this kind of mindless repetitive rubbish.

PLEASE do some friggin' research. It's pathetic.

And while you're at it, read/watch my other thread specially for you: http://www.politicalforum.com/australia/239502-dumbanddumber-read-watch.html