It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Ms Gillard has finally taken her carbon tax sell to the Latrobe Valley, fronting workers at the Hazelwood Power Station which is tipped to close under the plan.
She faced some "very hard questions" away from the media glare but was unable to provide any further certainty about whether Hazelwood would close, putting more than 800 workers out of work.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
What would you do?
I would have shut it down years ago, we don't need coal powered power stations when there are much better alternatives available, forget the CO2 stuff, the pollution alone is enough reason to get rid of places like this, then there is the health effects of those that live nearby as well as those that work there.
The loss of jobs for workers can be helped by employing them in the construction of new power plants.
Obviously it's not that black and white, but at least it's heading in the right direction, not sideways like the government likes to do.
Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Chadwickus
Yep, and lets remember in her great carbon tax rip off there are $Billions to buy carbon tax credits from OVERSEAS..
Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
So? What's your point? Carbon emissions know no international borders. Carbon released in Australia can impact countries around the globe.
Originally posted by jamesthegreat
Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
So? What's your point? Carbon emissions know no international borders. Carbon released in Australia can impact countries around the globe.
Yes that is exactly correct. So tell me this then, why is it that Australia, and presently only Australia are imposing a carbon tax, whereas the rest of the world are remaining as is.
The amount of carbon that Australia emitts is relatively nothing compared to the likes of China, India or the US.
Or perhaps the tax does not go far enough. Instead of just taxing the 500 major carbon polluters of the country, why not check everyones homes, and those with wood fires can be taxed in proportion to the size of their fireplace.
Gillard and the labor government are going to kill the manufacturing sector, and send Australian jobs overseas to those countries who don't seem to care how much carbon they produce.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
The loss of jobs for workers can be helped by employing them in the construction of new power plants.
Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
So short term economic gain is more important to you than the long term well being of the planet your grandchildren will inhabit?
What will these people do for jobs when all the coal is gone, and the water and air are poisoned?
\
Originally posted by jamesthegreat
Originally posted by Chadwickus
The loss of jobs for workers can be helped by employing them in the construction of new power plants.
That will be fine for the workers who have a trade skill, but what about the workers who are simply that..workers.
The carbon tax is nothing more than a money grab.
Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
So, from your perspective, short term financial gains are more important than long term environmental (and therfore economic) sustainability. It's an understandable perspective. After all, it's hard for the average 'worker' to grasp issues far larger than their own individual lives.
Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by incrediblelousminds
you have to be kidding me right?
there is no peak anything
only ARTIFICIAL shortages in order to jack you up
as we have ALREADY SEEN
Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Chadwickus
Yep, and lets remember in her great carbon tax rip off there are $Billions to buy carbon tax credits from OVERSEAS..
So? What's your point? Carbon emissions know no international borders. Carbon released in Australia can impact countries around the globe.
Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
reply to post by jamesthegreat
So, from your perspective, short term financial gains are more important than long term environmental (and therfore economic) sustainability. It's an understandable perspective. After all, it's hard for the average 'worker' to grasp issues far larger than their own individual lives.
Nonetheless, avoiding addressing problems with pollution because 'jobs' are connected to industry is certainly short sighted,because employment is never as preferable as potable drinking water and breathable air. In fact, most people gain employment so that they can afford clean food, land, and air. IF there is none to be had, what's the point of the job in the first place?