Page 18 of 21 FirstFirst ... 89101112131415161718192021 LastLast
Results 256 to 270 of 310

Thread: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

  1. #256

    Exclamation Why won't mark answer ??

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Delisser View Post
    You may have missed the first two occaisions I asked you this question Mark, so I'll try a third time, thanks.
    Hope your not holding your breath Mike , or YOU'LL go blue in the face.

  2. #257

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    Quote Originally Posted by PinHead View Post
    well Mark..I have finally decided who I am going to vote for at the upcoming State election. As i have said previously I was of 2 minds..either the useless ALP incumbent or the LNP bible bashing candidate. CanDo's annoucement today convinced me the bloke has no idea..cancelling the upgrade of Wardell and Samford Roads..how stupid is Newman. That intersection needed the upgrade 10 years ago and now he cans it..bye bye LNP..how dumb can they be? Who will I be voting for? No one..I honestly cannot bring myself to vote for either of the majors..neither of them has the faintest idea of what is required for the general populace. To both leaders all ican offer is the middle digit salute..both dolts.
    Campbell and I (as Main Roads shadow) are working on a better plan for Samford and Wardell. The govt one is a waste of $90+ million. It will save commuters only a few seconds and delivers no extra lanes. It does resume many people's beautiful character homes - I have visited some of them. It is a Kate Jones last second special announced when Campbell put his hand up, and to look like she has done something when she hasn't.

  3. #258

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Delisser View Post
    You may have missed the first two occaisions I asked you this question Mark, so I'll try a third time, thanks.
    Yes Mike, I agree with the Direct Action Policy. Unlike Labor's carbon Tax, Direct Action will not make the cost to fish higher.

  4. #259

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    How about no action and give everyone a tax cut or pay off the debt.
    Democracy: Simply a system that allows the 51% to steal from the other 49%.

  5. #260

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Robinson MP View Post
    Campbell and I (as Main Roads shadow) are working on a better plan for Samford and Wardell. The govt one is a waste of $90+ million. It will save commuters only a few seconds and delivers no extra lanes. It does resume many people's beautiful character homes - I have visited some of them. It is a Kate Jones last second special announced when Campbell put his hand up, and to look like she has done something when she hasn't.
    NO need to work on a plan..it is so obvious what to do...carry the current railway overpass right over the top of Samford Road. Then put another on Dawson Parade at Grovely.

  6. #261

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Robinson MP View Post
    Yes Mike, I agree with the Direct Action Policy. Unlike Labor's carbon Tax, Direct Action will not make the cost to fish higher.
    I was hoping you would tell us you think we don't need either a Carbon Tax or a Direct Action Plan but thanks for your answer Mark.

  7. #262

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    So Mark you have no problem in supporting Abbott throwing wad loads of cash to big business based on flawed science and hypotheticals.

    Better ways to spend that money me thinks.

    DoNotFeedTheTrollsAandBelligerent

  8. #263

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    Quote Originally Posted by Steeler View Post
    So Mark you have no problem in supporting Abbott throwing wad loads of cash to big business based on flawed science and hypotheticals.

    Better ways to spend that money me thinks.
    please explain

  9. #264

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    Explain what ?.

    DoNotFeedTheTrollsAandBelligerent

  10. #265

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Robinson MP View Post
    Campbell and I (as Main Roads shadow) are working on a better plan for Samford and Wardell. The govt one is a waste of $90+ million. It will save commuters only a few seconds and delivers no extra lanes. It does resume many people's beautiful character homes - I have visited some of them. It is a Kate Jones last second special announced when Campbell put his hand up, and to look like she has done something when she hasn't.
    I've seen quite a few no-hopers hanging around Enogerra lately,(BTW that's not MP Mark in the jeans guys, we haven't sent his hair white just yet). Mark, you should tell your LNP policy committee to get their act in gear and get bigger maps, Kate, Wilson and that guy from Everton Pk are photographed holding a much larger map than Campbell.

    45245952fc8c5c5e099a3e444bf8f32a_XL.jpg Samford_Stage_1_open.jpg

  11. #266

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    Quote Originally Posted by Steeler View Post
    Explain what ?.

    Abbott throwing wad loads of cash to big business based on flawed science and hypotheticals.????

    Is that akin to the Fed Govt still throwing wads of cash at the car industry? If they cennot make a profit..let em go.

  12. #267

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    I refuse to accept any government or wannabe alternative needs a plan for so called climate change.Carbon tax or direct action.

    What about the car industry, i agree if you are not profitable and self sustaining then bye bye.

    Hope that clarifies things for you, after all i am here to help in any way i can buddy pal.

    DoNotFeedTheTrollsAandBelligerent

  13. #268

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    Quote Originally Posted by PinHead View Post
    please explain
    Well.....I don't think it will happen as promised, but.

    To start with both the carbon tax and Abbott's (and MP Mark's) Direct Action Plan set out to achieve the exact same thing, to reduce greenhouse emissions by 5% on the year 2000 level by the time we get to 2020.
    Direct Action is a competitive grants program, which has been used before in Aus to reduce emissions. Companies come up with plans and ways to reduce emissions, submit them to Gov committees who investigate them and if they are deemed worthy they get given tax payers dollars to do the work. The Australian National Audit Office and the non alined Grattan Institute have reviewed all the past competitive grant programs and concluded they end up costing far more than what is budgeted, take longer to achieve the targets if they ever get to the target at all. In the last years of the Howard Gov, competitive grant programs were delivering emmission reductions at $160 a ton (of tax payers money) what's Labor's carbon tax, $26 a ton (I think) and there's some of that goes back as compensation to families or low income they say, and there's also the raising of the tax free threshold for everyone. There's none of that with Abbott's plan, all the $$$ go to the poluting businesses. Abbott has also committed just over 10 billion till 2020 to achieve the 5% target, all out of the Gov budget he says. If you average the cost of previous Coalition Gov competitive grant emission programs, to get to Abbott's target by 2020 it will cost the Aussie tax payers around 11 billion each year or $1300 extra per household every year.
    Then you have to administer the program, the Aus National Audit Office said if the average imission reduction per project is 25,000 ton (which is a high call), it will take almost 30,000 projects to reach the promised target. In the past only 1 in 4 projects have quallified as good enough for tax payers $$$, that could require up to 150,000 projects to be assessed. Unless they want to hand out tax payers $$$ willy nilly (pink bats style) each project will need to be looked at with a fine toothed comb if they're to succeed. They expect it will require twice the number of public servents to administer this system than it will take to administer the carbon tax over the same period. But at the same time Abbott plans to reduce the size of the public service???
    There's also the trees, a good idea, you can never have enough trees, but Abbott has pledged to reduce 15 million tons of emissions by planting trees. this amount of trees would require 25,000 square Klm of currently cleared land, that's of a quality to support that many trees naturally, where's that coming from?

    I hope that helps Greg.

    And please please please don't think I'm pushing Julia's carbon tax over Abbott's (and MP Mark's) Direct Action Plan, I recon we can't afford either of them. Hopefuly our Timmi Boy is right and Abbott's Direct Action Plan is only policy until they get elected, then it will be one of his Non- Core promise.
    Cheers

  14. #269

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    Another B/S post from Mark.I am assuming he is putting the increase costs in his list down to a flow on effect for electricity from the Carbon Tax and a CPI increase. Well lets look at a few of these.

    FACT : this is a federal issue & he as a state politician can have no impact on this issue unless the LNP is ceeding from the federation

    FACT : my electricity costs have been soaring at 3 to 5 times the inflation rate. This is not due to a carbon tax but is due to PRIVATISATION. Introduced by " Anna Lie " but also LNP POLICY.

    FACT : flow on to CPI to be around 1/2 % reducing. Political spin ?? Figures out of mid air ?? Treasuary figures using the same formula as used to calculate the effect of the GST to the economy. ( Remember the Labor scare campaign about the huge increases in prices) didn't happen and the CPI input was similar ( slightly higher and not reducing )
    Fishing Licence : says who ? You ! And no I do not trust Labor on this point either , however you have been asked numerous times for the LNP policy on Rec Fishing and continue to avoid questions with claims that Labor will steal your policy. Didn't stop you from demanding the chap from Katters party explain his policy regarding MB green zones did it?

    Jobs not up : Which jobs are you going to produce , the jobs at a federal level where you go to work one day at a certain hrly rate with entitlements & turn up the next with a lower hrly rate & no entitlements ( No OT , only paid 40 hours even if you work more work choices) or Can Do's 1 hour of work a week means you are gainfully employed. ( Both sides have been using this bullsh*t in regards to the jobless rate )

    Wages not up : Yeah right ! From the political party that has supported every national wage case for the low paid. NOT!! And actually froze wages ( but not prices ) Come on down Malcolm.

    There have been many valid points made by every one on this post , but I would draw your attention Mark to Mike Delissers post, both schemes are going to cost , THERES NO FREE LUNCH. I myself am of Steelers & others view that we don't want / need either. However we must all come to accept another FACT : this is now law & will be at the very least expensive if not impossible to repeal. A few other of points for discussion 1 : compensation package ( more political spin for mine) 2. Change to tax free threshold ( better targeted tax cut than the normal $120 a week for the big end of town & $5 to pensioners / low paid ) 3. IF . a big IF , this works shouldn't Qld businesses gain a competitive advantage in regards to electricity production here being low sulpher black coal ( cleaner ) as to brown coal ( dirtier ) used in southern states ( Latrobe valley ) as they will now have to pay the pollution costs?

    Cheers Kevin

  15. #270

    Re: Why you don't want a carbon tax as a recreational fisher

    Quote Originally Posted by PinHead View Post
    NO need to work on a plan..it is so obvious what to do...carry the current railway overpass right over the top of Samford Road. Then put another on Dawson Parade at Grovely.
    Perhaps the LNP have tunnel vision Greg!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Join us