Palaszczuk taxed the coal mining companies and balanced the state budget. And keep in mind this was in Queensland, the most conservative state in the country.
Rudd … there is so much I could say. One of Gillard’s first acts after replacing Rudd was to drop the taxes on mining, she then put in a carbon tax that even an idiot could come up with a scare campaign against, said carbon tax only lasted a few years and permanently poisoned the idea of a price on carbon. This is not even mentioning the CIA cables discussing whether they should replace Rudd with Gillard because Rudd didn’t want to automatically join America in a war for Taiwan.
Sure, but it wasn’t an especially bold proposal. And it wasn’t particularly central to either party’s election campaign, compared to things like cost of living, the Olympics, and “youth crime”.
she then put in a carbon tax
Not a carbon tax. A fixed-price period leading into a cap and trade scheme.
said carbon tax only lasted a few years
Still not a carbon tax. It lasted only a few years because the Government lost at the next election. Something that was greatly aided by the constant white-anting by Rudd after he lost the leadership.
Gillard’s scheme was actually working. It was world-leading legislation that actually reduced emissions while it was in effect. If Rudd had just been willing to compromise and had delivered that exact policy in 2009 instead of trying to act the Big Tough Guy and insisting it was His Way or the Highway (despite the fact that “his way” would not have reduced emissions for another decade from today), turning it into the political football that brought down both his and Gillard’s Governments.
Was enough to get her couped with a fake corruption scandal plastered all over the press. What are you expecting exactly, Whitlam levels of boldness?
Not a carbon tax.
Doesn’t matter. You can say all you want that it’s a lie to call it a “carbon tax” but does anyone in Australia know it by a different name?
It lasted only a few years because the Government lost at the next election.
If Rudd had … instead of … that brought down both his and Gillard’s Governments.
Gillard was polling abysmally before Rudd took over. She was a terrible prime minster who nobody liked.
Gillard was polling abysmally before Rudd took over
Yes. Because of relentless attack ads from the Murdoch media, and because Australians hate internal party division, and Rudd stoked that up every chance he got.
Not a carbon tax. A fixed-price period leading into a cap and trade scheme.
What do you mean “leading into”?
Cap and trade? Isn’t that an emissions trading scheme? She certainly didn’t install ETS, she installed a carbon tax (and I don’t consider tax a dirty word) aka carbon pricing.
Oh yes, sorry that wasn’t clear. I’ve been talking about it for so long (even before the Gillard Government, I remember a fixed-price introductory period leading to a cap and trade scheme being what was described in my highschool econ classes as the best method for reducing emissions) I may have gotten lazy about explaining the terminology that’s become so familiar to me.
Nah, that’s fine. Most people don’t want to know the details because they just want to be right about their entrenched view. The few serious ones will politely engage, and you then explained.
Maybe it is better in this sub but on Reddit it was usually ugly. Yay Lemmy!
Palaszczuk taxed the coal mining companies and balanced the state budget. And keep in mind this was in Queensland, the most conservative state in the country.
Rudd … there is so much I could say. One of Gillard’s first acts after replacing Rudd was to drop the taxes on mining, she then put in a carbon tax that even an idiot could come up with a scare campaign against, said carbon tax only lasted a few years and permanently poisoned the idea of a price on carbon. This is not even mentioning the CIA cables discussing whether they should replace Rudd with Gillard because Rudd didn’t want to automatically join America in a war for Taiwan.
Sure, but it wasn’t an especially bold proposal. And it wasn’t particularly central to either party’s election campaign, compared to things like cost of living, the Olympics, and “youth crime”.
Not a carbon tax. A fixed-price period leading into a cap and trade scheme.
Still not a carbon tax. It lasted only a few years because the Government lost at the next election. Something that was greatly aided by the constant white-anting by Rudd after he lost the leadership.
Gillard’s scheme was actually working. It was world-leading legislation that actually reduced emissions while it was in effect. If Rudd had just been willing to compromise and had delivered that exact policy in 2009 instead of trying to act the Big Tough Guy and insisting it was His Way or the Highway (despite the fact that “his way” would not have reduced emissions for another decade from today), turning it into the political football that brought down both his and Gillard’s Governments.
Was enough to get her couped with a fake corruption scandal plastered all over the press. What are you expecting exactly, Whitlam levels of boldness?
Doesn’t matter. You can say all you want that it’s a lie to call it a “carbon tax” but does anyone in Australia know it by a different name?
Gillard was polling abysmally before Rudd took over. She was a terrible prime minster who nobody liked.
Yes. Because of relentless attack ads from the Murdoch media, and because Australians hate internal party division, and Rudd stoked that up every chance he got.
So Gillard got couped too. Let’s just leave it at that because I can’t really be bothered.
What do you mean “leading into”?
Cap and trade? Isn’t that an emissions trading scheme? She certainly didn’t install ETS, she installed a carbon tax (and I don’t consider tax a dirty word) aka carbon pricing.
Yes, she did.
OK so that’s what you meant by “leading into”. TIL. Thanks.
Oh yes, sorry that wasn’t clear. I’ve been talking about it for so long (even before the Gillard Government, I remember a fixed-price introductory period leading to a cap and trade scheme being what was described in my highschool econ classes as the best method for reducing emissions) I may have gotten lazy about explaining the terminology that’s become so familiar to me.
Nah, that’s fine. Most people don’t want to know the details because they just want to be right about their entrenched view. The few serious ones will politely engage, and you then explained.
Maybe it is better in this sub but on Reddit it was usually ugly. Yay Lemmy!