Carbon Tax Debacle

Carbon Tax Debacle

This is not my usual topic on this site - but hey, let's not limit or restrict ourselves. This is a warning post to all Australians and in fact all people living in Western nations in the world. Our government is currently debating how a carbon tax will be taken from us, The People.

I insist that we still debate whether a tax should be taken at all simply because we use and create more carbon. And I insist that we should not, in any way shape or form pay any carbon tax whatsoever. Carbon tax and carbon credit is a complete and utter debacle. If you read this post, please distribute it to everyone you know - because we are on the verge of being skinned alive by the powers that be.

Firstly, if you really look into the subject, it is extremely questionable whether there is such a thing as human-activity based, carbon-dioxide-related climate change. This CO2 theory has become popular of late to the point of being dogmatic, and if you do not agree to the theory and challenge people who do you can really evoke their wrath on the subject. They may even confuse you as 'not caring about the environment' and such nonsense, which is a complete misinterpretation. If the idea that there is no such thing as human activity related climate change impresses you, please do some research on this topic. Climate change is occurring, however. We are experiencing this as a slight change in temperature across global averages with changes in eco-system and weather patterns. We can see how a large number of eco-system variables are intimately related and one thing affects another with great complexity. Weather is consequently more extreme in some places, indeed much colder in some parts of the world. In Australia at the moment (if you would presently disregard flooding in many parts of the East coast - and my heart goes out to the victims of this flooding) we have been experiencing very dry conditions for a long period of time. The recent deluge of rain all at once (some places experiencing 600mm+ in one day!) is indicative of changes in patterns involving extreme scenarios. We have experienced tremendous amounts of forest fires, very long droughts and heat waves, and now we are experiencing huge storms and extreme deluges of rain and resultant flooding in Australia. This has occurred across distant parts of the whole continent, where 80% of Queensland (twice the size of Texas), large parts of Victoria, Tasmania and even the north of Western Australia have been under water. Recent reports estimate at least 15 people are dead, and over 60 are missing. We even experienced inland tsunamis, where the river torrents rose so fast and furiously that a wall of water swept across inland plains that actually washed people out from their own homes! This will now threaten many sectors of our economy and a large part of our food production has been destroyed. But is this all due to human activity based carbon dioxide ('greenhouse gas') emissions or is it actually due to something outside of our control?

There are other factors related to weather change on Planet Earth. In Australia and other parts of the world, a lot of our drought is due to deforestation as, simply put, trees pull up water from the ground, evaporate the water in the sun through the leaves, and this moisture condenses in clouds to later rain on the forest below.There is also evidence (again if you research if for yourself) that volcanic eruptions pump tremendous volumes of 'greenhouse gases' into the atmosphere. Aside from this, our sun is experiencing an increase in sun spot and solar flare eruptions, and there are reports that all planets in our solar system are heating up - and let's not forget that there are no people living there polluting the atmospheres whatsoever. Astronomically speaking, our solar system is moving through the galactic equator of the Milky Way Galaxy, and this is set to occur some time during the winter solstice of 2012. Some scientists are predicting major changes to our magnetosphere and also a reversal of north - south polarity is due to occur around this time. We are currently in the build-up period of a coalescence of multiple extreme events on our planet and in our galaxy. Perhaps a focus on man-made climate change as propagated by the powers that be is a ruse device to give people a sense of control over nature or perhaps to distract from larger issues such as those described above. Cynically speaking, the focus on human activity related carbon dioxide based climate change (phew, that's a mouthful) may also be a device which is simply being used to cash in on major change and disaster which is occurring during this period of time.

To focus for a moment on forest degradation, here in Western Australia we have about 5% of our old growth forest remaining - so clearly a major cause of our drought is at least in part due to deforestation. Carbon exists within all living things and things that once were living (coal and oil, even diamonds are the apparent remnants of ancient forests). If you burn it, it releases carbon dioxide (CO2) and carbon monoxide (CO1) into the atmosphere. If you plant more trees, the trees breathe in the CO2 and breathe out more oxygen (O2) which we animal life forms, including humans, just love to breathe in. So this is a natural cycle of carbon output and uptake, and the carbon cycle goes on. Please think about this - let us not confuse deforestation with carbon dioxide pollution-based increases in temperatures or decreases in water availability. This error in reasoning is called equivocation. At the moment there is an extraordinarily huge amount of equivocation occurring. And we are being fooled by this common, underhanded and deceitful tactic.

Example: Bill is a carpenter; all carpenters work with wood; therefore Bill will only work with wood, therefore Bill hates anything that is not wood.

This is equivocation: of course Bill could actually work with wood, and also utilize and enjoy other materials and products as well.

Carbon dioxide has been equivocated with climate change, which may instead be due to things like deforestation. And we, most of us, have been fooled by it. So this article serves as a remedy to that situation, and all I ask you to do is read it and think about it, and if you agree or are curious furthermore, to talk about it to other people that you know.

As I stated above, there are other reasons for climate change: Volcanoes produce extreme amounts of so called 'green house gases'. The sun also goes through cycles of change which affect all planets in the solar system. If we measure changes in the Earth's temperatures over time, we know there have been ice ages and heating periods in a cyclical nature throughout time. This is evident in layers of ancient ice. We can also see further evidence for cataclysm and disaster in pre-historic timesĀ  that had nothing to do with technologically advanced civilizations burning fossil fuels. The extinction of the dinosaurs is an example of this.

Now, to focus on carbon taxation. The Copenhagen summit of 2009 brought many nations together to try to reach an agreement on taxing their citizens for the use of carbon. The idea is that if you make carbon producing activities expensive then people will not use them as much and there will be impetus for alternative technology using 'renewables' like wind and solar power. Now I think that investment in alternative technology is excellent and a very wise thing to do. Mostly because we will not have to rely on the middle east with all of its instability to get our oil. We will not be at the mercy of such foreign countries. For example, Scotland has invested so much money, R and D in renewables that they are on the way to having 80% of their energy produced from 'green' technology by 2020. This is a great move because then you are employing your own people with all allied industries involved, and not wasting money on importing oil - which is very expensive (from $80 to $150+ per barrel).

Thus, if we were savvy like the Scots, all we would need to do is invest in renewable (non-oil/coal/gas) technology to create our energy and also to convert motor vehicles to non-petroleum fuel. Electric vehicles could be plugged in to get their recharge from a clean (non fossil fuel) power station, instead using wind, water, wave and solar power.

The government could spend current tax payer's money on these sorts of upgrades, and /or give rewards to companies in the private sector (such as tax concessions) to do it for them. This would not be hard at all, and many scientists around the world would flock to our country to be a part of it. We would also eliminate ugly hazes from cities and foul smelling fumes from traffic jams. The air would be cleaner, fresher and healthier.

So this is where we need to be going. However - we are not. This 'green' change has instead been equivocated with CO2 almost exclusively, and we have become dead-locked into a ruse, where we are made to think that carbon taxation is the same thing as eliminating climate change.

It is not.

What would otherwise be a lovely idea to develop clean technology, local jobs, scientific advancement, etc., has been turned around, twisted, shat on and held hostage by extremely clever, wicked and machiavelian individuals who make up the powers that be. They will attempt to use our otherwise good intentions to skin us alive.

Carbon tax is planned to be charged like a goods and service or valued added tax (GST and VAT), so that anything you do which involves carbon or so called 'green house gases' will be taxed, from taking a trip on a bus or plane, to driving your car, to eating meat, having children, or owning a pet. You see - all of these activities involve the release of carbon. We are finally being taxed for simply being alive, for existing. We are afterall carbon-based life forms.

And it gets even worse. The reason why carbon tax is an extremely poor and bad idea (as it has been envisaged by the powers that be, world wide) is that the taxation which is collected by our government from our citizens as tax payers, is instead to be paid to so called 'third world countries' and not to be put toward our own domestic 'green' energy changes. This taxation is NOT designed to benefit our own moves toward renewable / clean energy. Can you believe it??

I gather the basis behind such a ruse theory is that if this taxation is paid to third world countries it will benefit them if/when they experience the bad effects of climate change which is supposedly 'caused' by first world nations (richer countries that pollute by releasing 'greenhouse gases'). Secondly, the tax may be used to help such third world countries 'develop'. Ironically, what do you think third world countries would be doing if they develop? They would be industrializing, burning fossil fuels and owning more cars!! So our carbon tax will simply pay for other poorer nations to produce more carbon!!

However, as I have stated and some of us quietly understand, our production of green-house gases does not even cause the climate change we are seeing and experiencing in the world.

Can you see the fallacious reasoning and chiefly the equivocation at work regarding carbon, tax and climate change?

Now to make matters even worse, what do you think these third world nations will do with this money? Firstly, let's look at the definition of a 'third world country'. These are countries that are not fully industrialized and often this means that standards of living are very low which is due to economies that don't export enough valuable commodities. As a result these countries do not meet the financial needs of the people living there. How do these countries become industrialized or indeed progress toward better performing economies? They go into extreme debt to the World Bank and International Monetary Fund to pay for the so-called necessary improvements in industry and economy and to 'benefit the citizens' of such countries.

This is of course not the outcome in reality. The debt involves compounding interest and so it can never be repaid, and much or all of the exports from such countries are sold to service the debt. The people living there are perpetually enslaved by the debt and their ignorance has been exploited to put them in such a position. Additionally if such countries have democracy, it is a false democracy, where the ruling party hires their own friends and families with nepotism to become owners of the factors of production and exploit the majority of the people. Bribery, false voting, intimidation, violence and despotism are the orders of the day in such places. As a result, even if such countries do develop, the money from exports is often not shared equally amongst the people, and it is very difficult to get 'in on the action' and actually make some money as a business person unless you know the people in power. Your best bet might be to become an unprotected small business person to live on the scraps from the big players (extremely concentrated wealth in the hands of the few), and many more will go into black market industries and organized crime.

So, in reality now, what do you think these third world countries will really do with the money they are 'given' by first world 'polluters' via a carbon tax? If you owed your landlord money for rent and were at risk of eviction, and you were given some money by someone else, would you go out and blow the money on a good night out on the town?! Of course not. Third world nations will simply service their debts. Thus, if we allow a carbon tax here it will simply be going through an elaborate money laundering scheme in the guise of payment to third world countries, and then off to where it was originally intended: into the coffers of the World Bank and IMF. These are already extremely rich institutions, but they are simply greedy and want more. In fact, international banks wish to exsanguinate the common people and small businesses of the world (to drain all the financial blood). They are effectively international banking cartels - banks without borders. This means they cannot be restricted by governments within specific countries, and if they lend to a country, they then effectively own that country, just as the bank effectively owns your house if you have a mortgage to it (just see what happens if you default on several repayments!). And by the way, have you ever heard of a bank significantly investing (beyond silly hype and PR) in green technology? I haven't. So let's not be foolish enough to assume that such international banks will use all of this carbon tax money from western nations to fund some sort of super-green-highway to 'green the world' or anything daft like that. They will use the money to make their owners and share holders fat and rich, their executives will be paid massive salaries and bonuses, and they will use the money to finance further exploitative operations to squeeze even more money out of all of us, first world, second world and third world alike.

So this is why I am completely against any carbon taxation, as it will basically be directly transferred to international banks which are the reason why we are in our disastrous economic predicament in the first place - i.e. they gave very cheap credit in good times, companies and governments alike took up excessive cheap credit and over-leveraged themselves so that when the global financial crisis came they could not afford to pay back the debt. We had been tricked with shonky forecasts into believing that the good times would keep on rolling. For example, regular folk that I know were starting to look at purchasing house and land packages worth $700,000 to $1 million plus. Now if they bought such places on 'equity' from pre-existing inflated assets, they would then be living in negative equity after the GFC, and if they lost their jobs or businesses they would default on payments and be homeless with zero equity, if not with debt on assets they no longer even owned. Again - the bank would then own them. Anything they did economically would need to be used to pay back the loans with the interest accumulating at a compounding rate of course, all the while. This is a microcosmic version of what has happened to entire nations.

So, in conclusion I strongly suggest you do everything you can to research this topic. Empower yourself with knowledge. Tell everyone you know about it and anyone else who will listen. Stop equivocating carbon and carbon tax with global warming and 'greening the world' because they are simply not the same thing. Do not vote for any government or representative which pedals this nonsense - in deed, write to your local representatives, local newspapers, networks and express your refusal to support such notions. Let's not allow ourselves to be taxed any more, at all! Especially in such a climate, we need all the money we can get as then we can spend it in our local economies which in turn creates employment for people living in our own countries. Let's also understand this very clearly: we as regular folk in the west are not responsible for the creation and perpetuation of third world countries and their dire circumstances; rather: international banks (World Bank, IMF, and numerous other Banks) are responsible for the creation of the Third world and all the desperate situations of the people living in such countries. You and I did not do this. Ask yourself: 'did I ever offer credit to a person overseas at an interest rate that they could never repay?' If the answer is a resounding 'no!' then you are not responsible for the dire economic circumstances of such people. This is a similar equivocation to the way that the people of countries like the USA, tax payers, were forced against their will (80%+ voted NO: so much for the 'free world' and the world's greatest democracy) to bail out banks that declared themselves to be on shonky financial ground. Did those tax payers create the problem of over-leveraging and ridiculously risky gambling tools like hedge funds and derivatives? Of course not! Yet time and time again the regular folk are told or made to be responsible for the outrageously corrupt and irresponsible behaviour of huge corporations and banks. We are not responsible for what they do, they are!

Let's not put up with this bullshit any longer.

Ben Bruce


6 Responses

  1. Tony
    Love your article. I wonder if paying carbon tax could be legally challenged in a court of law. After all, they are charging for "theorised emissons" , There is no "carbon meter.
  2. Ben
    Hi Tony Thanks for your feedback. I think that many issues can and ought to be challenged in a court of law. Many issues are interpreted in a twisted / loophole way until someone challenges it. The only way we can have a better democratic system is to become more involved and particpatory in debate, to ask the difficult questions, and to take authorities to court to beat them at their own game, especially with notions that are unconstitutional, wrong, silly and against our human rights. This would require the common man and woman to be better versed in legal process, law, communication skills, argument and oration. However I also think that courts can sometimes be a bit rigged when it comes to political issues. Of course we'd like to think all judges and legal systems are infallible but the reality is they are often not. This is because of the nature of power, and how it corrupts... There is an argument for getting rid of some or much of the state all together as it limits our freedoms by its very existence; the degree to which of course needs to be carefully assessed. So yes a carbon meter - I suppose they will find a way to calculate it somehow, but as they are theorised there may be ways around paying it. I think in many ways the revolutions in dictatorship countries that we are seeing a lot of at the moment are because the people are absolutely sick of being exploited and disrespected. Perhaps in western countries we also need to have a 'revolution mindset' applied in a slightly different way; that we are sick and tired of being endlessly told what to do, to have our adult discretion to make our own decisions taken away from us as we try to get on with our awkward lives, studies, families, friendships and businesses - tripping over endless bureaucracy and red tape laws and codes. We are taxed to death and then our money is used for stupid reasons (as well as some good ones, arguably). I am brought to thinking of the idea - what if there was a war and nobody turned up? I think if there was to be a revolutionary mindset in the west, we as people who would rather be free would simply start to ignore silly government impositions en masse: Question authority as well as embrace the vulnerability that is created thereby; swim to the side as it all the important stuff happens on the edge. A person or collective (governing body) only has as much power as it is given and this involves the giving of attention. If we just ignored much of the legal code or taxes which are plain wrong and we did so either discreetly or en masse with protests etc., we simply wouldn't be giving it undue credence: just like walking past the town drunk when he starts spouting rubbish. B.
  3. Matthew Charlton
    I think it is very important for all Australians to be fully aware of the very serious implications a tax on carbon would pose on us as individuals but also on the third world countries, that could benefit from our tax. This could have disasterous consequences for third world countries in Africa, like Zimbabwe, who with their dictator leader have all kinds of avenues towards accessing the money that is supposedly meant to end up in the coffers of the World Bank or IMF. We do not need to be supporting these dictators in any facet. We have already seen the destructions & devastion they have caused in their countries from the money they have laundered through supposed 'charitable organisations' & the numerous bank accounts they have in Switzerland. We are been totally brainwashed by our own government who are in-directly supporting people like Robert Mugabe. This has to stop. We have to stand up & voice our concerns & take positive pro-active steps to prevent this tax been passed in parliament. So I ask what can be done ??
  4. With all science aside from the carbon tax idea, a carbon tax is very unfair for those living in colder climate, I will be punished for staying warm enough to survive global warming, the colder I am during global warming, the more I will be penalized for bing cold during global warming. most of the energy used is to survive nature. All life comes from the ocean, carbon based oxygen is the cause of all life and energy, CO2 caused the greenhouse, causing (O2) dioxide for carbon based life to breathe, I have more than proven CO2 caused by mankind can not cause global warming or climate change. There are a dozen causes of climate change missing from the U.N. study. Please go to Thank you Bruce A. Kershaw
  5. Ann
    I think the Carbon Tax is now dead in the water, or soon will be. The horror budget, making up for lower tax receipts and reckless spending will see the end of Gillard. Labor will remain in power, as Oakeshott and Windsor know they will lose their seats if there is an election. The Greens take control of the senate and Gillard's replacement limps through to next election. We are doomed for the next 2 / 1/2 years.
  6. Ben
    Good points - I never thought about the money actually getting to the third world countries and not being paid back to the international banks for third world debt. Indeed, what if a dictator kept the money for his own destructive purposes? Either way, both outcomes are not good. Neither banks nor dictators are in our best interests, and neither should be financially supported. I believe that we the people should keep our hard-earned money. It is important for a nation to redistribute some of its moneys from the citizens, of course - but I'm not sure if we can always trust a government to do so efficiently and wisely. They tend to end up spending the money on warships and government palaces and chauffeured vehicles - not so much in the way of schools, roads and hospitals. Even worse they may use the tax revenue to make payments on government debt - so it goes back to banks anyway. Taxation is somewhat an illegal extortion racket; afterall if I don't pay tax I go to jail and if I resist jail I get shot. So it literally is 'stand and deliver' at the barrel of a gun. We didn't used to have income tax - and people forget this! "In the old days" of this country, you would pay tax for using government provisions, like ferries, water and electricity. So they would create their own income and these profits could be redistributed to the people, responsibly, in the way they most needed it. Business would rent government land and pay royalties. In a sense as a citizen you would do business with the government by using its equipment (which we all collectively owned anyway) so there would be a vested interest in efficiency and sound business principles, not wasteful allocations and huge tax revenues. There would then be the private sector to keep things even, well priced and competitive, and there can also be a competition watch dog to notice anything like collusion and price fixing if it springs up. An example is this: the great barrier reef - this was protected by creating tourism ventures. The government supported this and thus collected some of the moneys that came in from tourists. Perfect deal. We keep the reef, create jobs and businesses, scientific studies, environmental awareness, happy marine animals, happy tourists and happy government - perfect. Interestingly - our PM Gillard has never stated, to my knowledge, what she intends to do with the money from carbon taxation. And we are expected to pay a tax without even knowing where the money is going. If we knew for example, that it was going into R and D for renewable energies, or being used to plant forests, or clean up wetlands, or give all households water tanks attached to their roof run off, or solar/wind/wave renewable and 'clean' energy generation, or put in flood levies in low lying cities - and to be used primarily within our own country.... we may not mind so much paying this tax. However, I am generally skeptical about taxation in general - it hardly ever goes where promised, and those who should pay it the most often don't. Some people in government are not there for the right reasons - i.e. to help the country get better, to help the people be better, to enrich our capacity for freedom, responsibility, creativity, health and innovation, because they like to get big things done - rather they are often there because they want a high paying job or they want perks (like an endless high level pension as soon as they quit politics) or some kind of fame in the public eye - book deals and the like afterwards. Whilst this stuff is nice, if it is the prime motivator, and not a secondary motivator you will tend to have people in power who are selfish, and will do things to cover their own buts, and will not want to make good changes in case their own safety is jeopardised - so leadership can become ineffective because of this. The government also uses guilt trips to make us pay it 'for their good works' and alternatively uses fear tactics and threats if you don't. BB.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *