Are the Green Party for real??? Carbon Tax.

gerrymadden1

I've just listened to an economist (I think Richard something or other from ESRI) on RTE 1 touting the need for the Green Party carbon tax. There's steam coming out my ears. This guy was so far removed from reality that it was unbelieveable. Probably on 300K + per annum and like his colleagues in the ESRI, changes his predictions at the whim of his political masters.

When asked about how it would affect the elderly (home heating etc) he came straight out and said that they are in the category that will be hardest hit & didn't really see this as a major issue.

When asked about people who must make long commutes to get to work & how the the added energy cost to Industry would cause job losses, he jovially stated that "they won't be hit on the double if they lose their jobs & don't have to commute!

Since they've been in Government, the Green Party have done absolutely nothing except penalise the ordinary working man. They are now proposing a new tax on the cost of getting to work (or getting to the dole), a tax that will increase the cost of public transport, (don't think taxi drivers & private bus companies are going to absorb this tax) and worst of all, a tax on home heating oil.

I know (as the Green Party knows) that they will never see another day in the Dáil after the next general election but is there anything that can be done to get them out faster???

For the record, I'm not associated with any political party & in the past I may even have voted for a Green candidate if I thought he/she was worth a vote.

ei.sdraob

the funny part is were already paying "carbon" taxes, from ESB bills to the petrol pump

its just a way to tax people by playing on their guilt of living in a modern society

all we have to do is plonk a nuclear plant in this country, and voila no carbon being emitted and we get a steady reliable power source

but no that would be to pragmatic and sensible

Heroditas

gerrymadden1 wrote: »

I've just listened to an economist (I think Richard something or other from ESRI) on RTE 1 touting the need for the Green Party carbon tax. There's steam coming out my ears. This guy was so far removed from reality that it was unbelieveable. Probably on 300K + per annum and like his colleagues in the ESRI, changes his predictions at the whim of his political masters.

Was it Richard Tol by any chance? This is the guy who has argued that "climate change" would be good for Ireland because it would reduce our home heating bills.

Riskymove

The original plan was to make any carbon tax revenue nuetral (e.g. bring in a carbon tax but lower income tax by a percent or two)

or put extra tax on fuel pumps but geet rid of motor tax or VRT


the idea was to resrtructure taxes and encourage a different behaviour to using oil, gas, etc

unfortunately in the present situation its almost impossible to mimagine a decrease in tax rates

L8rdude

Yes, Carbon tax is madness at this stage. I've been forced to move miles from my work and family to afford a house. So people like me will be hard hit.

I think the green's are really shooting themselves in the foot over and over! & FF appear to be great at making the smaller party take the blame.

I remember seeing a sign on the back of as car 'PD's = Politically Dead.'

I think the new calculation is -
Greens = PD's = Politically Dead

View

Taxes influence human behaviour. Hence, what is being proposed is perfectly in line - for the Greens - in pushing their Green agenda.

As another poster put it, all such tax changes should happen in a revenue neutral basis (i.e. raise one tax, while lowering another). For instance, if the Government lowered your income tax and also introduced a tax (inversely) related to the BER of your home you should: a) be no better or worse off immediately after such a tax is introduced, and, b) you should have a strong incentive to improve the insulation of your home.

Given the huge hole in the budget we'll definitely see tax increases come the next budget. For the average person, it doesn't hugely matter if the tax increases are plain "old-fashioned" taxes or "green" taxes. If you are getting upset at the fact that they are going to be "green" taxes rather than "old-fashioned" taxes, you probably should ask yourself why?

ei.sdraob

View wrote: »

If you are getting upset at the fact that they are going to be "green" taxes rather than "old-fashioned" taxes, you probably should ask yourself why?

because if the greens were serious about climate change they would use existing technologies (read nuclear) in a pragmatic manner

not more taxes for nothing in return

these taxes wont go to green projects, they will go to bail out banks (who shouldn't be given a cent), pay the PS (who are among highest paid in world) and hand money to welfare (a 1/5th of whom are long term spongers) and lastly pay external debt interest (which is rapidly increasing to pay for above 3)

Diarmuid

gerrymadden1 wrote: »

When asked about people who must make long commutes to get to work & how the the added energy cost to Industry would cause job losses, he jovially stated that "they won't be hit on the double if they lose their jobs & don't have to commute!

That's not what he said. He corrected Aine Lawlor who said "wouldn't people be hit twice with by being made unemployed and they would have to pay carbon tax on their car fuel". He stated (not jovially) that if you have no employment you are not going to be paying carbon tax on petrol to get to work. It's just a fact.

Carbon tax makes perfect sense. You are charging for the cost of polluting and creating an incentive to develop and choose a less polluting option. Lets say you lived on the ground floor and I lived on the first floor of the same house. Now every day I take my rubbish and dump it out the window into your garden. Well it's no skin off my nose but there is an impact and cost to my pollution. If I was charged for that pollution I would investigate other options like paying a binman or reducing my waste etc..

Whether now is a good time to introduce it in Ireland is debatable though.

gerrymadden1

Heroditas wrote: »

Was it Richard Tol by any chance? This is the guy who has argued that "climate change" would be good for Ireland because it would reduce our home heating bills.

That's the guy!!! What an arrogant ass!!!

bangersandmash

View wrote: »

Given the huge hole in the budget we'll definitely see tax increases come the next budget. For the average person, it doesn't hugely matter if the tax increases are plain "old-fashioned" taxes or "green" taxes. If you are getting upset at the fact that they are going to be "green" taxes rather than "old-fashioned" taxes, you probably should ask yourself why?

If the taxes are to necessary to make up the deficit in the budget resulting from past mismanagement of the public finances, then the government should put their hands up and admit it. But instead it seems they will hide behind the guise of a green agenda in an attempt to avoid (further) unpopularity with the electorate.

As Ei.sdraob pointed out, this is simply more taxes for nothing in return.

Captain Furball

Carbon dioxide is an end product in organisms that obtain energy from breaking down sugars, fats and amino acids with oxygen as part of their metabolism, in a process known as cellular respiration.
This includes all plants, animals, many fungi and some bacteria. In higher animals, the carbon dioxide travels in the blood from the body's tissues to the lungs where it is exhaled. In plants using photosynthesis, carbon dioxide is absorbed from the atmosphere.

The Green party wants to tax nature?How ironic is that.Pack of scoundrels.

gerrymadden1

Diarmuid wrote: »

That's not what he said. He corrected Aine Lawlor who said "wouldn't people be hit twice with by being made unemployed and they would have to pay carbon tax on their car fuel". He stated (not jovially) that if you have no employment you are not going to be paying carbon tax on petrol to get to work. It's just a fact.

Sounds like the same thing to me... and to a lot of other people who heard it! And maybe I should have said flipantly rather that jovially... again, either way he didn't seem too bothered.

And while we're using "Let's say" ananolgies (Your garbage dumping example) I'll try one...

Lets say I live quite a few miles from the nearest city (true) and I need to travel to work every day (true at the moment)... fuel costs are not a luxury for me, they're a necessity! Bus services in rural areas are a joke... Public transport in rural areas is a joke... Tax me when I have a genuine alternative way to travel... Until then, hands off!!!

Until the next election, the Greens can continue to crucify the ordinary working people of Ireland. Then, it's bye bye Greens!!!

For God's sake, we can't even buy a lightbulb anymore.

Captain Furball

gerrymadden1 wrote: »

Sounds like the same thing to me... and to a lot of other people who heard it! And maybe I should have said flipantly rather that jovially... again, either way he didn't seem too bothered.

And while we're using "Let's say" ananolgies (Your garbage dumping example) I'll try one...

Lets say I live quite a few miles from the nearest city (true) and I need to travel to work every day (true at the moment)... fuel costs are not a luxury for me, they're a necessity! Bus services in rural areas are a joke... Public transport in rural areas is a joke... Tax me when I have a genuine alternative way to travel... Until then, hands off!!!

Until the next election, the Greens can continue to crucify the ordinary working people of Ireland. Then, it's bye bye Greens!!!

For God's sake, we can't even buy a lightbulb anymore.

Why are you still breathing?
You will get taxed........

Dannyboy83

because if the greens were serious about climate change they would use existing technologies (read nuclear) in a pragmatic manner

not more taxes for nothing in return

these taxes wont go to green projects, they will go to bail out banks (who shouldn't be given a cent), pay the PS (who are among highest paid in world) and hand money to welfare (a 1/5th of whom are long term spongers) and lastly pay external debt interest (which is rapidly increasing to pay for above 3)

Why don't we build a nuclear powerplant?
We could sell energy to the UK/France

Apparently the Chinese are planning to build 300 of the pebble bed reactors that can't explode, according the DMcW's latest documentary anyway.
Couldn't we build 1?

Gonna need more electricity when we get these Green approved electric cars.

Dannyboy83

Oh...............and the agreement for introducing a "Carbon Tax", was that they would get rid of Motor Tax/VRT.
That is the argument in the UK also.

They seem to have forgotten completely about that.

At this rate, the charges for owning a car are going to be at least 50% tax.

CptMackey

Its typical of this government tho. All they use is the stick never the carrot.

Greens: We dont want you driving any where so we are going to tax you out of the car.

Public: How will i get to work?

Greens: Use the bus!

Public: You have cut the bus service

Greens: So walk, any way im off in my government car bye , by the way i want a new one so im creating a carbon tax to pay for it :P

ei.sdraob

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Why don't we build a nuclear powerplant?
We could sell energy to the UK/France

Apparently the Chinese are planning to build 300 of the pebble bed reactors that can't explode, according the DMcW's latest documentary anyway.
Couldn't we build 1?

Gonna need more electricity when we get these Green approved electric cars.

i kept mentioning pebble bed and other safe nuclear technologies here on boards over and over

pebble bed reactors are not new

they had one build in Germany 40 years ago rand it ran for 21 years with no issues

there are other safe nuclear reactor designs


the problem is people are so freaking scared of the n word that they are willing to be shafted up the behind in multiple ways


once again a perfect energy mix for ireland is 40% wind 60% nuclear, with some storage

the target for 2020 is to have 20% of our energy from wind, that still leaves 80% by burning dirty coal, dirtier turf, and also burning gas and oil which could be better used in other applications such as chemistry

mikkael

Enviornment coincidentally always involves money. Greatest scam going imho. My hobbyhorse for a long time now has been the new motor tax bands, brought in mid - 2008.

On top of what amounts to drivers of older cars subsidising drivers of newer cars through a completely bizzare dual system, I have to listen to a tidal wave of b.s. about "newer, more enviornmentally friendly cars". What a load of cobblers.

A new car will have to be run for something like 30 years in order to offset it's carbon footprint. Therefore, owners of older cars ( properly maintained ) should be encouraged to keep them on the road, rather than being taxed to oblivion, if this is about enviornment ( which it's not )

A brand new 2.0 Tdi Audi can be taxed for €156 a year. My 15 year old 1.8 costs over €500. I'm sorry, but it doesn't pollute in tandem with that. I sent an email to a senior Green party T.D. to ask him wtf?

The response I got, reading between the lines, was that it's more convenient to just tax older cars higher and deal with newer ones on the basis of the actual Co2 output. I suggested that older cars be judged via NCT. Then, to my amazement, he replies "The NCT don't test for Co2 emissions".

Once again, wtf ... and then some!

Crazy little place this.

anonymous_joe

ei.sdraob wrote: »

the funny part is were already paying "carbon" taxes, from ESB bills to the petrol pump

its just a way to tax people by playing on their guilt of living in a modern society

all we have to do is plonk a nuclear plant in this country, and voila no carbon being emitted and we get a steady reliable power source

but no that would be to pragmatic and sensible

You'd let Irish people run a nuclear power plant!?

Long Onion

Diarmuid wrote: »

Carbon tax makes perfect sense. You are charging for the cost of polluting and creating an incentive to develop and choose a less polluting option.

You are assuming that there is a less polluting alternative though. Let me assure you that if you live in a remote rural location there is no less polluting alternative to getting to work than a private car. A carbon tax should penalise those who make a poor decision and not those who have no decision to make in the first place. If and when I am given an alternative I will happily agree with the introduction of a carbon tax.

Diarmuid wrote: »

Lets say you lived on the ground floor and I lived on the first floor of the same house. Now every day I take my rubbish and dump it out the window into your garden. Well it's no skin off my nose but there is an impact and cost to my pollution. If I was charged for that pollution I would investigate other options like paying a binman or reducing my waste etc..

Again, your argument pre-supposes the existence of alternative options, this is not the case for those who have to commute long distances to work due to lack of investment in rural infrastructure and job creation.

There is always the temptation to ask why I don't move closer to my job - my answer is that I pay my taxes to allow me to enjoy my rights as a citizen, the choice of where to settle is one of these rights. I do not complain about the bad roads or the fact that I have no transport, have to pay for my water, have to provide my own sewage tank, have no broadband or street lighting - all of these things I am prepared to pay and see them as being part and parcel of living in the country. I am not, however, willing to pay a punative tax on top of this.

Diarmuid wrote: »

Whether now is a good time to introduce it in Ireland is debatable though.

The right time to introduce it is after an alternative solution has been put in place, bar this, a carbon tax remains a lazy way of raising revenue without dealing with the issue of emissions - we will all still drive to work on the same roads, the same distance so no squirell's will be saved.

Be Do Have

"Carbon dioxide is an end product in organisms that obtain energy from breaking down sugars, fats and amino acids with oxygen as part of their metabolism, in a process known as cellular respiration.
This includes all plants, animals, many fungi and some bacteria. In higher animals, the carbon dioxide travels in the blood from the body's tissues to the lungs where it is exhaled. In plants using photosynthesis, carbon dioxide is absorbed from the atmosphere.
The Green party wants to tax nature?How ironic is that.Pack of scoundrels. "

Does everyone here seriously think that in 2007 the green party was elected and then they invented the tax system? FF have been taxing us for 20 years in non progessive ways, and where has it gotten us. FF signed away all our oil and gas reserves in the atlantic for free! Bet you don't here that on rte news? I wonder why?

Yes bacteria, organisms and every living creature that has roomed this earth secretes carbon dioxide. But its humans that mine, dig and pump carbon out of the ground in one century and burn it for everyone to breath. While at the same time chopping down the very plants that absorb all of this carbon in the carbon cycle.

It is the financial system that is destroying our economies, our jobs, our wellbeing and our planet. It is not carbon taxes or green politics.

The green party are the only people trying to link the carbon cycle of life to the monetary cycle of money. Thus creating a balance in the way we live on this earth.

Forget about saving the planet, it will be here for millenia, long after you and I and our children are gone. We on the other hand have less than 50 years to decide to work with the basics laws of phyics, chemistry and biology OR just blame everybody else for not living up to our responsibilties.

This choice now lays before us.

ei.sdraob

anonymous_joe wrote: »

You'd let Irish people run a nuclear power plant!?

there are some very bright Irish engineers now btw

dont be putting these people down, my relative is an engineer who was involved in building a nuclear plant btw

we can always import more German equipment and labor as ESB have done in past

as long as its run by a private company and a state body (hello Eirgrid) it can work quite well and gives us time to build up more renewables and stop burning fuels

eoinbn

Lets be clear- FF want this tax. The 'blame' will be on the greens, this thread shows that, and it's a few million that they wont have to cut. If it hurts the elderly too much then FF can raise the fuel allowance and be seen to be looking after their own even though what they are really doing is giving back what they took! And once you start blaming the greens for one thing then you can start blaming them for everything- again refer to OP speech:"The greens have done nothing but screw the working man since they went into power".
The foundations for all the carnage that is taking place and will take place happened during the lifetime of the last government, not this one.

It's either taxs or cuts, so they might aswell put in a tax that MIGHT have some positive benefits.

OT: Pebble bed reactors are not viable- yet.

ei.sdraob

eoinbn wrote: »

OT: Pebble bed reactors are not viable- yet.

:rolleyes: source?

the technology is well researched and over 40 year old

the_dark_side

Look.... the Green party agreed to accept NAMA, on the condition that FF outlawed the fur industry in Ireland.... JOKE...

but so long as we sit starring at Sky premiership action, Facebook, Big Brother, X Box etc. that shower will continue to swan in and out of Leinster House and draw their humongous salaries at the tax payers expense, and will continue to implement the adgenda of their paymasters in Brussels, so long as the public are enjoying a relative level of comfort... this will not last long though

MrMicra

Long Onion wrote: »

You are assuming that there is a less polluting alternative though. Let me assure you that if you live in a remote rural location there is no less polluting alternative to getting to work than a private car.

You've made the decision to live in a remote rural location. Why should the whole planet subisidise your selfishness?

bladespin

MrMicra wrote: »

You've made the decision to live in a remote rural location. Why should the whole planet subisidise your selfishness?

I'd really doubt if the majority choose to live in remote locations, most of us would've been born there, can't blame our ancestors for not being environmentally aware when the built their homes.
Most people pay their way, they're not looking to be subsidised, the system needs to be fair, punishing a commuter for working won't serve the country.
Personally I'd never live in a city again, I hated it, think I might be a bit claustrophobic (sp??), it might be environmentally ideal for us all to live in high rise buildings but you can't force that type of lifestyle on people.

That's the problem with the green party, too many idealists and not a trace of practicality.

Can you imagine even suggesting we centralise our population during a property market crash.

eoinbn

ei.sdraob wrote: »

:rolleyes: source?

the technology is well researched and over 40 year old

This will be my last comment on it as it's way OT: There is a big difference between been possible and been viable. Solar power has been around for years aswell, but it's only now becoming a viable solution. The reason that china is researching them instead of building them is because the technology isn't ready yet.

diverdriver

First off the tax is misnamed, 'Carbon tax' conjures up visions of black sooty carbon, pollution etc. In fact it's a carbon dioxide tax. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant but it is being blamed for global warming. Whether or not you believe in man made global warming is another point, (I do not). But this tax isn't really a green tax at all despite the soon to be extinct Green party might think. It's revenue raising and it will have a negative effect on the economy.

People like to delude themselves with the notion that heavy polluters will pay more. What they don't realise is that it's us who are the heavy polluters. All of us. This tax will once again hit the low paid more than the well paid. Business will pass the cost onto us. They won't bear it themselves. It's a con of the worst sort. Worse from my point of view as a skeptic about global warming. It's pointless.

The sooner the Greens disappear into the history the better. But eoinbn is right this isn't really either a green or a Green party tax. It's an FF tax one of a long line.

Be Do Have

the_dark_side wrote: »

Look.... the Green party agreed to accept NAMA, on the condition that FF outlawed the fur industry in Ireland.... JOKE...

but so long as we sit starring at Sky premiership action, Facebook, Big Brother, X Box etc. that shower will continue to swan in and out of Leinster House and draw their humongous salaries at the tax payers expense, and will continue to implement the adgenda of their paymasters in Brussels, so long as the public are enjoying a relative level of comfort... this will not last long though

I agree dark side. But. The bright side is that either way, after the all the s**t goes down, the next generation will rebuild a very sustainable world out of community, integrity and that L word that we have all completely forgotten about as we go about our daily rat race.
Me included, i drive 400 miles a week, im a slave to the "modern developed" system too. Its crazy when ya think the electric car was invented before the petrol one a hundred years ago. And yet here we are, its 2009 and I still cant buy an electric car even if i had €99,000 to spend.....after all those years watching "Beyond 2000" on tv, I can never understand this myself.

Long Onion

MrMicra wrote: »

You've made the decision to live in a remote rural location. Why should the whole planet subisidise your selfishness?

This is the kind of rubbish that really annoys me. Please read my post. I have stated that I am happy to pay for my water, to go without broadband, to provide my own sewage works, to do without public transport, to pay my own rubbish costs, to do without street lighting, footpaths, a cinema, a swimming pool etc etc.

All of these things come as part and parcel of rural living. I am not looking for a discount in taxation by virtue of the fact that I get less infrastructure than those in urban areas, nor am I campaigning for better infrastructure.

What I am complaining about is one thing - carbon tax being levied on those who have to drive to work because despite paying the same tax as those in urban areas, we have not benefitted from a pro-rata public spend. I have no issue with paying a carbon tax if there is an alternative that I choose not to use - I have no such alternative.

Were it not for the population of the rural parts of the country, urban dwellers would have to purchase foreign agricultural produce and pay dearly for it, revenues from agriculture would not flow to the exchequer and the country would be a damn sight worse off.

Rather than make mindless generalisations come back to me with factual information which will prove that I am more of a burden to society than an urban dweller. With respect, you know nothing of my situation, the taxs I contribute or the services I recieve therefore your post is ill-informed and a thorough waste of pixels.