Australia Strangles Free Speech to Protect Carbon Tax

Your statement is self-contradictory. ....don't you see that??

Let me try to simplify it. You offer a used car dealer $10K for a car. He says he cannot sell it that cheap....."I'll lose money !"
You are saying it is alright for the gov't to throw him in jail for not accurately telling you his COSTS.....

 

I will answer your last question first. I have no investments in mitigation plans. As a matter of fact, at the age of 61, I used to think it unlikely that I would be alive to experience the catastrophic effects of CC. So for me personally, I do not give a rat's ass if a climate catastrophe is prevented. What I do care about how difficult the naysayers are making it for future generations. The Republicons complain about the Democrats putting out kids into debt but when it comes CC and alternative energy, the Republicons would rather sell out to the ff industry than support the next generations.
Your turn: What are your incentives for opposing plans to reduce CO2? Do you work for the FF industry?

 

I do not know about countries but GHG emissions in the Northeast are down by 30%

at an increase of 46 cents a month to my electric bill.

 

My incentives? My incentives are that I am sickened by one of the biggest scams in human history being played on most nations around the world.

First of all, I'm not convinced that global warming is as bad as it is being portrayed. After all, it was warming during the Middle Ages than it is now. Why?

Secondly, I'm against cap and trade. I see no real benefit for those trying to "save the planet' via cap and trade. Simply put, it does not go far enough in ending carbon emissions on a large enough scale to really make a difference.

And lastly, I'm tired of governemnt stealing money from it's citizenry. In the US, they created social security, and then robbed from it. They then take our tax dollars and do stimulus programs and bail outs etc. and it is virtually impossible to keep track of where all these big pots of money go to. In other countries they come up with the VAT tax and then try to pimp gambling on the populace in order to raise more revenue. Of course, it's not enough, is it? Now they want another pot of money in cap and trade. Looking at those who are pushing cap and trade, those that push it stand to make a killing with Al Gore leading the way. If it is enacted in the US it will enrich the Chicago Climate Exchange to the tune of $10 trillion as well as its supporters and investors. I also have a personal stake in all this since I have to heat and cool my home and need transportation. Or I could just stick my tail between my legs and pay the government about $2000 a year or more in carbon taxes every year and watch a staggering economy go further down the tubes.

You've heard of the laffer curve haven't you? I think we are seeing a similar phenomenon in terms of regulation, planned economies, and taxation taking a toll on economies around the world. A booming economy can only exist if it is a free economy. The sad part is, a booming economy is the only remedy to the massive debt that these goons have piled up and they just won't let it happen.

 

What are you on?

The article is clearly about preventing people from committing fraud by falsely increasing costs beyond the carbon tax amount. They have the same monitoring when they brought in their Goods and Services tax.

This isn't a free speech issue, unless its free speech to defraud consumers!

 

No it doesn't because

A) it is not a new law
b) it is not about divulging anything to anyone on a routine basis
c) the ACCC will only investigate if there is a consumer complaint
d) we are not America - different system

 

Got evidence it is a "scam"? COme on I would love someone to actually lay out a trail of EVIDENCE that this is a scam - who is benefiting and how are they managing to get so many governments around the world to participate? Warning links to NWO conspiracy theory sites will not be accepted as "evidence"

That would be a concur IF it were true - but it is not so...............fail!!

Bully for you. Big Woop! You don't like Cap and trade - so? I don't like the GST but I have to pay it

But this is about AUSTRALIA not AMERICA - different countries. Al Gore has nothing to do with us. He has no investments here - we only know of him as an ex-politician from America. You complain about Gore meanwhile people like "Lord" Monkton are making a killing off of denying climate change exists and convincing people like yourself that it is all a "scam" by muddying the water about the science.

Finally - why should we NOT put a price on pollution? Personally I would put a price on ALL forms of pollution because after all we have not stopped people from polluting just by fining them

 

Now who is being obtuse?

 

They do not have to tell you the costs. They can't LIE about the costs.

They can't tell you that they can't sell it for $10k because of the, let's say, Blue Sky Tax and how they have to pay $5k per car they sell. That would be a lie.

 

So your gov't in Australia can make it a crime for a citizen to lie about something the gov't has done??

Tell me then, is it also a crime for your gov't to LIE to the citizens about what it has done? Because if so you had better start building prisons for all the pols that convinced you a carbon tax was needed to save the planet......LOL

 

Perhaps I do not understand Aussie law...I was under the impression free speech was protected.

For example, here in the States i can say " Latherty eats worms !" Now that is untrue (I assume !) and makes me sound stupid, but I CAN say it if I like. Your only recourse would be civil court where you would have to show it harmed you in some way, but it is still not a CRIME. So your constitution makes it possible for the gov't to make simply lying a crime?

Wow....

 

No it doesn't. It requires no misrepresentation of costs. That is, if a price rise for goods produced, for example, is 10% and the carbon tax element of that 10% is 0.5% then the business cannot say, "we are raising our prices due to the carbon tax". There are obviously other cost factors involved. That is not curbing free speech, it is simply requiring the truth.

http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/807902/fromItemId/ACCC

http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/1039050

 

None of the above. The issue of free speech is complex in Australia, just like it is anywhere else. It is hedged with limitations, just like anywhere else. Because our constitutional law is composed not of one single document this makes the issue complex. The High Court of Australia has determined that in Australia free speech is implied. In practice I have the same level of freedom to speak my mind as does any American or Brit or anyone else living in a liberal democracy. But that's another issue.

 

Except for their masters in government. They can lie. In fact, it is expected.

 

Somehow I get the feeling that your laws are sooo complex that only your lawyers in government can understand them.

 

No and that is not what this is about and if you actually read what you posted you would realise that. It is a crime to make a lie about what YOU have done - i.e. if the price went up and you could prove it was the carbon tax you could say and do what you liked but if you hiked the price 1,000% and CLAIMED it as the fault of the tax when really you were just getting greedy - then no you cannot do that

 

Well known fact - If you are a pollie you couldn't lie straight in bed...............

 

Yeah! We decided to do that when advertising decided it did not want to tell the truth anymore. "False Advertising" obviously that is a new concept for Americans - we can share it with you if you like............

BTW THAT is not part of the constitution. We have no "Bill of rights". Instead we just make it up as we go along,,,,,,,,,,,,,, now THAT is freedom!!!!!

 

Constitutional law in a common law jurisdiction without a single, authoritative written constitution is complex. But then so is US constitutional law, frankly it befuddles me, but then I'm not a lawyer.

 

Which is why constitutional lawyers are traditionally "Queens Counsels"/"Senior Counsels"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITUSZ6LRHrk

 

Can you lie and say that your food contains no nuts when it does? It'd be a violation of your free speech to make it a crime.

 

Parliamentary privilege.

 

All you have to know is that if you are a highly ranked elected official you are above the law. Our own Congress has an ethics committee and one Conressman, Charley Rangel, was found to have around 20 ethics violations but he is still there. It seems that no Congressmen have the gonades to pass harsh judgement on their collegues in fear that it might happen to them. As a result, many have argued that the Ethics Committee should be disbanded altogether and is a waste of time and taxpayer money. Then again, wasting taxpayer money is second nature to them.

The Founders knew that such abuses would occur and tried different branches to keep the others in line. It worked for a while but now such checks and balances are gone. Now we live in a country where you can be detained without charge or representation and the nation is ruled via the Executive Branch.

 

Do you know the difference between politics and religion? Those in politics are never held to a higher standard. In fact, they are expected to be the lowest of the low, yet statists worship their rule and even defend their hypocrisy.

 

Ummm - where did you get the impression that our parliamentarians will not be jailed? We have lots of pollies who have not only been charged but have ended up behind bars
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Australian_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

They cannot be charged or even face civil court over anything cain IN PARLIAMENT. As Diuretic pointed out that comes under "parliamentary privilege"