Carbon tax: Australia's economic suicide

Less than two years after a proposed carbon tax felled Australia's Labour Party Prime Minister, his replacement, an utter economoron if ever there was one, appears ready and able to pass such a tax through the Australian Parliament with the support of a couple of independent members of that body.

It's a tax which will raise the cost of everything in Australia, the damage from which government will further compound by redistributing income in the form of subsidies to lower-income Australians so that the burden on them is felt less, whereas the burden on the economically productive sector of society is increased. It's an extremely complicated scheme...and it's even worse than it sounds at first with some people likely to end up getting subsidy payments larger than the negative impact of the carbon tax on them. This is especially true for people who don't drive a lot and don't earn income, namely older retirees. In other words, big companies and high earners will become an even greater blood source for government parasites and their remoras.

It's remarkable that a country which is so dependent on the energy-intensive mining industry would kneecap itself so badly, but such is the nature of enterprise- and profit-hating leftists.

And at the end of the day, people get the government they deserve.

Julia Gillard is Australia's own Nancy Pelosi, arm-twisting her caucus into voting for something which is likely to cost many of her members, and probably Gillard herself, their jobs when the next election comes around. Nevertheless, she, like Madame Defarge, keeps on knitting the seeds of economic destruction into the fabric of the Australian economy.

Furthermore, like Pelosi, Bob Brown, the head of Australia's Green Party says that despite a more than 2-to-1 public opposition to the tax, he thinks Aussies will "change their mind on the carbon tax" once it passes. If ever politicians embodied what Hayek called "the fatal conceit", it's people like Pelosi, Gillard, and Brown.

I wonder if Federal Infrastructure and Transport Minister Anthony Albanese recognized the irony in his words when he says that he, referencing his support of a carbon tax, is "in government to make a difference to people's lives." No doubt the tax would do just that, raising the cost of essentially everything in Australia while redistributing wealth to cover the tax's especially damaging impact on lower incomes, thus making business development that much less likely among the entrepreneurial class.

The carbon tax is like sacrificing Australia's virgins to some mythical spirit and hoping the climate happens to go along. The only problem is that if it does go along, it will make you think that the pagan ritual actually had an impact. After all, the same "scientists" told us in the mid-1990s that we were going to suffer large temperature increases only to have no increase in global temperatures for at least a decade starting in 1998.

When destroying the economy and killing camels become the best-known proposals of the industry-hating cult currently running, and profiting from, Australia's federal government, it's time for a new government, not a new tax.

[One quick science and polling note: Poll questions about carbon taxes are often worded in terms of "pollution", "polluters", etc. But carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It's plant food. And such questions are fundamentally dishonest.]

  • kjdiamond
    Comment from: kjdiamond
    07/13/11 @ 11:41:05 am

    Obama is doing essentially the same by eliminating, through regulation by the EPA and Minerals and Mining, our own ability to drill in the Gulf and kneecapping the coal industry. He just isn't calling it a tax. However, when you eliminate an estimated 200 millions barrels, and counting, of Gulf oil from production since 2009 and impose draconian emissions tragets on coal-fired plants, you are taxing the public through self-imposed higher energy prices. The sad fact is that he flat out TOLD US and the lemmings still voted for this man. Not that McCain was great, but at least there was a buffer. After two years of no buffer, we are in deep sh*t because once imposed and in place, companies have to base their ROI on the current environment and owning the House isn't enough to force a course correction.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in now!