Results 1 to 34 of 34
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Pavoniboy

Thread: The carbon tax won't have any affect on retail prices, HA.

  1. #1
    Senior Member Yelta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Moonta SA.
    Posts
    7,029

    The carbon tax won't have any affect on retail prices, HA.

    Gene Cafe Coffee Roaster $850 - Free Beans Free Freight
    Just ordered a 45kg cylinder of gas and with falling oil prices I expected a lower price than I was charged, you guessed it, the dealer told me there was a price reduction, however, the application of the carbon tax necessitated a small increase.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Barry O'Speedwagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PRL
    Posts
    2,687
    Who is claiming that carbon tax won't affect any retail prices? The whole point of it is to change the relative price of goods/services, and for people to adjust their consumption accordingly. Whether or not particular individuals are better or worse off is a function of whatever compo (tax cuts / handouts) they received relative to the increased cost of the stuff they consume. If the tax doesn't affect prices, then it really is pointless.

  3. #3
    Senior Member saoye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,006
    Local cardboard manufacturers are one of the biggest hit, so anything with a cardboard box made locally will be affected, among other things. Don't get me started on the government's "brilliant" solution to offset local carbon tax impact. How does giving the consumer more money offset the cost (tax) that the local manufacturer's now have to bear? The cashed up consumer still has the ability to make a decision to choose how to spend their money. Given the option of a now much cheaper imported product compared to an inflated local product which do you think they would choose? The money in the consumer pocket means they can spend more, but the money does not directly tie in with the carbon tax. Local manufacturers that have to compete agains overseas imports were already fighting a losing battle, this is just kicking them while they are down.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    395
    Just out of interest, How much was the 'increase' that was put on the gas bottle because of the carbon tax?
    Also, Cost of oil does not influence the cost of LPG, which is a totally different priceing market, What you are doing is looking at the price of tea and using that as a guage for the price of coffee beans, While they may be used for similar things, Does not mean that they're priced accordingly

    on top of all that, if you feel that your distributer is gouging the price to 'make up' for the losses he "may" make under the carbon tax, you have the right to ring up the ACCC and complain. One of the big things that the Federal government said they would do was to act on any price gouging/

  5. #5
    Senior Member Yelta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Moonta SA.
    Posts
    7,029
    The price of LPG certainly fluctuates, the retailer mentioned it was tied to oil prices, perhaps not, but this from Origin goes into a little more detail,
    "LPG prices
    LPG prices are variable and subject to change for each delivery according to movements in the world market price for LPG, changes in the value of the Australian dollar and the costs of supplying gas to you."

    I'm not whinging about the rise, and I'm not suggesting the supplier is gouging, retailers have every right to pass on govt charges.
    My post was based on govt statements that the carbon tax would have a (minimal) affect on retail prices, my last bottle cost me $115 this one cost me $130 not sure how much of that is carbon tax related, it certainly makes you wonder.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Barry O'Speedwagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PRL
    Posts
    2,687
    Quote Originally Posted by saoye View Post
    Local cardboard manufacturers are one of the biggest hit, so anything with a cardboard box made locally will be affected, among other things. Don't get me started on the government's "brilliant" solution to offset local carbon tax impact. How does giving the consumer more money offset the cost (tax) that the local manufacturer's now have to bear? The cashed up consumer still has the ability to make a decision to choose how to spend their money. Given the option of a now much cheaper imported product compared to an inflated local product which do you think they would choose? The money in the consumer pocket means they can spend more, but the money does not directly tie in with the carbon tax. Local manufacturers that have to compete agains overseas imports were already fighting a losing battle, this is just kicking them while they are down.
    Your point re imports is spot on (I wasn't suggesting that the carbon tax was a good or bad thing....just that there is no point if relative prices do not change). In terms of industries that will struggle because Aust consumers buy less of its product in total (i.e. fewer cardboard boxes are used in australia), well that is pretty much the intention of the tax (not saying that is a nice outcome for those directly affected). Now of course, the reality of the situation is quite different from the textbook case....there are all sorts of concessional carve outs to interest groups, the rate of the tax is way too high (thanks Greens), the imported goods issue that you have raised, and the fact that the Euro tradable pollution rights market went into meltdown a year ago or so.

  7. #7
    CoffeeSnobs Owner Andy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    17,004
    Blog Entries
    1
    Of course your beans order was shipped today in a locally produced cardboard box
    It was produced (in bulk) before the carbon tax so I don't know what the price impact will be until I run out... and they won't know the price impact until they start getting higher bills from their suppliers etc etc.

    The bills I've had this month with a slight bump because of carbon tax have been:

    Gas price +
    Waste + (skip bin for the Snobbery as there isn't a council service)
    Electricity ++ (double hit, we already pay extra for green hydro power yet the cost per kilowatt went up too hmmmm...)

    ...and those are only the bills that I've had since the start of July and they total an extra $30+ a week. I'm guessing there are penty more to come as everyone tries to grab a few extra dollars to cover their costs or because they can.

    It's a stupid tax that does nothing for the environment, instead it just pushes money around. I would rather they added 1% GST and then used it to build cleaner power sources and electric fuel stations in competiton to existing... but the truth is if they had a wad of extra dollars they would just fritter it away on handouts to voters in marginal seats.

  8. #8
    Senior Member saoye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,006
    Let's face it, consumers are happy because they have less tax so they are not going to go up in arms about the cost to local producers. Costs goes up for locally produced so they buy imported and at the same time have a bit more money to spare due to the reduced tax, thank you very much. Things like local services such as electricity, waste etc are the ones that are safe as they do not compete with imports.
    The idea that the carbon tax is supposed to be pushed all the way down to the consumer is naive. Some industries just cannot afford to increase their prices due to the heavy competition against imported goods. We then choose to absorb these costs and find smarter ways to offset, pushing the workers for more and more productivity, reduced profitability etc. Having to purchase cardboard boxes locally is one of the few things left that we purchase locally, now with the increase that are being enforced we are seriously looking at importing flat packed cardboard from overseas...that's just crazy!
    Sea freight containers of cardboard of all things!

  9. #9
    Senior Member Barry O'Speedwagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PRL
    Posts
    2,687
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy View Post
    It's a stupid tax that does nothing for the environment, instead it just pushes money around. I would rather they added 1% GST and then used it to build cleaner power sources and electric fuel stations in competiton to existing... but the truth is if they had a wad of extra dollars they would just fritter it away on handouts to voters in marginal seats.
    Certainly agree that the implementation of this tax/trading scheme (which is what is supposed to develop into) has been a total mess, and that the tax is presently levied at a stupid level. I think it's going a bit far to say that it does nothing for the environment......just a question of whether the small amount that it does achieve is worth the pain (and obviously a lot of people think it is not). With respect to cardboard boxes, would this be the industry in which the 2 major local players got caught fixing prices (to the detriment of local businesses and consumers)?

  10. #10
    Senior Member saoye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry O'Speedwagon View Post
    With respect to cardboard boxes, would this be the industry in which the 2 major local players got caught fixing prices (to the detriment of local businesses and consumers)?
    There really aren't that many cardboard manufacturers so it's not hard to guess. The government watchdogs are keeping a very close eye on them and the cardboard ppl have used a third party accounting firm to ensure their numbers are correct as they are fully aware of the consequences. I am certainly not too concerned about the cardboard industry as these guys are pushing 100% of this cost to the next tier manufacturer/producers. It is at this second or third level that struggles to offset or forward the increase to the retailers due to the competitive nature. The retailers will be presenting two similar products, one without carbon tax and one with carbon tax...consumer wins either way because they are cashed up and free to make a choice, local producers (the people who sell to the retailers) lose by way of sales and or profitability. The writing was already on the wall, it's just now been put in bold lettering and fluro highlighted.

  11. #11
    CoffeeSnobs Owner Andy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    17,004
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry O'Speedwagon View Post
    ...I think it's going a bit far to say that it does nothing for the environment....
    You are right, nothing was a bit harsh, but if they were serious about the environment fuel would have been very high on the list and the offsets from that could have gone into better (or maybe free) public transport but it would be political sucicide to touch fuel and their "working party" would have thought that selling a tax on "the top 200 fat-cats" was a much easier sell to the masses.

    With respect to cardboard boxes, would this be the industry in which the 2 major local players got caught fixing prices (to the detriment of local businesses and consumers)?
    No, I get all mine custom made by a small local manufacturer but there is every chance that their raw material (flat sheet cardboard) comes from the majors but I don't know.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    120
    I read an article about 2 weeks bag in the Weeklytimes, were wood carters in Melb were selling out and 1T of redgum was costing $320..... Wood fire installation is booming....... Good to see the carbon tax is having an effect....... I went out last weekend with brother inlaw and old man, 3 chainsaws and 12T of 'free' wood and carbon tax free.... Is the tax having the effect it was introduced for? Maybe for industry it is but for the general public I am yet to make my decision on the matter. People adapt to save coins and with access to free firewood - CO2 emissions in households might sky rocket. Something to ponder.

  13. #13
    Senior Member Rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Central Queensland
    Posts
    1,117
    I don't pretend to know much about this whole topic but have a couple of observations from the point of view of the "average uninformed Joe".
    I thought Kevin Rudd was on the right track (pre-GFC) with his long-term plan to try to achieve some incremental gains based on a global concensus (developed countries only - the developing countries like China and India and probably Russia were never going to buy it in my lifetime)
    I thought the sensible thing would have been to have shelved the whole thing for a decade due to the GFC.
    The present governments determined stance seemed a bit pointless given Australia's tiny contribution to the environmental problem.
    There was a feature in the weekend Courier Mail that purported to demonstrate that the Carbon Tax was negatively impacting on businesses. In fact the "survey" on which the article was based was little more than a very limited opinion poll of a couple of hundred businesses about whether they supported the Carbon Tax, what they thought of the government, and whether they thought the tax MIGHT negatively impact on them in the future. Dishonest and misleading journalism. It seems that some businesses are already claiming the tax has impacted on them but cannot show any evidence of this. It seems likely that there WILL be an impact but it is misleading to present 'opinion' (or crystal ball-gazing) as fact.
    There is no doubt in my mind that some businesses will use the Carbon Tax to explain a whole range of problems and difficulties that they are suffering as a result of the GFC and probably as a justification to increase prices. Whilst I am sympathetic to businesses struggling to cope with what has been thrown at them in the last 3 years, it's important to 'keep it real'.
    I am most intrigued as to whether the current Opposition will repeal it all when they win the next election.
    (Mods - if this content is too political just delete it)

  14. #14
    Senior Member Bosco_Lever's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    QLD
    Posts
    442
    A simplistic view:

    A Carbon tax, a Mining Tax, what next?
    How about:
    Green's Tax (If you do not subscribe to the Greens then you will be taxed)
    Farming Tax (we cannot have the farmer's make too much money)
    Non luxury car Tax ( we are taxing the luxury cars, we should tax the others too)
    And so on.........

    The premise of the GST was to simplify our Tax system. It was also supposed to get rid of a lot of taxes, that unfortunately stayed. Less Taxes, the less government waste in administering it. Accurately, and I mean accurately, review our Tax system and compare it properly to other relevant countries.
    You will be surprised at our level of taxation.

    Why not a push for simplification? Or do we need to create more govt jobs??

  15. #15
    Senior Member Pavoniboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Minnamurra NSW
    Posts
    693
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy View Post
    It's a stupid tax that does nothing for the environment, instead it just pushes money around.
    I believe a key to Government is to appear like you are doing a lot, whilst actually doing very little. So this tax fits their purpose well.
    If you do a lot, you will do a lot wrong (or at least a lot which can be criticised publicly) and you bare too much responsibility. However, the people must think you are working hard for them, so you cannot appear to be doing little. Call me cynical, but I've been in too many meetings when I worked for Government where the focus of the meeting was 'How do we best create an impression that we are doing..." rather than actually doing it and doing it well.

    "Optimism is a lack of information" - sorry, I forget who I'm quoting now.

  16. #16
    Senior Member noidle22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Bathurst
    Posts
    1,165
    tl;dr anything, just going to say that we used to eat at The Village Hotel in Mount Druitt and get their $6 rump steak meal. Was so good, get a big 250g rump steak that you cook yourself on the huge gas bbq's, then fill the rest of the plate with chips, pasta, salad and veggies.

    Since implementation of the carbon tax it's risen to $7, we assumed because of running 2 massive bbq's for a large portion of the day increases cost. Still a mad deal, if you're in the Mount Druitt area, check it out.

  17. #17
    Senior Member Rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Central Queensland
    Posts
    1,117
    Political parties of all complexions have ideological underpinnings that pop to the surface in the form of policy that causes many people to go "What the....why are they flogging this?" The problem is that they have this 'ideological baggage' that they cannot let go of, no matter how inappropriate or ill timed it may be. If only the parties could be a bit more pragmatic and just focus on the simplest practical solution to current and future needs of the country instead of doggedly pursuing their traditional social agendas in a variety of peripheral areas.
    My biggest concern for this country is what we are going to use to prop up our standard of living when the coal runs out. No level of government seems to be thinking more than 3 years into the future.
    The Carbon Tax just strikes me as another political abberation that is the wrong thing at the wrong time.

  18. #18
    Senior Member flynnaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    4,125
    Perhaps we need some balanced commentary here:

    The Carbon 'Tax' is designed to reduce energy consumption, not redistribute money
    Conservative parties are miilking this for all they worth with propaganda. They are blaming every price rise on this.
    At least half of the current rise in electricity prices don't come from the Carbon Tax but rises in electricity infrastructure costs (poles and wires) and increase in dividends and tax equivalent payments
    The Mining Tax helps to ensure all the squillions in profits earned by mining magnates from the boom doesn't flow into their own pockets and overseas. Don't kid yourself that they have the interests of working Australians at heart.
    Retails organisations can see carte blanche to raise prices and blame it on the CT.
    Wrong thing at the wrong time? Tell us what the right thing is and when its the right time for it.

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    158
    thanks flynn, i was losing faith...

  20. #20
    Senior Member Rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Central Queensland
    Posts
    1,117
    I was under the impression that the purpose of the Carbon Tax was to 'encourage' big polluting industries to reduce the level of their pollution. It follows that if their 'products' become more expensive due to the Carbon Tax, then consumers might look for substitutes. Whether they would reduce their consumption of those products is another issue. (Some will, some won't, I guess)
    I agree with Flynn's next few points about propaganda, electricity prices & the Mining Tax (another issue)
    The Mining Tax would be a very good thing (IMHO) IF the proceeds were used to develop some 'niche industries' to support our economy when the resource boom is over - unfortunately I have seen/heard no evidence of this.
    I have never kidded myself that big corporations (Australian or multi-national) care about anything except their profit. Nor do I think they have any special interest in Australia's future, 10, 20 50 years on.
    The right thing at the right time is policy that is well timed and well matched in terms of existing circumstances and the developing scenario (national & global). It is about identifying the most pressing issues to pursue for current/long-term benefit and not being distracted by peripheral issues or ones that, whilst important, are better addressed at a different time. It's a skilled judgement that should be made by talented elected representatives with due regard to the best expert advice available. My point is that our leaders seem to be distracted by peripheral issues and have an inability to see more than 3 years into the future.

  21. #21
    Senior Member DavidW1960's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Kariong NSW
    Posts
    545
    Quote Originally Posted by flynnaus View Post
    The Carbon 'Tax' is designed to reduce energy consumption, not redistribute money
    That's the rhetoric anyway.

    So if Australian products subject to cost increases because of a carbon tax are now more expensive and people then buy imported goods that have no carbon tax (in any country) - that is wealth redistribution right?

    And subsidising lower income earners for the effects of the carbon tax is also wealth re-distribution.

    IMO.

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by flynnaus View Post
    Perhaps we need some balanced commentary here:

    The Carbon 'Tax' is designed to reduce energy consumption, not redistribute money
    It's designed to reduce energy consumption by redistributing money and tax burden (Cash 4 You, decreased low income taxes, higher medium/high income taxes, with the trickle down cost of the carbon tax priced into everything eventually) , and doesn't appear to be very effective at reducing energy consumption in the short or medium term.
    Household energy use has been on a long slow decline due to gradual replacement of lights and appliances with more energy efficient versions. I don't see the carbon tax accelerating this.
    As pointed out previously, it will likely have the "unforseen" effect of pushing manufacturing overseas to countries without a carbon tax. Net increase in world CO2 emissions due to increased transport, but a decrease in our own emissions, which is all that politically matters I suppose (until the loss of jobs becomes a political hot potato, but that's a time bomb for the next government)

    Conservative parties are miilking this for all they worth with propaganda. They are blaming every price rise on this.
    At least half of the current rise in electricity prices don't come from the Carbon Tax but rises in electricity infrastructure costs (poles and wires) and increase in dividends and tax equivalent payments
    Yes, Liberals are being dishonest with the impact of the carbon tax, and should be called out for it.
    Remember that Labor are also a conservative party, so that label should be used a little less liberally.

    The Mining Tax helps to ensure all the squillions in profits earned by mining magnates from the boom doesn't flow into their own pockets and overseas. Don't kid yourself that they have the interests of working Australians at heart.
    The mining tax, while being marketed as screwing over the rich magnates, had the side effect of reducing the ability of the states to control their own mineral royalty rates.
    The tax is also on profits rather than volume, compared to the existing royalty system.
    Do you really think that the big multinationals will not be able to shift profits around to show lower paper profits within Australia and avoid the tax?

    Retails organisations can see carte blanche to raise prices and blame it on the CT.
    They are, and should be taken to the ACCC.
    The example Andy gave of the electricity companies increasing the cost of their 100% green power plans because of the Carbon Tax is definitely something that should be investigated.

    Wrong thing at the wrong time? Tell us what the right thing is and when its the right time for it.
    I would have preferred to see a direct tariff on imports/exports of gas/oil/coal, as it would have been a simpler solution that also forces other countries that buy our coal to pay a higher price, coupled with a federal royalty rate for all minerals (on top of the state royalties) instead of the complicated mining tax, and that the funds from that be put into an infrastructure fund to build expensive things like high speed rail and clean energy projects.

  23. #23
    Senior Member Pavoniboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Minnamurra NSW
    Posts
    693
    I thought it's time for a bit of objective reflection on the mining industry in order to better understand the tax:

    Dennis likes this.

  24. #24
    Senior Member Rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Central Queensland
    Posts
    1,117
    Water quality is a big issue in this neck of the woods. We have always had very high quality water from the mighty Fitzroy River system but after the floods in CQ (about 2yrs ago) the water suddenly tasted very unpalatable. There was no mention of anything changing by the local Council but it eventually emerged that the local coal mines were discharging the water from their flooded pits into the upper reaches and tributaries of the Fitzroy. A number of Mining Companies have since been fined (minor smack on the wrist) for illegal discharges. The local and State authorities were quick to emerge as apologists for the Mining companies assuring us the water was not toxic but anecdotal evidence from locals suggested the opposite.
    Nearby Mt Morgan mine (retired gold & copper mine - used to be the biggest open cut in the southern hemisphere) now has a massive pit that is filled with millions of litres of toxic water. The river that runs through Mt Morgan is bright milky blue-green. What do you do with a couple of million litres of toxic water? They are resigned to the fact that they are going to have to pump it out and purify it at the cost of millions of dollars. (the Mining company that created the problem is not paying for any of this - they are long gone)
    I'm not even opposed to mining (even though it inflates the value of local real estate, fills the coast with cashed-up bogans, and takes all our tradesmen)

  25. #25
    Senior Member flynnaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    4,125
    Quote Originally Posted by Pavoniboy View Post
    I thought it's time for a bit of objective reflection on the mining industry in order to better understand the tax:
    Hehehe. I assume this is a tongue-in-cheek endorsement. Objective? Well, in a sense. Not that I'm pro-mining.

    From About Us on thisistherealstory.com.au
    These are the real stories about what Australian mining is doing to the economy. They are stories of a group of concerned satirists comprising of the Australian Satire Institute of Australia, the Chamber of Satire Studies (NSW), Queensland Satirical University, the Royal College of Japery (WA), Federal Council of Satirical Councils (Federal Branch). Together our member organisations comprise over 85% of all satirical output in Australia.

  26. #26
    Senior Member saoye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,006
    I have no problem with the tax, I'm for it to protect the environment but how about making it an even playing field for the imports? brazil protect their local industry by heavily taxing imports, australia does the opposite. If we dont want manufacturing in Australia or mining or any kind of production then let's start plannig some kind of exit plan. Alternatively we need to put in some heavy investment in this countryon some clever innovations to clean up manufacturing. At the end of the day I still have to pay the bills and support my family. I don't want to end up a statistic without a job.

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,376
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    I was under the impression that the purpose of the Carbon Tax was to 'encourage' big polluting industries to reduce the level of their pollution. It follows that if their 'products' become more expensive due to the Carbon Tax, then consumers might look for substitutes. Whether they would reduce their consumption of those products is another issue. (Some will, some won't, I guess)
    Not exactly. Public companies essentially have an obligation to shareholders to maximise profits. So for the people running these companies, even if they have a personal desire to reduce environmental impact, it's not always easy to justify expenditure on things that don't directly (or, immediately) improve economic performance. The carbon tax provides an easy mechanism to do so.

    In my professional life (as a consulting engineer) I have seen the impact of this first hand with some of my clients (from oil companies no less!); even back in 2010 when Rudd was trying to introduce the ETS.

    From another perspective, it presumably also provides a competetive advantage to companies who have already invested in, or are developing, processes/technologies which result in a lower lifecycle carbon dioxide emission.
    I think we need to take a wider view of our environmental impact and encourage sustainability in general (and prevent general nasties from polluting our environment), but the Carbon Tax is a start that 10 years ago I'd have never expected. Even if it is perhaps a slightly half baked idea.

    I used to wonder how my parents generation did so little to prevent us being in the position we are; I recently realised my generation isn't doing much better...
    Last edited by MrJack; 25th August 2012 at 09:55 PM. Reason: Added quote.

  28. #28
    Senior Member saoye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,006
    Quote Originally Posted by MrJack View Post
    Not exactly. Public companies essentially have an obligation to shareholders to maximise profits. So for the people running these companies, even if they have a personal desire to reduce environmental impact, it's not always easy to justify expenditure on things that don't directly (or, immediately) improve economic performance. The carbon tax provides an easy mechanism to do so.
    That thought process is correct for companies that are not directly competing against imports. When you are in a highly competitive industry, you do not have the luxury of putting up prices. What you do is essentially absorb the costs. The "justification" even if you can 100% categorically show that it is carbon tax (and you must) does not mean a thing when you have like product in the market from low cost countries already at a lower retail price to your product. How much does "made in Australia" and "carbon taxed" appeal to the consumer nowadays? We are ALL consumers. Given a like product that retails for around $1000, the overseas product is $850 (good currency exchange etc) and the made in Australia is now $1050 with ALL the justification of being carbon taxed, will you consciously make the decision to buy Australian made, GST and Carbon Taxed? Overseas does not necessarily mean China, it could mean Eastern Europe such as Turkey etc (labelled Made in Europe).

  29. #29
    Senior Member Barry O'Speedwagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PRL
    Posts
    2,687
    Quote Originally Posted by MrJack View Post
    Not exactly. Public companies essentially have an obligation to shareholders to maximise profits. So for the people running these companies, even if they have a personal desire to reduce environmental impact, it's not always easy to justify expenditure on things that don't directly (or, immediately) improve economic performance. The carbon tax provides an easy mechanism to do so.
    Well, sort of. The board of a company has an obligation to act bona fide in the interests of the members of the company. This does not necessarily translate to maximising short term profitability (particularly if that creates long-term risks). I guess the overall point is sound though....there are limits to which directors can impose their own moral/ethical judgements on the firms with which the are associated.

  30. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,376
    I think it's got very little to do with competing against anything.

    If you are assessing an investment to reduce emissions and it costs $5m (Net Present Value) to upgrade a system or use an alternative product or material, while the NPV of the carbon tax it would save is $6m, then you have justification.

    Yes, your costs are $5m greater than without the tax in place, but the intent of the tax has been achieved and the mechanism has been effective. Provided you are still in business...

    Personnally (speaking as a non-expert in economics) I prefer the Norwegian model where they reward companies who invest in technologies and R&D with tax reductions.

    Competing against overseas imports will always be a problem for a developed country like Australia with a high cost of wages and a small market/workforce. Unfortunately, reducing costs means doing things smarter and more efficiently; likely through increased automation and/or smaller workforce. Generally not something popular with those working in the industry, and by extension politicians.

    Things might be different with the current generation coming through; people tend to move employers or occupations more frequently and re-skilling isn't as scary. A more flexible workforce would hopefully allow for more flexible business practices.

    As they say, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

  31. #31
    Senior Member Barry O'Speedwagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PRL
    Posts
    2,687
    Quote Originally Posted by MrJack View Post
    I think it's got very little to do with competing against anything.

    If you are assessing an investment to reduce emissions and it costs $5m (Net Present Value) to upgrade a system or use an alternative product or material, while the NPV of the carbon tax it would save is $6m, then you have justification.

    Yes, your costs are $5m greater than without the tax in place, but the intent of the tax has been achieved and the mechanism has been effective. Provided you are still in business....
    Yeh, I think the last sentence is very relevant in some industries exposed to competition from sources immune to any significant environmental taxing. . While it makes sense to to spend $5 to save $6, you might just save $20 by shutting up shop and ceasing to trade. I'm not against a carbon price per se (it's a good idea in principle) , but I think the current fixed price regime is set too high, and we have to give some thought to aspects of the regime that simply encourage the off-shoring off the polution.

  32. #32
    Senior Member saoye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry O'Speedwagon View Post
    Yeh, I think the last sentence is very relevant in some industries exposed to competition from sources immune to any significant environmental taxing. . While it makes sense to to spend $5 to save $6, you might just save $20 by shutting up shop and ceasing to trade. I'm not against a carbon price per se (it's a good idea in principle) , but I think the current fixed price regime is set too high, and we have to give some thought to aspects of the regime that simply encourage the off-shoring off the polution.
    That's pretty much it. The world pats us on the back while rubbing their hands together. Did you know that recycled paper is one of the most heavily taxed?

  33. #33
    Senior Member Barry O'Speedwagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PRL
    Posts
    2,687
    Quote Originally Posted by saoye View Post
    That's pretty much it. The world pats us on the back while rubbing their hands together. Did you know that recycled paper is one of the most heavily taxed?
    Not sure about them being more heavily taxed per unit of carbon produced? They produce a fair bit of it. IIRC the problem is that they get no credit for the reduction of landfill that results from recycling (I might have missed something though). These are things that *could* be (largely) fixed without actually tampering with the tax itself (by allocating credits).

  34. #34
    Senior Member Pavoniboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Minnamurra NSW
    Posts
    693
    Quote Originally Posted by flynnaus View Post
    Hehehe. I assume this is a tongue-in-cheek endorsement. Objective? Well, in a sense. Not that I'm pro-mining.
    Yes, very tongue in cheek. I'm neither anti nor pro mining, I just thought that clip was so well done that I couldn't resist posting it.



Similar Threads

  1. Active carbon filter for roaster
    By strackers in forum Home Roasting - Tips, Tricks, Ideas
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 1 Week Ago, 09:48 PM
  2. Carbon Fiber Rancilio Silvia
    By Firepower in forum Brewing Equipment - Midrange ($500-$1500)
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 13th July 2010, 03:47 PM
  3. Commodity prices up, coffee prices up?
    By Beanhead in forum General Coffee Related...
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 28th June 2008, 09:39 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •