The SA Politics Thread

[rev]

Clay, what was wrong with Rudd?
Gillard & Swan need to go. Preferably before the election.

Aidan, in theory, that's fine. But I don't see why we consumers should be bled dry by utilities companies because the government decided to slap them with a carbon tax.
Wasn't the whole point of the carbon tax to reduce emissions by the big polluting companies?

Electricity is tipped to rise a few hundred dollars more annually, again.
Whatever savings people have made from less income tax, or higher pensions and welfare, is eaten up by the rise in power costs.

[Norman]

How much of the increase is due to the carbon tax? Very little. It has more to do with the increasing cost of infrastructure and our growing demand for power, not just as a whole, but on an individual level as well.

[monotonehell]

...Aidan, in theory, that's fine. But I don't see why we consumers should be bled dry by utilities companies because the government decided to slap them with a carbon tax.
Wasn't the whole point of the carbon tax to reduce emissions by the big polluting companies? ...

I'm not going to claim that it's working, but the idea is that there's a tax on polluting methods of producing electricity. But there's no (or less) tax on non-polluting methods of production. So this gives the less polluting methods of production a cheaper price in the market - everyone is supposed to buy those instead because they are cheaper. Giving more incentive to the producers to invest more in less polluting methods.

The problem is that there is no dollar cost associated with pollution. Even though there is a real cost to society. The theory is to attach a cost to it to make it less attractive to the market. Look up triple bottom line accounting, accountants have been talking about how to account for external costs for decades. I remember it in uni.

[Aidan]

We could really do with Rudd back (though of course he's not perfect either). But contrary to the Liberal spin, Gillard's government is one of the best we've had.

This is a wind up right?

Wrong. When I look at the criticism of what this government's done, very little of it stands up to scrutiny.

[dsriggs]

What has it accomplished, exactly?

[[Shuz]]

What has it accomplished, exactly?

300+ odd bills passed.

0 bills blocked.

The numbers says it all.

[rev]

How much of the increase is due to the carbon tax? Very little. It has more to do with the increasing cost of infrastructure and our growing demand for power, not just as a whole, but on an individual level as well.

Power demands and the cost of infrastructure went up after the carbon tax was introduced?

What a coincidence..

I remember they were building a new inter-connector for electricity with Victoria a few years ago at least. I don't remember power bills going up hundreds of dollars annually because of that. And that was a very expensive project.
They recently constructed that new high voltage line under the center of Port Road...again, power bills did not rise by hundreds of dollars as a result.

[Aidan]

What has it accomplished, exactly?

Invested more in infrastructure and education while keeping the economy growing. If you want a more comprehensive example then look at the government's own website, but perhaps the most important thing is that they haven't done much damage!

[Aidan]

How much of the increase is due to the carbon tax? Very little. It has more to do with the increasing cost of infrastructure and our growing demand for power, not just as a whole, but on an individual level as well.

Power demands and the cost of infrastructure went up after the carbon tax was introduced?

And before.

What a coincidence..

A coincidence so mundane it's hardly worth mentioning. But as you seem to doubt it's a coincidence, perhaps you'd like to supply an alternative hypothesis? How do you think the carbon tax has increased the price of electricity so much more than the amount that the carbon burned to geneerate electricity is taxed?

I remember they were building a new inter-connector for electricity with Victoria a few years ago at least. I don't remember power bills going up hundreds of dollars annually because of that. And that was a very expensive project.

I'm guessing you mean Murraylink, as the original interconnector (in the state's SE) was quite cheap because it was above ground and the gap between SA and Victoria's grids was rather narrow when they decided to build it. Murraylink was built at a time when there were supply shortages in SA. IIRC it's under separate ownership to the rest of the state's grid, and has rather high charges for the electricity it carries - so while it hasn't resulted in a rise in electricity prices, it didn't result in as much of a fall as it would have had the public alternative (Riverlink, which was championed by Nick Xenophon) been built instead.

They recently constructed that new high voltage line under the center of Port Road...again, power bills did not rise by hundreds of dollars as a result.

Not hundreds of dollars, but one of the many things that pushed the price up.

[rev]

Nah, I think I'll pass on a "debate" with you, Aidan.

If you cant see the connection between the carbon tax and the rise in electricity bills for households, then that's your problem.
But in the real world, in reality, where the majority of people are not blinded by being faithful to a political party, the problem exists and it very much is happening to them.

And if the Labor party is too blinded to replace Gillard before the election, they certainly will replace her after they lose the coming federal election.

[peas_and_corn]

Yes the electoral comission is run independant of governments/ parties, but is staffed by public servants. Pubic servants are employed by governments and their conditions are negotiated with unions. Only under Labour do the public servants via the unions and their connections to the Labour party get so much say in the running of government, thus there will always APPEAR to be under labour governments, massive conflicts of interest which distract the government which is currently the case, and unfortunately leaves them wide open to the acusations, founded or otherwise of the likes we read here.
PS with you big time on the carbon money go round (tax) and the oposition shambles.

How would they know you vote Liberal? You don't have to make your party alliegences known to the AEC & your ballot papers aren't named.

How certain areas will vote is very predictable due to only a small percentage of the population being willing to swing their vote. The previous election campaign was a winner for state Labor because their data was precise to the point where they were tailoring their message not to cater to each seat, but crafting it to suit certain booths within seats. People (as a group, not individuals) are incredibly easy to predict once you have enough data.

[dsriggs]

But I'm talking about the individuals who got "removed from the electoral roll". If the government used influence to remove people from the roll in marginal seats, they're just as likely to remove their own voters as they are to remove the opposition ones.

[peas_and_corn]

Not necessarily. Take for example Makin. It's marginal Labor, but it's got a clear division of voters- those who vote in the areas closer to the hills vote liberal while those in the northern areas vote for labor. Taking a vote away from a hills-side booth will, with a large statistical certainty, be a liberal vote. Likewise with removing a vote from the north will give a statistically higher chance of getting a labor voter.

[rev]

But I'm talking about the individuals who got "removed from the electoral roll". If the government used influence to remove people from the roll in marginal seats, they're just as likely to remove their own voters as they are to remove the opposition ones.

And do you know for a fact that the government used it's influence to have people removed from the roll? Or is it just some stuff ups within the AEC(remember, they are human too, and as humans are prone to many errors and stuff ups just like the rest of us...) that has been blown out of proportion because there hasn't been a proper response to these irregularities?

My first thought, if it happened to me, would have been that there was an error by the AEC, not that the government is employing dirty tricks to win an election.

The voting process is anonymous. Your name is ticked off when you attend and collect your voting papers. But there is nothing to identify you on the voting papers, therefore your vote is anonymous.
The government and the Australian Electoral Commission do not know who each individual votes for.

Therefore for the government to be removing people from the electoral roll, it would not be guaranteed to be beneficial, and just as likely to be detrimental to their campaign.

[Aidan]

If you cant see the connection between the carbon tax and the rise in electricity bills for households, then that's your problem. But in the real world, in reality, where the majority of people are not blinded by being faithful to a political party, the problem exists and it very much is happening to them.

I see the connection: the carbon tax results in a small rise equal to the tax on the CO2 released when burning the fuel, plus a much smaller rise equal to the tax on the CO2 and methane released when extracting and transporting the fuel. But you seem to be saying there's a much bigger connection, and if it's not a figment of your imagination I'd like to know what it is!

Are you blinded by a political party? Or a radio announcer perhaps?
I know you think I'm blinded by loyalty to a political party, but you're totally wrong. I don't think I've ever given my first preference to Labor, and there are few policy areas where I wouldn't do things very differently. But that's the same with all governments, and the current federal opposition's policies are much worse.

And if the Labor party is too blinded to replace Gillard before the election, they certainly will replace her after they lose the coming federal election.

But will they lose? That question may well be answered by Tony Abbott!