Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Nine MSN)   Even the dead don't escape Australia's carbon tax   (news.ninemsn.com.au ) divider line 107
    More: Obvious, Australia, carbon taxes, ACCC, Maliki  
•       •       •

4686 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jul 2012 at 2:31 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



107 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-09 11:28:11 AM  
If this is legitimate and not just overcharging, my guess is it would be for the hearse and/or the backhoe used to dig the grave. Still assholish, though
 
2012-07-09 11:55:19 AM  
"Carbon tax? Boba, can you believe this farking asshole? This is coming out of your bounty."

murlocparliament.com
 
2012-07-09 12:42:44 PM  
You Aussie suckers let carbon tax BS pass? Here in America we would tar and feather any politician who even suggested such a thing.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-07-09 12:52:43 PM  
A year or two ago the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court upheld a tax on burials. Technically the court said the tax was a fee. Cities can't tax death but they can fee death.

If I die you are welcome to stick my rotting corpse in the wall of a tax-loving politician's office to avoid the fee for covering it with dirt. It is not important to me that my remains are consumed by subterranean worms rather than above-ground flies and bacteria.
 
2012-07-09 02:36:06 PM  
I hope they declared the pennies on their eyes
 
2012-07-09 02:36:42 PM  
carbon tax, what a joke.

just a government money grab excuse. there is nothing the Aussy government can use that money for that will make one iota of difference in climate change.
 
2012-07-09 02:42:03 PM  

youfoundthekingbaby: carbon tax, what a joke.

just a government money grab excuse. there is nothing the Aussy government can use that money for that will make one iota of difference in climate change.


The point is to make carbon fuels more expensive, not nessecarily spend the money on anything relevant.
 
2012-07-09 02:42:39 PM  
They were sequestering carbon into the ground. They should have gotten a carbon credit.
 
2012-07-09 02:43:04 PM  

ZAZ: A year or two ago the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court upheld a tax on burials. Technically the court said the tax was a fee. Cities can't tax death but they can fee death.

If I die you are welcome to stick my rotting corpse in the wall of a tax-loving politician's office to avoid the fee for covering it with dirt. It is not important to me that my remains are consumed by subterranean worms rather than above-ground flies and bacteria.


What? No bawdy puppet shows staring your corpse? How are we ever supposed to win state with that kind of attitude?

/ I keed, I keed
 
2012-07-09 02:43:16 PM  
FTFA: Climate Change Minister Greg Combet said it would be "reprehensible" if any cemetery was taking advantage of grieving families by overcharging them for funerals.

The ACCC, which is investigating three companies accused of blaming the tax for price hikes, said it would be willing to investigate the claims.


Surely funeral homes wouldn't try to grub extra money and try to misdirect the hostility of the bereaved toward the gummint?

I really don't think it costs AUD$55 in tax just for the extra gas for the backhoe, or even for the embalming. If the funeral director tried that one on me, I'd just about demand the itemization.
 
2012-07-09 02:43:33 PM  
Ned Stark
The point is to make carbon fuels more expensive, not nessecarily spend the money on anything relevant.

They could spend it on research funding to develop an alternative to carbon fuels.
 
2012-07-09 02:44:11 PM  
Fark you. Pay me.
 
2012-07-09 02:49:11 PM  
Well, they're stardust. They're golden.
 
2012-07-09 02:49:40 PM  
Climate Change Minister?

That is farking hilarious. . I thought Australians had more balls than that!

This is just another pointless tax to get money. I guess they need to money to pay for that useless Minister and of the people who "work" for him.

In the meantime, the level of CO2 has not been impacted one bit.
 
2012-07-09 02:51:55 PM  

MBooda: Well, they're stardust. They're golden.


They are 55-buck carbon?
 
2012-07-09 02:55:18 PM  

Bondith: Ned Stark
The point is to make carbon fuels more expensive, not nessecarily spend the money on anything relevant.

They could spend it on research funding to develop an alternative to carbon fuels.


Making an emergency slush fund or building infrastructure to help cope with climate change might be a better idea at this point. Prevention time is past mitigation time is now.
 
2012-07-09 02:56:30 PM  
Penn and Teller did this too. People buy carbon credits so they feel less "guilty" for driving and using energy.

I guess this is an extension of that. Of course the money used won't go back to making clean energy or anything, probably just refills the ol coffers like most taxes.

The episode in full

Link
 
2012-07-09 03:01:16 PM  
If they buried the man in a wood coffin wouldn't they be due credit for carbon sequestration? The body and the wood, probably about 50 pounds of pure carbon sequestered there in the ground.
 
2012-07-09 03:04:23 PM  

ArkAngel: If this is legitimate and not just overcharging, my guess is it would be for the hearse and/or the backhoe used to dig the grave. Still assholish, though


I disagree. Any measure, no matter how restrictive, to reduce the amount of free carbon in the atmosphere is to be lauded.

For instance, the recent jingoistic infantalism of July 4th - creating additional thousand of tons of free atmospheric carbon, all contributing to global warming - should be banned. USA! USA! USA! God, Americans are such losers.
 
2012-07-09 03:09:15 PM  

Distinguished Global Warming Scientist: ArkAngel: If this is legitimate and not just overcharging, my guess is it would be for the hearse and/or the backhoe used to dig the grave. Still assholish, though

I disagree. Any measure, no matter how restrictive, to reduce the amount of free carbon in the atmosphere is to be lauded.

For instance, the recent jingoistic infantalism of July 4th - creating additional thousand of tons of free atmospheric carbon, all contributing to global warming - should be banned. USA! USA! USA! God, Americans are such losers.


4/10...would have been 3/10 but you used the words jingoistic infantalism and it made me chuckle
 
2012-07-09 03:09:26 PM  

Ned Stark: Prevention time is past mitigation time is now.


Mitigation in terms of most discussions of climate change policy refers to prevention. You're probably thinking of adaptation, which is about buffering our systems to the effects of climate change rather than trying to limit the amount of change by reducing our contribution of radiative forcings like GHGs to the planetary energy budget.

There are some areas of overlap (restoring coastal vegetation not only acts as mitigation by increasing a carbon sink, it also acts as adaptation by lessening the impact of SLR and warmer SSTs on storm activity with respect to coastal areas).

It's also important to make the point that while we're past the point of mitigating all anthropogenic change, that's entirely different than whether we can mitigate any anthropogenic climate change. The difference between what we can achieve under an aggressive mitigation policy and exploitation of all feasible sources of carbon energy is enormous.
 
2012-07-09 03:09:27 PM  
scienceblogs.com

I sure hope I don't owe a carbon tax for posting this image...
 
2012-07-09 03:12:33 PM  

rhondajeremy: 4/10


I give it a 2/10.

Account created: 2012-07-07

Trolling used to mean something, goddammit. Does no one remember Skookum and his list? That kind of trolling is something we just don't see these days. It took time, effort, and subtlety.
 
2012-07-09 03:15:20 PM  

rhondajeremy: Distinguished Global Warming Scientist: ArkAngel: If this is legitimate and not just overcharging, my guess is it would be for the hearse and/or the backhoe used to dig the grave. Still assholish, though

I disagree. Any measure, no matter how restrictive, to reduce the amount of free carbon in the atmosphere is to be lauded.

For instance, the recent jingoistic infantalism of July 4th - creating additional thousand of tons of free atmospheric carbon, all contributing to global warming - should be banned. USA! USA! USA! God, Americans are such losers.

4/10...would have been 3/10 but you used the words jingoistic infantalism and it made me chuckle


And your professional credentials on the validity of climate change are????

I get SO tired of the ignorant posturings of know-nothing Deniers.
 
2012-07-09 03:15:20 PM  

BKITU: MBooda: Well, they're stardust. They're golden.

They are 55-buck carbon?


And they've got to get themselves back to Greg Commmmmmbet.
 
2012-07-09 03:28:07 PM  

Distinguished Global Warming Scientist: And your professional credentials on the validity of climate change are????


I invented climate change.
 
2012-07-09 03:29:23 PM  
I bet that guy sure is grateful for the extra taxes.
 
2012-07-09 03:31:48 PM  
I just told my wife to bury me in a subduction zone, so she can get a carbon credit.
 
2012-07-09 03:32:18 PM  
When you can tax the release of trace gasses that are actually beneficial for life, you can essentially tax anything. Welcome to arbitrary taxation hell, world.
 
2012-07-09 03:33:53 PM  
It really seems as though this was a fraudulent bill, but I do like the Brazil-like notion that if the family is charged for the carbon tax of the backhoe for a funeral, then they should probably be given a rebate form akin to what the electric utility will give when you replace incandescent lightbulbs with LEDs, or the old fridges with new more efficient refrigerators. So when mom and dad pop off, we should get a rebate form for stopping a large and inefficient carbon producer, and for the carbon sequestration if they are buried (greenly).
 
2012-07-09 03:35:08 PM  

youfoundthekingbaby: just a government money grab excuse.


You know, of course, that their tax was designed to be neutral with respect to government revenue. They offset the carbon tax revenue by collecting less income tax (raising the threshold at which income tax is collected). You can read about it in Forbes.
 
2012-07-09 03:36:49 PM  
Next they need a methane tax. I sequestered some of that last night.
 
2012-07-09 03:36:54 PM  

Jon Snow: Ned Stark: Prevention time is past mitigation time is now.

Mitigation in terms of most discussions of climate change policy refers to prevention. You're probably thinking of adaptation, which is about buffering our systems to the effects of climate change rather than trying to limit the amount of change by reducing our contribution of radiative forcings like GHGs to the planetary energy budget.

There are some areas of overlap (restoring coastal vegetation not only acts as mitigation by increasing a carbon sink, it also acts as adaptation by lessening the impact of SLR and warmer SSTs on storm activity with respect to coastal areas).

It's also important to make the point that while we're past the point of mitigating all anthropogenic change, that's entirely different than whether we can mitigate any anthropogenic climate change. The difference between what we can achieve under an aggressive mitigation policy and exploitation of all feasible sources of carbon energy is enormous.


I bet you spend your weekends looking for Big Foot. You seem to be into things that do not exist. - Sorta like your integrity.
 
2012-07-09 03:38:24 PM  
ok, its even more pointless than I expected! they could have used the extra dough for some cool incumbent vote buying programs.

Ambitwistor: youfoundthekingbaby: just a government money grab excuse.

You know, of course, that their tax was designed to be neutral with respect to government revenue. They offset the carbon tax revenue by collecting less income tax (raising the threshold at which income tax is collected). You can read about it in Forbes.

 
2012-07-09 03:38:49 PM  

Jon Snow: Ned Stark: Prevention time is past mitigation time is now.

Mitigation in terms of most discussions of climate change policy refers to prevention. You're probably thinking of adaptation, which is about buffering our systems to the effects of climate change rather than trying to limit the amount of change by reducing our contribution of radiative forcings like GHGs to the planetary energy budget.

There are some areas of overlap (restoring coastal vegetation not only acts as mitigation by increasing a carbon sink, it also acts as adaptation by lessening the impact of SLR and warmer SSTs on storm activity with respect to coastal areas).

It's also important to make the point that while we're past the point of mitigating all anthropogenic change, that's entirely different than whether we can mitigate any anthropogenic climate change. The difference between what we can achieve under an aggressive mitigation policy and exploitation of all feasible sources of carbon energy is enormous.


Leaving any in the ground? [Unlikely].
 
2012-07-09 03:39:35 PM  

Big Man On Campus: When you can tax the release of trace gasses that are actually beneficial for life, you can essentially tax anything. Welcome to arbitrary taxation hell, world.


Right. Because something that in one context might be "beneficial for life" means it can never, ever be pollution in any other context. Ever.

You know, like nitrogen oxides. Or nitrates. Or ozone. Or iron. Or water.
 
2012-07-09 03:54:35 PM  
taxation with representation

/does not apply in chicago
//politics tab refugee
 
2012-07-09 04:04:31 PM  

Jon Snow: Big Man On Campus: When you can tax the release of trace gasses that are actually beneficial for life, you can essentially tax anything. Welcome to arbitrary taxation hell, world.

Right. Because something that in one context might be "beneficial for life" means it can never, ever be pollution in any other context. Ever.

You know, like nitrogen oxides. Or nitrates. Or ozone. Or iron. Or water.


that tinfoil hat of yours mighr be just a bit tight,

You are fully aware of the very small part CO2 plays as greenhouse gas. You are also fully aware that the increase in CO2 has been very small. You are also fully aware of the very tiny increase in average global temperatures since 1850.

What exactly is your goal in propagating all of these lies?
 
2012-07-09 04:13:09 PM  

Outlawtsar: BKITU: MBooda: Well, they're stardust. They're golden.

They are 55-buck carbon?

And they've got to get themselves back to Greg Commmmmmbet.


www.winemakerschoice.com.au
/bouquet like an aborigine's armpit
 
2012-07-09 04:48:41 PM  
kategale.files.wordpress.com

Someone mentioned death and taxes?

/Hot, like a lightning bolt
 
2012-07-09 05:01:27 PM  
Looks like Hotblack Desiato won't be coming to Australia anytime soon.
 
2012-07-09 05:05:54 PM  

MBooda: Outlawtsar: BKITU: MBooda: Well, they're stardust. They're golden.

They are 55-buck carbon?

And they've got to get themselves back to Greg Commmmmmbet.

[www.winemakerschoice.com.au image 450x450]
/bouquet like an aborigine's armpit


This thread prompted me to download the song. Ninety-nine cents well-spent.
 
2012-07-09 05:12:03 PM  

Big Man On Campus: When you can tax the release of trace gasses that are actually beneficial for life, you can essentially tax anything. Welcome to arbitrary taxation hell, world.


Try breathing into a paper bag for a few hours and tell us that again.

/which is every bit as relevant to climate change as your post
//Bullshiat: They call it pollution. We call it life.
 
2012-07-09 05:32:09 PM  
Well, if the Australian government wants to go green, why not hold "sky burials" on the top of their Parliament building in Canberra? It's already got a grass roof, this way they could save on fertilizer.
 
2012-07-09 05:47:51 PM  
Well, somebody has to pay for the liberals' new religion.
 
2012-07-09 05:50:47 PM  

Mithiwithi: Big Man On Campus: When you can tax the release of trace gasses that are actually beneficial for life, you can essentially tax anything. Welcome to arbitrary taxation hell, world.

Try breathing into a paper bag for a few hours and tell us that again.

/which is every bit as relevant to climate change as your post
//Bullshiat: They call it pollution. We call it life.


How is the concentration in a paper bag after breathing in it for 20 minutes relevant to any projected concentration by the worlds scientists?

Politicians want to tax it when it's still in the parts per million, you're suggesting we should think of it like it's in the parts per hundred? wtf am I reading?
 
2012-07-09 05:53:09 PM  

Jon Snow: Big Man On Campus: When you can tax the release of trace gasses that are actually beneficial for life, you can essentially tax anything. Welcome to arbitrary taxation hell, world.

Right. Because something that in one context might be "beneficial for life" means it can never, ever be pollution in any other context. Ever.

You know, like nitrogen oxides. Or nitrates. Or ozone. Or iron. Or water.


Water can be pollution? In what context is water on a planet that is 70% water pollution? wtf am I reading?
 
2012-07-09 05:58:55 PM  

Walker: You Aussie suckers let carbon tax BS pass? Here in America we would tar and feather any politician who even suggested such a thing.


All it means is the Australians are not ruled by oil corporations.. that is a GOOD thing
 
2012-07-09 06:11:44 PM  

Ambitwistor: youfoundthekingbaby: just a government money grab excuse.

You know, of course, that their tax was designed to be neutral with respect to government revenue. They offset the carbon tax revenue by collecting less income tax (raising the threshold at which income tax is collected). You can read about it in Forbes.


This.

Alot of businesses are using the carbon tax to hike prices. At best it's out of greed, at worst it's part of a fear mongering campaign for the liberal camp.
 
2012-07-09 06:26:24 PM  

ontariolightning: Walker: You Aussie suckers let carbon tax BS pass? Here in America we would tar and feather any politician who even suggested such a thing.

All it means is the Australians are not ruled by oil corporations.. that is a GOOD thing


no, what it REALLY means is that were are not gullible enough to accept this crap.
 
Displayed 50 of 107 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report