« profile & posts archive

This author has written 619 posts for Larvatus Prodeo.

Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

68 responses to “Spotlight the Spin”

  1. Fran Barlow

    Channel 10 comments that Julia Gillard has introduced a carbon “tax” in which “some” houseolds and businesses are compensated.

    Some households = 90%?

  2. Brian62
  3. CMMC

    ABC A.M. still trying to invoke “gotcha!” moments, no matter how feeble.

    “But some newspapers are saying this Carbon Tax will destroy the economy, Mr. Swan”

    A few minutes ago.

    LOL, the piss-weak attempts to get a “Tea Party” movement happening.

  4. Chris

    Was amused to see the effect of the media advisors at Gillard’s press conference yesterday. Although happy to say how many million would be better off was obviously told not to put an actual number against how many people would be worse off, just saying “some” and telling the reporters to do the math themselves. Avoiding a soundbite that might end up in an advert I think :-)

  5. Fine

    There was a shocking ad in ‘the Age’ today from Sportsbet. You can have a bet on whether the carbon price legislation passes the Senate. I think the world is mad based on this sort of stuff.

    But, the ad itself was titled “Tax Beater”. It was a ’50s style image of Bob Brown sitting down with Gillard bent over his knee while he hit her. ‘Cos you know, domestic violence never gets old.

  6. Paul Burns

    Their ABC.
    At breakfast, the Brisbane markets were coming to an end or something, because of the carbon price. Well, a small business Liberal Party constituency would say that, wouldn’t they?

  7. paul walter

    I read the thread starter and straightaway thought, “Gillard”. Like the rest of you I’ve just come from msm coverage of it, in this case involving the Advertiser, Adelaide’s sole newpaper, a tabloid ( they are determined to keep us a country town, despite Adelaide being a city of a million and a quarter people).
    Featured in this “journal”, was the same sort of guff that people above have mentioned, plus a vile little push-poll to reinforce the impression of crisis.

  8. Duncan

    Fran @1

    what are you smoking?

    Sure, 90% of households get compensation, but in only 60% of the cases does it sufficiently cover the expected price rises.

    I’m getting compensation.. $3/year for a family of five on an estimated cost increase of over $700.

  9. Bellistner

    “I love my Woolies because…” (new propaganda campaign)

    I met my Partner at Woolies.

    But there is not enough steel wool and bleach in the world to be able to wash the dirt off if I combined those two statements.

  10. Fran Barlow

    Duncan said:

    Sure, 90% of households get compensation, but in only 60% of the cases does it sufficiently cover the expected price rises.

    AIUI, 66% get at least full cover.

    Nevertheless, no reasonable person thinks “some households will get compensation” means 90%. If I didn’t know better and were asked to get I’d probably guess under 10%, and maybe only 1%.

    If 66% (or even 60%) are getting full compensation and 90% are getting some, the most accurate hostile adjective is “most” or perhaps they could say “the majority of” households are getting compensation.

  11. Fran Barlow

    Disclosure: Come July 1 2012 our household will be comfortably above those getting compensation. That’s Ok with us because we don’t need it. Indeed, we would have preferred a far more ubiquitous and rigorous scheme, embracing all sectors of the economy, with no sweetheart deals or free permits and a price starting around $40tCO2 and getting to about $100 by 2020.

  12. Tiny Dancer

    Julias smug promise of compensation and assistance have the same ring of hollow rhetoric that that great Qlder, Beattie, had when he told us electricity would become cheaper when privatization took place. Hollow is one way tomdescribe it.

    I am also reminded of the other great Qlder, Bligh, putting up water costs because we used less when we were told to use less.

    Prices haven’t dropped since we had the rain.

    Last night was like listening to a newsreel of those two truly great leaders.

  13. David Irving (no relation)

    If Duncan is getting $3 pa for a family of 5, his household’s income must be well above the median.

  14. paul walter

    Yes, am afraid Duncan’s proposition doesn’t impress me much, either.
    The idea of certain things being priced as they are is to encourage or deter certain behaviours, against a backdrop of growing scientific knowledge relating to why certain things need to encouraged or discouraged, for the ultimate benefit of all here now and for future generations.
    You don’t like the winter weather (for example)?
    Don’t just lazily squander more money on electric fires, use your native adaptive wit and go put a pullover on!
    You’ll get by..

  15. Tyro Rex

    DINR. Indeed, we’re getting about $3 and we are a DINK household both on good professional incomes.

  16. jumpnmcar

    @11,12,13
    Must be wonderful to be in a financial position that will hardly even notice this tax, good for you.
    Let me guess, your collective incomes are flood-proof, drought-proof, economy-proof, rise or fall in the dollar-proof, trade-proof, not tender reliant and safe. Again, Good for you.

    A comfortable perch.

  17. jumpnmcar

    Oops, the order changed?
    should be @ 11,13,15.

  18. David McRae

    I too find myself in the fortuntate position of not needing to be fully compensated. And happy for it.

  19. paul of albury

    But jumpnmycar that’s the point. As long as our incomes are high enough not to notice we don’t need compo. If our incomes drop we’re covered. Clever isn’t it?

    And I assume there’s a certain baseline amount of energy we all almost ‘need’ to consume, rich or poor. As we have more discretionary income we have more discretion to use it in ways which don’t have as high a carbon footprint.

  20. Charlie

    If the point is about changing behaviour – why have compensation?

  21. Fran Barlow

    The The Terror and (The Hun as well) ran one of their trolling polls asking:

    Will the carbon tax (sic) change your energy consumption?

    I’m wondering how the “No, climate change is a myth” is an answer.

    If we’re to believe The Terror, then not only are nearly two thirds of their respondents scientifically illiterate, but illiterate even in simple English.

    What this shows is that how easy it is to get the right answer even when using bogus means.

  22. jumpnmcar

    Spin ” Aust carbon tax is good for the environment”
    Fact “Our sacrifices in the next decade will be negated by Chine before the start of summer”

  23. Fran Barlow

    Charlie asked:

    If the point is about changing behaviour – why have compensation?

    1. It’s about changing the behaviour of those

    a) whose behaviour can change to become less Co2 intensive

    and

    b) whose lifestyle is heavily Co2-intensive

    2. It’s also designed not to be act in a way that would prejudice the position of socially disadvantaged people. One of the principles of burden sharing is that it should be done equitably. It would be absurd if welfare programs aimed at assisting the poor to live in dignity and escape poverty were subverted by programs designed to encourage upper middle class folk to adopt a more Co2-constrained lifestyle.

    Poorer people tend to have little choice about where and how they live, where they work, their transport options, the design of their houses and so forth. So their demand is relatively inelastic. An increase in costs will not much affect their behaviour, though it might make them poorer. Compensating them makes sense since it doesn’t greatly subvert action but does stop them being poorer. Compensating us relatively privileged folk is quite another matter of course. That is largely political, but it also reflects the fact that we do have options and can make lifestyle changes using in part, some of that assistance.

  24. Nickws

    80 per cent of people who voted in a national poll at heraldsun.com.au yesterday rejected the carbon tax; and 70 per cent – 15,866 people – said they planned to vote for the Coalition at the next election.

    Okay, so that’s just a throwaway line in a Newscorp online paper, I doubt the Herald Sun itself is going to run frontpage articles about the results of its own freepable poll, not when they can just quote the more rigorous results of Galaxy or Newspoll.

    But this exact same nonsense freepable poll was the lead Carbon-Tax-related item on Fairfax radio’s (3AW) Melbourne news bulletin this morning.

    Fine @ 5: There was a shocking ad in ‘the Age’ today from Sportsbet. You can have a bet on whether the carbon price legislation passes the Senate. I think the world is mad based on this sort of stuff.

    If this online bookie really is offering odds that this bill will be rejected by a combined Labor/Green senate majority of 40 in a chamber of 76, then I’d say that’s actually a sign they’re counting on a bunch of mad Wingnut whale punters placing massive bets on the impossible happening. In which case one side of that equation is behaving very sanely.

  25. Darin

    @20.. Apparently it’s so people can save money by choosing less expensive power sources when the carbon price ratchets up. Hopefully those sources will be available by then. I figure that’s the point of the billions of dollars of investment money.

  26. Fran Barlow

    Jumpy said:

    Must be wonderful to be in a financial position that will hardly even notice this tax {price}, good for you.

    It is indeed. I start each day bearing in mind how well placed hubby and I are compared with so many others. It’s regrettable indeed that we are the exception rather than the rule, and this consideration is what prompts our concern that global equity should be a foundational part of the public policy of at least the richer nations.

  27. patrickg

    Fran that could be some really really easy money, unless by pass they mean no amendments whatsoever.

  28. duncan

    I love the implicit assumption that I’m somehow a wasteful git earning squillions of dollars (that can be thrown about by a reckless government).

    I’ll tell that to my partner next time I spend my weekend replacing the gearbox on our 16yo car, late home from work because I rode my bike in, or explaining to them why camping holidays really are as good as I think they are.

    If it is such a small impost and you’re comfortable, how about you pay my chunk of Gillards hair-brained spendathon.. or at least the 80% of it that’ll be swallowed by the public service.

  29. Fine

    Duncan, it’s ‘hare-brained’. My bleeding heart bleeds for you.

  30. Michael

    Just saw the PM on QANDA – she was clear, concise and convincing. I can detect a change in the pubic mood, and as of yesterday, Tony Abbott is looking desperate and tired.

  31. Brian

    Jumpy @ 2 said:

    Spin ” Aust carbon tax is good for the environment”
    Fact “Our sacrifices in the next decade will be negated by Chine before the start of summer”

    That’s school yard stuff, jumpy. We don’t run China, but we are responsible for what we do here.

  32. Brian

    Michael @ 30, Gillard could have done a better answer to the Torres Strait mayor, where she didn’t remember what they are doing about adaptation and sea level rise specifically. But I was amazed at her command of detail. She has obviously been involved at depth in the negotiations.

    99 out of 100 from me.

  33. Magnet

    Yes – a horsey cover over here in the West, but I really do hate fruit bats… their big and scary and make loud noises and drop stuff on your head, uhhhhh shudders.

    Carbon tax – 8 page wrap, groan, I liked it better when Rudd was just going to tax the rich mine owners but the union “powerbrokers” messed that up last year. If they’d only just hurry up and do it, then I wouldn’t have to listen to Jyooliar harping for weeks – they could use that voice instead of Barney tunes or waterboarding, and it’s on every station. Stuff media ethical guidelines they need mercy guidelines.

  34. wbb

    Gillard did as well as anybody could tonight.

    But whether Australia manages its carbon pollution problem in the next few years will not be a function of which person leads the ALP – it will depend on the willingness of the media to play along with Abbott’s destructive politics. The issue is too complex scientifically and economically for the uncommitted voter to make the right choice while being mislead. The ALP requires at least a neutral media partner.

    Had the misfortune to be in a town this morning where only The Australian was available. But was pleasantly surprised at the coverage it gave to the announcement. Was at least neutral if not slightly positive.

  35. akn

    The 7:30 Report last night: was that reportage? If they keep this up there won’t be an uninterviewed person in the Hunter Valley by next month. In any event, plagues and pestilence are already apparently sweeping the Hunter in the wake of the announcement; there are people greasing the tracks by throwing themselves under coal trains to show their support of pollution. BTW: spent the weekend in a Hunter town that is so conservative that Landcare is an underground organisation. Sales of 00 shot are up apparently.

  36. Katz

    If, by dint of effort, the 499th “worst polluter” manages to become merely the 501st “worst polluter”, will this entity then escape the impost?

  37. Fran Barlow

    akn said:

    BTW: spent the weekend in a Hunter town that is so conservative that Landcare is an underground organisation.

    Keep Landcare in the ground!

    You know it makes sense … ;-)

  38. Tiny Dancer

    Q&A – she did look good, friendly hose, friendly crowd who clapped themselves to exhaustion, no opposition, no hard questions and importantly magnificent motherhood statements. By crikey, she could lead a state government in NSW or Qld she was that good.

  39. akn

    Yes Fran. Landcare, deeply subversive. The whole town is like an open air nursing home and a museum depository for Howardism. Had a conversation with a town resident who said of another “so and so is … is an Aboriginal…but he won’t admit it”. Poor bastard, I’m not surprised.

  40. Chris

    tigtog @ 39 – like it or not, polls do significantly change how the government and opposition behave even if the election is a couple of years away. Have to wonder just how much the primary vote can drop before the ALP backbench revolts. At this rate how long before the Green primary vote overtakes the ALP’s?

  41. dylwah

    Katz “If, by dint of effort, the 499th “worst polluter” manages to become merely the 501st “worst polluter”, will this entity then escape the impost?”

    Katz, A. Crabb has a go at that question. 500 is roughly the amount of companies that have facilities that emit over 25,000 tonnes of C/CO2 a year.

    A.C. has a few links to the relevant Govt departments that collect the data.

  42. Paul Burns

    A classic Trioli on ABC TV this morning. Its because the electorate thinks the Government is illegitimate apparently. Gawd help us!
    On a less serious level, its Abbott and co. who are the pack of bastards.

  43. Paul Norton

    In the case of Virginia Trioli, I think we might be seeing an element of long-run blowback from the bad behaviour of the Labor student factions at Melbourne University towards non-Labor leftists when she was studying there in the 1980s.

  44. robbo

    The coal mine that abbott was prowling around yesterday in the Hunter is owned by Macarthur coal. That would be the Macarthur coal that is under a takeover bid for 4.7 billion dollars. Hardly an endorsement of the rantings of abbott, but what it really says about him is far more revealing.
    That being that this ghastly man is prepared to tour this country telling lies and using workers as a backdrop to further his political aims.

    The sooner the workers of this country wake up that they are being used by this grub the sooner we will no longer have to endure the farce of his anti campaign.

  45. adrian

    You mean Trioli studied? At a University?

  46. David Irving (no relation)

    Actually, robbo, the coal miners looked pretty hostile towards Abbott, which is a hopeful sign.

  47. mediatracker

    @34wbb – Is there such a thing as a “neutral” section of the media?
    Have a look at Jay Rosen’s PressThink for 3rd July – http://pressthink.org for a recap of Jon Stewart’s Daily Show on “CNN leaves it there”. That’s the U.S. version of neutrality.

  48. Katz

    Thanks Dylwah @42. Crabb’s article is full of meaty detail.

  49. akn

    Abbott in the mines and urging the metalworkers and others (CFMEU) to walk on Labor over this is exactly what ought to concern the broad environment movement. It signals the solidification of an alliance between a fraction of capital (coal miners) and a fraction of labour (those dependent on coal miners) to exploit this resource to their mutual advantage regardless of the costs to anyone else. The mine owners will be portrayed as heroic entrepeneurs and the employees as embattled working class heroes striving to protect their jobs and families from predatory greenies. The Miner’s Federation ought to be ashamed.

  50. Paul Norton

    akn @50, I think you might be doing the CFMEU (Mining & Energy) an injustice.
    http://cfmeu.com.au/

  51. Dave McRae

    DI(NR)@47 You’re right, but I think the perception out there is closer to what akn@50 has seen.

    SBS news was the only one to show the non-loving reception by miners to Abbott – ABC and I presume everywhere else has been showing Abbott in hi-vis gear giggling with others in hi-vis gear next to mines giving the impression the miners love him.

    Paul@51 has the link, but those messages isn’t getting transmitted. (I love that “end transportation, it’ll ruin us” advert)

  52. Ambigulous

    ‘leadership rumblings’ in the Federal Govt. …..
    Ridiculous: the ALP would be very foolish to dump a recently-elected Prime Minister, wouldn’t it?

  53. David Irving (no relation)

    Actually, Dave, I only caught Abbott ingratiating himself with the working class on the ABC news. They looked really unhappy, like Management had told them to be there or their jobs were on the line.

  54. Tiny Dancer

    Robb, as I understand it the mine you refer to exports it’s coal to Asian countries. No carbon tax payable as it’s not burnt here. Maybe that’s why it seems a food idea

  55. Tiny Dancer

    Hey Irving, was it as bad as Julia’s stage managed family meeting yesterday and shown all over the news?

  56. Nickws

    Personally I trust Greg Combet’s political abilities (stuff like knowing where all the bodies are buried, what backs to scratch) to overcome the inexorable pull of the dialectic RE coalmining.

    That plus I reckon the Liberals in Opposition just don’t have the ability to divide and conquer blue collar organisation. Howard was able to do what he did in Tasmania in 2004 because he held the reigns of government.

  57. PeterTB

    tt: with pundits talking as if it was important for voting intentions right now, when we’re nowhere near an election

    The importance of the polling is that it should bring down Gillard within the party. It brought down Rudd, didn’t it?

    Oh Joy

  58. akn

    Paul Norton: maybe I am. I’m wanting actions as evidence and remain a sceptic. I’d be impressed if the ALP found the money to feather bed every miner and mine associated employee out of the industry on a guarantee that they don’t work coal mines again and tell the owners that they’ve made a good profit so far but now eff off. And no imported workers to fill the gaps. I’m thinking they’re mugs if they don’t negotiate terrific wages under these conditions which is what I expect.

  59. Fran Barlow

    It’s not clear PeterTB that the polling did bring down Rudd — he was still well ahead when toppled. It seems that some combination of ruthless ambition, hatred of him personally, the opening he created for them, the hubristic view that they could get away with it and utter mindless stupidity did for him.

    Bringing down Gillard now is not something even they could imagine would play out well. That really would be the end of the section for them.

  60. Pollytickedoff

    “Bringing down Gillard now is not something even they could imagine would play out well. That really would be the end of the section for them.”

    It would also be pretty risky as the independents made it pretty clear when they backed Julia for PM that they were supporting her and any change of leadership would not have their guaranteed support.

  61. Ambigulous

    Could youse Quincelanders be a bit more polite to the PM please?

  62. jumpnmcar

    This ones for Fran.
    Just click on 1:47 , wait 10 secs, and go back to 1:47.
    As many times as you like.
    Now that should put the Tax/price pedantry to bed.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-13/pm-heckled-over-carbon-plan/2793274

    :)

  63. Joe

    No spin to report just really good articles in the guardian of late.
    Including this one about Greek debt:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/13/eurozone-greek-debt-crisis-euro

    (UK-bias and all.)

  64. Paul

    David Irving (nr): That actually happened during the Great Depression – workers across NSW were told by their mangement that if they voted for Lang and Labor on Saturday, then they wouldn’t have a job on Monday.

  65. Ambigulous

    bye bye Rebekah

  66. harleymc

    SMH reprinted a story from the (UK?) Telegraph.
    In the article it was asserted that Bashar Al-Assad would be ‘forced’ to shoot demonstrators.

    No evidence was offered as to who or what was forceing him. Cleary the SMH is under a press embargo that prevented publication of how Assad’s family were being held hostage by thugs.

    Alternately and more simply the SMH endorsed crimes against humanity for a dictator’s self gain.