KGB Tactics

http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/latest/13975568/carbon-tax-impact-should-be-gradual-accc/


The competition watchdog has told businesses not to jack up prices in response to Labor's carbon tax just because there's a lot of "political noise" around the issue.

Instead, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) says retailers should wait and see what impact the pollution price has on their own costs from July 1.

"Businesses really know what's going on here," ACCC chairman Rod Sims told reporters in Canberra on Monday.

"They know it's a price impact - they don't know necessarily how much it's going to affect them - and I think they know to behave normally and wait to see what the impact will be."

Mr Sims said the ACCC would crack down on any business that simply "latched onto" any scare campaign to say their prices were going to go though the roof.

He agreed it was an "issue" that people could potentially accept higher prices because they'd been confused by "political noise".

Both sides of politics seized on Mr Sims' comments, made at a media conference to launch a carbon price hotline and online claim forms for people who think they're being ripped off.

Acting Prime Minister Wayne Swan said coalition claims "wouldn't pass the ACCC testing if it applied to them".

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott no longer believes the tax will be a "wrecking ball" through the economy and now insists it will be more like a "python squeeze than a cobra strike".

Mr Swan said on Monday, "Whether it's a cobra or whether it's a python it doesn't change the fact that the leader of the opposition is slithering around the country with a whole series of poisonous messages and a forked tongue."

Assistant Treasurer David Bradbury declared it would take a python "to squeeze a few facts out of the Leader of the Opposition".

But the coalition says the competition watchdog has backed its position.

"Even the ACCC doesn't know what the exact impact is going to be on individual small businesses," opposition spokesman Bruce Billson said in a statement.

"It's perfectly legitimate for small business to pass on the cost of the world's largest carbon tax but what is hard is how to work it out."

Mr Sims doesn't expect widespread price increases on July 1, except in the retail electricity sector.

"This is something that is going to play out over some months rather than immediately," he said.

But according to senior Liberal George Brandis, the carbon tax, which doesn't start for a fortnight, is partly to blame for Fairfax's announcement that it will slash nearly 2000 jobs, shut two printing presses and start charging people to view its key websites in the biggest shake-up in the newspaper publisher's 170-year history.

Senator Brandis used Monday's question time to note "every significant stage of the Fairfax production chain" would be directly affected by the carbon tax.

"This is a disgraceful scare campaign," Finance Minister Penny Wong said.

"If you really cared about the loss of jobs you wouldn't come in here and link it to a political scare campaign."

===========================================================================================

Blind Freddie can see that the calculations needed to quantify the cost of the carbon tax on any given item, are enormous, and out of reach of small business people trying to make a living. Prices will rise as a result of the carbon tax, these creeps have just made it illegal to say so.

 

To be fair, I don’t think Brandis is being genuine in suggesting that Fairfax announcing they will slash 2000 jobs is directly related to the carbon tax.

I believe Fairfax understands that the majority of the media is now being view electronically and not by print, and they are adapting to that methodology accordingly.

However you would have to be a complete simpleton to believe anything that came out of the ALP’s lying deceitful mouths - the whole nest are pathological liars.

My question has always been: why introduce this carbon tax when every scientists now say’s that the reduction of 0.0004% emissions over 18 years will not reduce or have any impact on reducing the planets temperature, when their arguments and premises for introducing the carbon tax was that reducing carbon emissions by 0.0004% over 18 years was going to help stop global warming.

This is a contradiction of terms, and begs the question in logic!! “Why force an action, when that action will not help the situation”?

The people need to wake-up really fast that some of these politicians are really “stupid individuals” who are making really “stupid decisions” that are going to have far reaching negative impacts on this country and the people living in this country if they keep allowing these really “stupid politicians” to legislate these really “stupid decisions”.

Yes. (*)(*)(*)(*)-ant politicians form Australia ascend the world stage and “big-note” themselves on how accomplished they have been in reducing 0.0004% of carbon emissions over 18 years that will nothing to help reduce or stop the global temperature rising, but what other major industrial country is going to be listening; when they are more concerned about doing something on a grander scale that will “actually” reduce or stop the planets temperature rising. Australia is looking like an absolute idiot country on the world stage - the jesters of the international court.

The jesters (Australians) use to be laughed at for their simplistic backward stupidity by the International Court, but now their blatant stupidity is becoming annoying, as referenced, when the EU chief slapped the toll queen down, and put her and Australia in their rightful place.

My mother-in-law said, these ETS’s/ carbon taxes have not worked in Europe, and many countries directly blame them for the EU’s financial situation - especially Spain. She went on to say “why” Australia did not significantly reference and study “all” the EU countries who had these schemes and taxes before forcing it into our populace when we had the opportunity to investigate and learn from their lessons and mistakes is beyond her.

 

I agree with every one of your points, CD. Furthermore, the carbon tax scam is tailor made to pitch at the "great unwashed" by virtue of a few simple points, some of which are listed below.

1. The illusion that those "other people" will take a hammering, while the precious proponents of carbon pricing actually make money from the rort, therefore, greed and envy are catered for.
2. The notion that these "easy" actions will have the heroic result of saving the world.
3. The ego boost of feigning an authoritive knowledge of climate science by repeating mantra supplied by the AGW scammers.

The subject of this topic, the suppression of mention of the carbon tax factor causing price rises, has been gone about in an extrordinarially slimey way. This law is capitalising on the simple fact that calculating the exact, direct and indirect cost factors, will in most cases be an impractically time consuming way. They have effectively made it illegal to state a carbon tax factor. These grubs live on lies & deceit.

 

The most “frightening” thing about all this Aussie, is that some Australians agree that these grubs have a natural “right” to lie and be deceitful to the people they are employed by, and they are allowed to do this without any recourse.

I also agree with your post, but I don’t see any answers for Australia now, and seriously feel it’s a doomed society.

 

They can jack up their prices as much as they want. However, they can't then lie to customers and say it's because of the Carbon Tax if it's not.

Businesses were not allowed to lie to their customers before the Carbon Tax and they're still not allowed to lie.

 

It`s not about business lying, it`s about suppressing the truth getting out about the price of the carbon tax. This sooky tactic on behalf of the Govrenment, has in effect, made it illegal to expose the price of the carbon tax. With this tax having such a broad range, the calculation of it`s cost of any given product to the end consumer, is a mathematical marathon. To survive, business will have to label price rises as other than carbon tax derived, or face the legal juggernaught of the federal government. Josef Stalin would have been proud of this pathetic tactic.

For example, the calculations for the effect of the carbon tax on a can of baked beans would be enormous. If a retailer can`t afford to maintain a massive pool of accountants for this purpose, and they declare price rises as being caused by the carbon tax, they will be faced with the litigious might of the federal government.

This tactic is nothing more than a jack booted, low life move. This government has no interest in the truth, that much has been evident for years, but this time they have reached a new low.

 

Look the ACCC have no teeth. Otherwise Woolworths and Coles wouldn't have such a monopoly on the prices of food, or the banks would be taken to task over collusion. The ACCC has more bark than bite.

Big business will put prices up gradually under another name. This is a fear that the public have had and the government through the ACCC has tried to allay these fears by spruiking hollow threats.

Think about it. How long would it take the undermanned ACCC to take all big business to court ? And how much would it cost us, the taxpayer ?

 

yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn

 

Sorry if all that was too complicated for you. I always get a laugh at the expence of those poor simple folk who have no objection to being deceived by their own Govt.

 

The cost of nearly everything will go up due to the carbon tax, but it will be nearly impossible to tell the truth about it. The ALP will be happy with that, to them all that matters is that the truth is supressed.

 

People have been compensated for this!

 

So you are saying that the carbon tax isn`t costing anybody anything?

 

Not those that couldn't afford it, that's why the government has compensated. Those that can, can reduce their carbon footprint and in effect save on costs. This is the whole concept with the scheme. People who can afford it simply waste energy.

 

So people have been compensated for the reduced accountability of being able to state prices have raised 'x' amount because of the carbon tax?

When everybody is demanding accountability from government and business, the government puts this type of thing out. So now the likes of woolies and coles can now deminstrate greater costs but is not able to show what it is, so people such as yourself can be further impacted by price hikes (possibly greater than should be) and you happy with this fact? Why, because people are compensated for this?

I have stated before that those compensation packages will be swallowed up by business plus more, and the government has provided the tools for them to do it.

Why, do people actually support a government that demonstrates nationalistic intentions while saying they are democratically idealistic, I will never know. What do people really want, more regulation or less?

 

It will all even out with competition. No one will go overboard, it would be detrimental to businesses who actually try. Stop being a drama queen Garry!

 

Did you actually read the post? I am not stating anything about the compensation package at all. I am talking about the regulation of speach. and that will now give ammo to the private sector. Drama queen? perhaps if you had read it you would be able to answer to the post.

 

This is what you said right?
So people have been compensated for the reduced accountability of being able to state prices have raised 'x' amount because of the carbon tax?

When everybody is demanding accountability from government and business, the government puts this type of thing out. So now the likes of woolies and coles can now deminstrate greater costs but is not able to show what it is, so people such as yourself can be further impacted by price hikes (possibly greater than should be) and you happy with this fact? Why, because people are compensated for this?

I have stated before that those compensation packages will be swallowed up by business plus more, and the government has provided the tools for them to do it.

This is what I said:
It will all even out with competition. No one will go overboard, it would be detrimental to businesses who actually try. Stop being a drama queen Garry!

 

Ok, you seem to think your comment is relevant, what is going to detrimental to business if they try what? Is that it will be detrimental to business if they try and explain they have increased their price by "x" amount because of the carbon tax? OR it will be detrimental to business if they increase their prices because of increased costs? Please give it some relevance.

 

If in any instance one were to increase prices unnecessarily above competitive productivity, it would be detrimental to the point that others would inevitably take advantage of this. It would play into the hands of smaller associated businesses, which these corporations won't allow to happen anyway. So, what I am saying that it would be unlikely that these corporations such as Coles and woolworths will take complete advantage of the governments compensation in a competitive market, unless they can collude with smaller associated businesses, including IGA and Aldi etc.

 

Way to go there, you managed to defend the two greatest colluding supermarket chains to defend an assault on the pricing of products. After all, these companies have the ability to spread the cost across a far greater demographic and hey guess what, the poorer areas are the ones with the least competition. There is a reason for that, poorer areas do not have the ability to support competitive markets.

But hey great intention, if you live in the city isn't it. however, if you had not already been aware been aware smaller independent competition in these areas are having so much trouble sustaining their business, you assume they will will be able to continue to compete at the same level. They too have to pay greater cost and will not be able to spread around to other areas to maintain further competition with the big business.

But the big Issue here that you have not answered is the regulation of business not to disclose or justify their prices, which has only been brought about by Labor, Green and independent coalition to stop people from finding out how much the carbon tax is actually going to impact on peoples every day life. Once you start regulating what people can say, you have opened a can of worms that will make it far harder to actually hold anybody accountable for anything, as you have to ignore things that are pertinent to that issue the government have regulated. Funny enough, you do not think this will be anything at all, but this will actually take so much away from the ACCC that they will be less than an advertising company for the government with so little power. AND YOUR HAPPY WITH THAT?

 

A lot of the appeal of the carbon tax for it`s supporters, is the allusion that someone else will be paying for it. It`s a wimpy way of addressing AGW, expecting someone else to pay. In reality, this tax will hurt those who can least afford it the most, it will also harm, and put added pressure on all businesse. To a particular type of "mind"set, the fact that others will be hurting, has no impact, no significance. Excessive selfishness, like all excess, has it`s penalty.

The carbon tax will have an adverse effect on the welfare of Australia. Why else would this government be attempting to suppress the truth about the carbon tax? The carbon tax will have absolutely no effect on the practical volume of carbon content, globally. To dream that Australia is leading the world in a heroic battle is delusional. The reality is that Australia is simply the dumbest nation on earth in this regard.

 

Look, for arguments sake: if a supermarket wants to charge $10 for a loaf of bread, what do you think will happen? Since the introduction of GST milk and bread prices have dropped....think about it dude!

 

So Abbotts direct action policy will be better! Okay......great argument!!!

 

Yes, why is it that milk and bread are cheaper? Is it because other taxes where removed with the introduction of the GST that aided the drop in prices in certain areas of the economy? and tell us what taxes will be removed for the introduction of the carbon tax? Sorry, did I hear correct? was that their is plenty of compensation for everything?

 

What is that Dr Hook song? I think it goes like this: I got stoned stoned and I missed it! Are you on something dude?Everybody knows the real answer to this, but again you missed it (oh, unless it took several years for the GST to impact-the reality is this only happened in the last couple of years dude regarding milk and bread prices)! Ill spell it out for you gazza. The competitive market was what brought bread and milk down.

The gst was a 10% imposition(a $400k house would have attracted $40k in taxes, well above retracted taxes, however, the CP is going to have a .07% imposition, which has been compensated for. Big difference dude!

Anyway, back to my original question: What would happen if a supermarket were to sell bread for $10.00?