The cost of something simple

Years ago here in Australia we had a politician lose an election based on one TV interview. The bloke was John Hewson, and the question was stunning in in simplicity, and utterly devastating to Mr Hewson.

Heres a link to a Wiki on the interview, see if you can find a youtube of the event, its well worth watching.

Here’s the nub of my post, why hasn’t any party, anywhere on earth (that Im aware of) been asked the following question.

Its a simple question, why hasnt anyone asked it?

Its a simple question, why hasnt anyone asked it?


In all seriousness, why hasn’t anyone supporting a carbon scheme been asked to put a figure on a simple grocery item? Im sure the roll on effect will prove to be quite high, and the complexity will annoy those asked.

But thats the point, if they cant explain how the price “wont be effected” (an obvious lie), or they have to add on every 1c, 1/2c, 5c, cost the item has its price raised by.

Its the question which will provoke widespread unease as the true costs become a little more solid, perhaps that’s why it hasn’t been asked.

15 Responses to “The cost of something simple”

  1. Kaboom Says:

    What scaremongering, denialist claptrap! Poor folk will be reimbursed 120% (yes, 120%) of any additional costs incurred as a result of the CPRS.

    Of course, how this modifies the behaviour of the silent penurious majority, if it doesn’t cost them, and in fact provides a windfall, is open to conjecture.

    It’s all leading to Carbon Rationing cards ……… I can guarantee this. I’ve written about this , and I’ll bet one Carbon Credit that I am correct.

    • thefrollickingmole Says:

      Ha, I bow to the wisdom of your CRAP plan, just think of how much extra tax the government will bring in with all those extra jobs, why Im almost certain everyone would have a tax cut as well….
      (I edited the link a bit)

    • Kaboom Says:

      God, what did I do?

      Frollick, did I put “>” rather than “[” in front of the a: or what?

      Or did I simply muff it up beyond repair?

      Jeez, I hate that!

    • bingbing Says:

      Kabs. Remember how we say that 1984 was meant to be a warning that the watermelons are using as an instruction manual? Same goes for your CRAP scheme.

      As for the bread, that’s easy. All you have to do is factor in a few things. First, how many wheat plants go into that particular loaf? Now here one can save since plants breathe IN CO2. Yet, how much carbon (dioxide) did the farmer use planting it? How much CO2 did the tractor or whatever pump out? Also factor in the CO2 used in producing the tractor/whatever and, in pure CRAP style, amortise that over 20 years and whAck it on the kid’s medicare card. Also, how much did the farmer breathe whilst planting, growing and harvesting the wheat? Remember, he probably supports a family so how much they breathed must also be factored in. Do the kids play sports? Oh, and how much did they all fart? All family member’s weight and diets must be carefully analysed.

      Then we have transportation to market. Amortise the CO2 cost of the truck over 20 years, how much the truckie breathes and farts, what he eats, and factor in the family factor.

      How much you’ll actually pay for your loaf of bread will vary. What car do you own, what’s your job, how far did you drive to get to the shops, how big’s your family, what do they eat and how much does your wife fart?

      May I take this opportunity to personally thank KRudd.


  2. thefrollickingmole Says:

    Im not sure, it still works, you just have to cut a bit out… A nice bit of satire that..

  3. Carpe Jugulum Says:

    Ok, I’ll ask the question, what will taxing and regulating a colourless inert gas mean to the price of a birthday cake?? Someone, anyone, c’mon the so called legislators in Aust want to foist this tax on the average punter, so can any alarmist out there in the intermong give me a price in dollars Aust. I sit here with baited breath.

    So if anyone can answer that, now tell me, as a representative of a principal contractor (commercial construction) doing around 2000km/week, what will the impost be on my employer, bearing in mindi lease my vehicle off my employer and it is subject to FBT outside my lease arrangements and general package.

    • thefrollickingmole Says:

      Thanks, my mind crawled out my nose in protest at trying to wrap itself around your last question….

      Im sure it will sorted soon….probably by you being issued a rickshaw, but it will have solar panels to run the little fan on the front to keep you cool.

    • Kaboom Says:

      Carpe, I reckon that a birthday cake is going to cost more as a result of taxing and regulating a colourless inert gas.

      If you are a principal contractor for the purposes of s.13 and s.30 of the Workplace Health & Safety Act 1995 (Qld), then may Gaia have mercy on your soul……

    • Capre Jugulum Says:

      Morning troops,

      Geez, can i waffle when i’m grumpy. The thrust of my previous rant is how do you factor in the the basic costs of the carbon scam when there are so many variables attached. How can the cost of an item be recalculated when things like the ‘cabon footprint’ of production, initial manufacture, transport & logistics, etc, have to be considered. This in turn is an unknown that has to be passed on to the end consumer.

      I asked the estimators if they could calculate the cost of a loaf of bread under the CRAP scheme, the response is along the lines of – do i like sex and travel & my head resembles a different part of my body, (i took that as a no)

    • Carpe Jugulum Says:

      Kaboom, NSW is much worse than QLD, although i’m based in Vic & we operate throughout the East Coast.

      NSW Act=dumb
      QLD Regs=Dumb2
      ACT=Weapons grade stupid (risk assesment to take a dump)
      Vic=Jesus wept (with Kevvi’s School jobs Worksafe becomes the client’s auditor) No conflict of interest or Government intererference there. Sh!t, Sh*t, Sh^t.

  4. J.M. Heinrichs Says:

    … not to mention that ‘carbon’ is a major structural component in the construction of a loaf of bread.


  5. Kaboom Says:

    I wonder what the carbon footprint is, of an imported from China or USA ceiling insulation batt?

    They weigh next to nothing, and take up a lot of space for their weight.

    Perhaps someone with a scientific turn of mind could calculate the transport GHG for the batts, as opposed to GHG saved by reducing the need for heating or aircon. The transport GHGs need to be calculated on volume, not weight.

    The results may surprise…

    • Carpe Jugulum Says:

      I am going to regret this but here goes,

      It would depend on the type of battt for starters, either regular batts (spun glass fibres) or rockwool (silica/silacateous material fibres). Now you would need to work out the amount of energy to produce the fibres, compact the fibres and cut them to shape. Then the energy expense to package them and load them on a truck to be transported to Aust from China. At this stage i’lll spec and say about 12 tonnes has been expended (batts are made at high temp in bulk ok). No we load all this onto a ship, probably not a new one, so we’ll surmise that it burns FFO (furnace fuel oil), to power the boilers. China to Oz about 600 tonne of fuel lets say 10% in footprint terms, we’re now at 72 tonne of carbon. Now the carbon cost to transport these batts to Melbourne from sydney (including load/unload) 200 litres of fuel, lets say 0.2 tonne of carbon.

      72.2 tonne

      Energy expended to install in say a 22 square house – bugger all

      Now cabon permits at, i dunno, $25/tonne equates to an increase in general terms of $1805 .

      Now these are not real numbers but if i were the builder, i would add an extra 5% to my margin to compensate.

      The offset to reduce heat/aircon is so negligable it can’t really be estimated (at least thats my call). Jeez now i have a headache.

  6. bingbing Says:

    Why? Just why? Surely Rudd knows it won’t be helping anyone or anything. So why?

    What’s his agenda? And why?

    • bingbing Says:

      The prick probably thinks he’s doing the right thing. And he can’t possibly be actually stupid… he made it to PM after all.

      I just don’t get it. Is he pure evil?

      Surely not.

      So why?

Well, SAY something...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: