Anyone that didn't like it were basically told to get used to it, and anyone expressing concerns were given assurances that it isn't a big deal.
As a researcher and critic of Government I investigated the situation. Here it is, for the first time ever...my findings available publicly - Feel free to share, to quote...absorb and enjoy :)
The Labor Government's arrogant suggestion that everyday people won't lose out with a Carbon Tax is deceitful. You need an example? How about the price of margarine then? Given as being $0.016 extra per 250g with the tax added.
A newspaper (Sunday Telegraph) article that ran alongside the announcement, informing of the price rises one can expect with the introduction of the Carbon Tax - As it used Julia Gillard's "Tim Tam" example, and that it received coverage with perfect timing suggests this was a targeted release with Labor Government influence - The Australian Federal Labor Government are now looking into investigating ethics in the media...as a knee-jerk reaction to the "cell-phone hacking saga"
The product used to illustrate that we "won't lose one cent" is Meadow Lea which *currently* costs $1.94 for 250g ($1.956 in 2012) which doesn't seem much of a difference really. However take the cheaper stuff that costs $1.09 per 500g (54.5c/250g) and the price increase obviously has a greater impact increasing the price to $1.122 (56.1c per 250g). Paying 56.1c for something that used to cost 54.5c represents an increase of 0.029%
People buying Meadow Lea ($1.94 to $1.956) only represents an increase of 0.008%
The difference is those that can afford brand names will barely notice the minute % increase, whereas those on a tighter budget will notice a bigger % increase. This HURTS the low income earner more, despite Labor trying to convince everyone they will be looked after.--------------------
One other thing to note is that 'pokie machine' (slot machine/poker machine) hater Andrew Wilkie apparently "demanded" benefits for the Zinc smelters (see image below). Which raises the question - Why does Andrew Wilkie single out the Zinc industry, where other industries are expected to cop the new tax on the chin? Is there a conflict of interest occurring?
Source: The Sunday Telegraph - July 10, 2011. Pg. Unknown
This takes me back to an earlier entry of mine discussing the specifications of the tax, which states "Australia's most polluting electricity generators will be closed and replaced with gas-fired units by 2020" - Which makes one wonder 'why is the Government steering the nation specifically towards gas for?' It's anti-competitive
What are your thoughts?