Mangled Thoughts

Centre for Inpendent Studies, in a small article easily missed in The Australian, issued the demand and called on Rudd to impose it. One only noticed it during a google search that threw it up. The CIS’ demand was published in November 2007.

It never was speculation that carbon taxation is the Centre for independent Studies’ position, and it is pushing it. The article adds nothing in this respect. What it does add is the news that it is actively campaigning for economic destruction of Australians through carbon taxes. Even before this shocking aim, the contradiction between its claim as a leading free market think tank and that it should push any capital tax and requiring extra Executive coercive violence to enforce it is truly appalling.

This lot claim to be experts on Hayek. This itself is risible. Their ignorance of the Austrian school makes their ignorance transparent. However, to invoke Hayek while pushing for economic destruction day through Co2 taxation is a fine indication of their conceit, callousness and deception; their immorality. This lot advises the Liberal Party in and out of office. They are one of the many reasons why the Liberal Party is a stinking wreck.

This lot are no mere clowns entertaining the diseased Left by damaging great causes and in tandem with the buffoons in the Institute of Public Affairs and the HR Nicholls Society. The Centre for Independent Studies has exceeded such risible, yet bleak efforts. They are caught out on Co2 taxation.

To salvage their disgraceful deception of Liberals and Australians in general, Greg Lindsay has once again brought out his great hope, John Humphreys. It is understandable why.

The CIS, and the interests hoping to collect billions out of the ‘cap and trade’ tax and increases in fully subsidised scams called ‘alternative energy’, need a village idiot who believes in ‘war is good’. Economic growth goes sky high after economic mass destruction. Kaboom. Oh, it is what direct Co2 taxes and all other kyoto compliance measures amounts to, the Executive and its hangers on declaring metaphorical war on Australians.

It’s a bit like the Greens and their fronts, including the ACF. These diseased Leftists recruit youngsters, because they are impressionable and therefore can be converted into true believers, blindly obeying their very wealthy, middle class, spoilt brats for masters. Humphreys is the CIS cultist. However, the condition of incredulity, marked by the vacuousness of Humpy’s statements, including to The Australian, is no excuse for the irredeemable bilge he is the ’salesman’ for.

The CIS, Humphreys, and their fan club Jason Soon, Professor Sinclair Davidson, et al at Catallaxy (another insult to Hayek) have smeared any who simply put a solid economic criticism of their position. After the babbling “Right’s” typical response, jerk knee and come out smearing, their other tactics are:

-Introducing straw men and diversion. This they consider reasoned argument.

- Lie about what they assert.

- Cower as in, Greg Lindsay et al hide behind the bolted doors of the CIS clubrooms while their human sacrifices throw themselves under trucks.

What Centre for Independent Studies had to say through its foghorn John Humphreys

In comments, for the CIS, John Humphreys has lied:

“I specifically say that a carbon tax has costs. And that other taxes have costs. And replacing one tax with another produces an ambiguous outcome. Given I’m suggesting a lower tax on a broader base, there is a change my suggested tax swap would produce a net welfare benefit.”

No he did not! Noting also, he is now asserting not only costless, but that there will be a gain, with a rider - if his ‘change’ is implemented. As quoted yesterday, let’s damn him again with his own words:

“that the revenue raised from a carbon tax can be used to reduce or remove other taxes, and therefore to offset the economic costs of the carbon tax”

To reiterate, any normal person would read this for exactly what it states, carbon taxes are costless. He has not asserted it once, but a number of times over. For instance:

“… a modest carbon tax and matching tax cuts may have no net negative economic effect.”

Oh, to make sure what the CIS and not simply Humphreys, is falsely telling the public is: the offsets are a complete offset -“no net negative economic effect”.

When and where did he state this unambiguous declaration of carbon taxes are costless? Not on a genuine Liberal site, but a site by and for libertines, Australian Libertarian Society Blog. Under his pen-name, “Temujin”, he wrote on the 15th of July this year :

The Free Market Argument for a Carbon Tax

Oh, and it is no free market argument at all, taxes are not raised through free market processes, they are imposed. This garbage has to be noted:

“The impact on economic efficiency would be roughly neutral, as both taxes create a similar level of behavioral response. The impact on equality would be roughly neutral…”

Another thing, the CIS, through Humphreys, asserts the Green lie, Co2 emissions are a climate change and a pollutant that must be cut. Then there is the ‘man are mere beasts’ as favoured by diseased Leftists - behaviourism. No science, no economics, no brains.

Turning to the inconspicuous article in The Australian, not in his name but speaking for the CIS, Humphreys said in Simple carbon tax call:

“Centre for Independent Studies researcher John Humphreys argues a carbon tax would allow tax reform and drive a faster transition to cutting greenhouse emissions with less impact on the economy than an emissions trading scheme.

“…a key condition of a carbon tax was that it be revenue neutral, with the revenue used to cut other taxes so that households could be fully compensated for increased energy bills….This would create the incentive needed for generators to develop and install cleaner technologies without changing demand for energy and transport…”

Further points Centre for Independent Studies is deliberately misleading Australians about:

1. Co2 taxes is taxation of capital, and it is no mere liquidation of some capital. It is mass capital destruction. The mountain of evidence available on the internet alone confirms this fact. This fact the CIS, and not only Humphreys, refuses to answer for.

2. Income transfers do not compensate for capital demolition derby day. This is how dense the CIS are:

Only capital generates income. What income is there, forget the force of what they are saying - socialist ‘redistribution’ ? What income is to be earned when the means of production are destroyed? They refuse to answer for this.

3. Not only do they work from the falsehood of perfect competition, but with it, aggregates. One in particular, GDP. The fallacy is consumption drives economic growth, instead of the truth that it is capital accumulation that does the work. GDP is worse than misleading, by conveying the falsehood that approximately 70% of expenditure is on consumption goods.

The American Bureau of Statistics has realised GDP is totally misleading. Instead, it examines total spending. It has found, 70% of spending is on capital goods. This is most interesting, because it reflects savings, and so production of capital goods, is the driver of economic activity. Perforce it has to be greater by a large factor than consumption.[1]

4. They repeatedly assert that if coal and oil based energy companies are wiped out, this will bring on ‘free market’ ‘alternative energy’. Also, destruction of the economically efficient via Co2 taxes will render the ‘alternatives’ competitive. This is, they assert, the clinching argument for Co2 taxes.

I see, in the 19th century horses and carriages should have been destroyed because it would have brought on the uninvented ‘alternative’ and made it economically efficient all at once, motorised transport and the battle tank.

5. As for ‘alternative energy’, what so far has been invented is not remotely economic.

6. Destroying coal based energy companies means destruction of other firms. They cannot produce without energy. It’s not an oversimplification to say; other companies will fold as a deck of cards at a puff of wind. Again, the evidence is rolling in.

It’s rolling in from Britain as companies contract and fold, laying off thousands of employees with it. It must be noted that Tony Blair and Gordon Brown asserted the same lie as the CIS, income compensation, including increasing exports, would eliminate any possible ‘negative impact’ of Co2 taxation. They asserted Co2 taxation would be costless.

Sure is. All those companies crashing to the ground is splendid demonstration. But it was all predictable out of Austrian school theory and, in particular, capital theory.

Again, the CIS refuses to answer for this.

This is not the item to go over all the abysmal falsehoods the CIS asserts but we have the major fabrications above.

The CIS and John Humphreys, duplicitious and worse

John Humphreys is pathetic and dishonest. Not only is he a pathological liar, he behaves like a spoiled brat. His comments on this site show this, as did all his other past comments against Jackson, and on Prodos’ site, and on my friend’s, Strider, site.

It also must be kept in clear view that despite all his freakish accusations, distortions, and lies against Mr. Jackson, Jackson from day one actually based his case on the costly effects of the CIS’ insane tax on the capital structure and hence living standards. This was clearly laid out in:

The real costs of the greens’ carbon tax

Carbon taxes versus living standards

Humphreys has not attempted to refute Jackson, and still refuses to engage. Instead, he resorts to lies, including about what he has stated as demonstrated above, and fallacies including his favourite that he constantly uses, the straw-man.

One wonders if Lindsay is encouraging this liar. Oh, but then Humphreys is putting the CIS position. This is damning. Using a pathological, lying ignoramus of a brat as one of his guns has to be rated as the greatest talent spotting achievement since he engaged Professor Saunders, and he’s a running joke in heavy hitting circles in Melbourne.

What is to be made of the CIS? Even before Co2 taxation, their claim to be a leading free market think tank ranks as one of the most ludicrous fictions ever invented. I ponder whether Lindsay can sleep straight in his bed at night. His spine must be really crooked for him to campaign for economic destruction through carbon taxation.

Not only push for but, as his pied piper Humphreys has made plain, fully co-operates with the Executive in preparing to immiserate millions of Australians. It would come as no surprise this lot have a seat in the Cabinet of Kevin “little Mussolini” and his ministry of brown pantalooned morons. Oh, this lot of pathological cretins are using the falsehoods in the CIS’ position paper to cover over what they are about to do to millions of Australians.

Notice, readers, Kevin and co. can plausibly say in public; ‘look, this is also what the free market CIS is saying. This is one of the Liberal Party’s major advisers saying it. It must be economically sound.’

Plausibly only, because though a lie, it has been fixed firmly in the public arena through the media. To entrench this, the CIS is doing its utmost to suppress debate from genuine Liberals, and by smearing them. In the case of Jackson, also making every effort to damage his reputation as a fine economist.

Notice the sheer hypcorisy. This lot whine when an objective criticism of what they put is published but, refusing to defend their garbage, happily smear critics. Bye the bye, this lot are typical of the nepotistic ‘Right’ who have nearly succeeded in throttling the Liberal Party to death.

The “Right” couldn’t care less about the damage they cause, nor the ruination of millions of Australians through Co2 taxation. The crime racket called the STO and OPA shows how callous and cruel (typical of stupid types), these bastards are. This is why, abusing Liberal Party members, and Australian taxpayers, they appoint ignoramuses as their immediate ministerial advisers and cretinous professional dole bludgers the IPA, the HR Nicholls Society, and CIS.

The CIS has an uber virtue. It is clear that it sees absolutely nothing wrong at all with destroying Australians and Australia (through Co2 taxes). It explains why the CIS engages not merely clowns, but a snivelling juvenile delinquent as one of their gun talents for good measure. Cultists need a true believer in their rotten cult of anti-free market arsenic.

Oh, indeed, Lindsay has a great deal of explaining to do.

[1] Mr. Jackson, bye the bye, refers to the Am.B. Stats. data, repeatedly, for the same reason as his articles also make plain. [Try, in contrast, the Australian Bureau of Statistics, it’s not there. Their website is, as so many websites of all tiers of Government, as useful as an Andrew Bolt Blog, nothing there.]