Are You in Favor of or Opposed to VIC Banning New Gas Connections as of January 1?

Bman17 on 20/09/2023 - 14:53

I prefer a gas connection over an electric one as some Indian and Middle Eastern food you just can’t cook them on an electric stove such as Roti.

The reasons for the banning new gas connections are:

  1. Reduce carbon emissions.
  2. Reduce energy bills (Seriously?).

I use 50 Kg LPG a year and it costs $105. How can anyone minimise their electricity cost given the sharp rise in electricity rates and the declining solar feed-in Tariff? If so, shouldn't the VIC government instead outlaw all appliances with an energy rating of 1-3 stars?
The plan could eventually affect current gas connections.

What would you prefer?:

Poll Options expired

  • 377
    I am in favor of banning new gas connections.
  • 420
    I am against it.
  • 16
    Dosn't bother me. I like Trump and Greta both.
General Discussion

Comments

  • urahara on 20/09/2023 - 15:01
    +2

    Actually if you think about it, the money was being paid off by tax payers. Its a different story altogether that this is mere an eye wash and tax money is still being spent on other non renewable sources.
    Atleast by banning gas connections there would be less money spent on putting up new infra.
    Govt is coming up with subsidies on changing old gas appliances to electric ones

    • Bren20 on 22/09/2023 - 10:31
      +1

      Nah, developers pay for new gas connections, not taxpayers
      The benefits will go to people buying in new developments or subdividing as they won't need to provide a gas connection.

    • Whiplash on 22/09/2023 - 14:30
      +6

      WA had cost control on electricity and Gas. So gas is advantageous in this state.

      The deregulated states seem to just get rorted.

      • ssfps on 23/09/2023 - 03:00
        +1

        WA also has an abundant supply of natural gas locally produced. Not sure how abundant it is in VIC.

        • Binchicken22 on 23/09/2023 - 07:35
          +3

          Probably not that abundant since they also banned gas exploration… 🙄

          • Drakesy on 23/09/2023 - 20:58
            +2

            @Binchicken22: And then they cry when WA get more than 30c back for every $1 of GST…

  • pjetson on 20/09/2023 - 15:04
    +16

    Reduce energy bills (Seriously?)

    I don't have any bills nearby to check, but if you assume that gas and electricity cost roughly the same for the same energy output, then you will save the daily service charge.

    • Iwantthebestprice on 20/09/2023 - 15:42
      +22

      This is what I’m assuming too. Daily supply charge for gas is roughly a $1 per day now, in next couple years will be about $1.50 per day so you would be saving at least ~$400 per year just on the supply charge.

    • eug on 20/09/2023 - 18:37
      +39

      I don't have any bills nearby to check, but if you assume that gas and electricity cost roughly the same for the same energy output, then you will save the daily service charge.

      A few years ago I did a test to see which was cheaper. I boiled 1L of water on a gas stove, induction cooker, and electric kettle. These were my results.

      Gas was the most expensive and took the longest, even taking into account today's expensive electricity prices.

      • gyrex on 21/09/2023 - 09:02

        Interesting graph, although most people don't use gas bottles for their gas supply. Would you be able to update the figures for mains supplied gas?

        • akunno on 21/09/2023 - 10:53
          +4

          Good question.

          LPG has a higher energy concentration - hence it'll be far superior, so it won't likely be more beneficial - and the cost isn't significantly higher.
          Probably won't be worth eug's time to add it to the chart as the result seems pretty clear already.

          Source: https://www.elgas.com.au/elgas-knowledge-hub/residential-lpg…

          LPG (propane) is more dense than air, at a relative density of 1.5219 to 1. Energy content of LPG is 93.2MJ/m³ vs 38.7MJ/m³ with town (mains supply) gas.
          LPG contains more heat energy, with 93.2MJ/m³ vs natural gas at 38.7MJ/m³ (2572 Btu/ft³ vs 1011 Btu/ft³)

        • eug on 21/09/2023 - 11:25
          +4

          Interesting graph, although most people don't use gas bottles for their gas supply.

          Hmm, I didn't realise how prevalent town gas is in other states. My friends here in QLD use bottled gas.

          According to this, the percentage of homes connected to the gas network are:

          QLD: 10%
          NSW: 43%
          ACT: 73%
          VIC: 76%
          SA: 56%
          WA: 68%

          Would you be able to update the figures for mains supplied gas?

          It's a lot harder to measure small quantities of town gas unfortunately. You'd be able to calculate an estimate if you know the flow rate of LPG vs natural gas for your stove. Natural gas stoves use more gas as it's less energy-dense as LPG as akunno mentions below, which is why LPG and natural gas use different nozzles.

      • Chandler on 21/09/2023 - 12:17

        Nice effort 👍

        Curious what vessel you used for the induction & gas tests. ~2L saucepan with the lid on? If not, not exactly a fair comparison. Realistic, yes, since many people would boil water with the lid off, but not fair: you lose a not-insignificant amount of energy leaving the lid off.

        • SnakeCasablanca on 22/09/2023 - 09:18
          +2

          Maybe he boiled the kettle with the lid off? Lol

        • placard on 22/09/2023 - 10:48
          +1

          I don't know why you're just assuming the saucepan would have the lid off?? I always boil with lid on to keep heat in, then remove once boiled.

          Induction means pretty much all the heat is going into the pan/water, and no wasted heat all up the sides and around like you get with gas flame.

          Plus with induction no gas fumes in the house.

      • rentonc on 22/09/2023 - 12:27

        MVP brings the receipts!

    • jv on 21/09/2023 - 01:52
      +6

      Gas works out much cheaper for me.

      • fredblogs on 21/09/2023 - 20:19
        +1

        how did you work it out?

        • rentonc on 22/09/2023 - 12:29
          +4

          jv is referring to DIY gas.

      • try2bhelpful on 21/09/2023 - 20:54

        And you are all that matters right?

        • jv on 21/09/2023 - 22:06
          +12

          To me… yes…

      • gromit on 22/09/2023 - 03:26
        +1

        Interesting. What are your gas and electricity prices like? I have gas as at the time of install 15 years ago it was cheaper. But now it has reversed, gas way more expensive than electricity, would convert gas heating and cooking to electric if i was not selling soon.

  • foursaken on 20/09/2023 - 15:29
    +22

    1) Can we stop calling for things to be outlawed? It's just silly. Use the market and price signals.
    2) Gas has to be mined and piped and is a hella-bad contributor to climate change BEFORE it's burned. So instead of saying "you can't mine that!" we're simply not making it available for domestic use. And other jurisdictions have already done it. Perhaps we might be able to repurpose the gas network for green H2?
    3) Burning gas in a closed environment is surprisingly bad for your health.
    4) The price of electricity is particularly high at the moment and can only really go down. Almost every week I'm reading about a breakthrough in renewable tech. Once we sort transmission out, prices will really start to drop. Gas will remain high.
    5) You want a gas connection? Sure, buy a bottle, have one. No one is saying you can't do that.

    • try2bhelpful on 20/09/2023 - 15:39
      +19

      We live in inner Melbourne, we have restricted roof capability, we get overshadowing from the housing commission buildings for part of Winter and we still, on average, generate more power with our panels than we use. Currently we have gas cooker and hot water but they will be replaced within the next two years. I’m just hanging out for an EV to become storage device and I’ll be close to being energy independent. We are, already, an annual net exporter of energy by a long way. Particularly in summer our cells will be generating enough power to run AC for a few places around us as well as our own.

      I find the “can’t cook certain foods” a cop out as well. By that logic these people should have open wood fires to get the right effect. In that case put in a barbeque and cook there.

      • boomramada on 20/09/2023 - 15:44
        +1

        In that case put in a barbeque and cook there.

        isn't that gas?

        • try2bhelpful on 20/09/2023 - 15:45
          +1

          Back when God was a child, and so was I, you used wood and briquettes for barbeques.

          • boomramada on 20/09/2023 - 15:49
            +2

            @try2bhelpful: Isn't burning wood, less energy efficient and bad for the environment than gas?

            • try2bhelpful on 20/09/2023 - 15:51
              +5

              @boomramada: I’m talking about if they want the authentic taste of certain food styles. Apart from that you just adapt to new cooking styles like they did going from open fires to gas.

              • boomramada on 20/09/2023 - 15:54
                +1

                @try2bhelpful: And I'm thinking, how about if you worried about the envirment, you can opt out instead of banning?

                • try2bhelpful on 20/09/2023 - 16:00

                  @boomramada: No, what I think is people need to adapt how they cook. Just as a matter of interest who do you think will pay for the gas infrastructure if it is left in place? Do you think that the people who opt for gas will pony up the money? Personally I think they will say since they have been offered the option then the Victorian tax payer should be picking up the shortfall. Particularly as more people go towards electricity and there are less people using gas.

                  • boomramada on 20/09/2023 - 16:14

                    @try2bhelpful:

                    Do you think that the people who opt for gas will pony up the money?

                    Yes, its already included as service fee/connection fee etc. So if I build a new house to a road that has a gas connection going to cost tax payers money? Lol 😅

                    • try2bhelpful on 20/09/2023 - 16:19
                      +1

                      @boomramada: I’m talking about the maintenance on the gas plant, the mining of the gas, the piping to get the gas from the plants to the houses. Do the people who want gas intend to maintain this all the way to their houses whilst most people go to electricity?

                      • boomramada on 20/09/2023 - 16:31
                        +3

                        @try2bhelpful:

                        I’m talking about the maintenance on the gas plant

                        When we pay the gas bill, they are all included. My usual gas bill usually service fee is more than the actual usage.

                        And what's with TAX payers' money? So people who use gas don't pay tax? Instead of banning, why not give people a rebate when opt out of gas on new homes?

                        the mining of the gas

                        LOL Gas is one of the major money makers in exporting. Do you even know what you talking about?
                        Australia is like #5 exporters/money makers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_natural_g…

                        • GG57 on 20/09/2023 - 16:39
                          +5

                          @boomramada:

                          Gas is one of the major money makers in exporting.

                          You are correct.
                          Unfortunately a lot of the gas we use is imported, and we pay global prices for that.
                          The profits from the gas that is exported stays with the company, and we know how much tax those types of companies pay in Australia for exporting our natural resources.

                        • try2bhelpful on 20/09/2023 - 16:41
                          +2

                          @boomramada: I think you are missing the point. There is currently a service fee that is across a certain number of users. As the number of users goes down then, theoretically, the usage charge should go up to be borne by the people who are left. People who have installed gas, as they have been told this will be available, will complain that they shouldn’t bear the cost, it should be the tax payer as general revenue. By taking out piped gas you have removed what is, effectively, a duplicate energy system to a particular area.

                          If the gas users guarantee they will cover all the costs of maintaining the entire system for piped gas to the door then go right ahead. However I seriously doubt this will occur. Pull the gas back as emergency generation for electricity and then remove maintaining the to the property infrastructure.

                          • boomramada on 20/09/2023 - 16:53

                            @try2bhelpful: Yeah sux to be a Victorian.

                            • try2bhelpful on 20/09/2023 - 17:01
                              +1

                              @boomramada: Actually I’m happy to be a Victorian. The quicker we wean ourselves off a duplicate delivery system the better. This is just a transition thing. It will be like getting rid of gas powered lights or running the night soil man in parallel with developing sewered systems. New areas that went in would’ve been told they couldn’t use gas lighting and they were need to sewer rather than a night soil man.

                • callum9999 on 20/09/2023 - 18:55
                  +4

                  @boomramada: Did you seriously suggest that the government shouldn't be protecting the environment, we should just let everyone decide if they personally want to be damaging it or not!?

                  If you cared about the environment, you'd understand why that's a ridiculous suggestion!

                  • boomramada on 20/09/2023 - 20:35

                    @callum9999: This is just Mr. Dan's mini achievement to add to his portfolio, "We introduce the following policy to tick the environmental targets".
                    If you care about the environment. Why not shut down the gas exporting together and become $92 billion dollars poorer per year, now that sounds ridiculous isn't it? lol

                    • callum9999 on 21/09/2023 - 01:47

                      @boomramada: Huh? You can say that about anything any politician does.

                      Losing $1 in revenue doesn't make you $1 poorer…. And I'd love to shut it down. I wasn't aware that power had been delegated to me - I wish they said something. I'll do it in the morning.

            • trapper on 23/09/2023 - 11:26

              @boomramada: Wood is carbon neutral.

      • jv on 21/09/2023 - 01:54

        I find the “can’t cook certain foods” a cop out as well.

        So you like to discriminate against people who cook using woks.

        • Jackson on 21/09/2023 - 23:09

          They make induction wok burners now, pricey tho. They can always buy a small gas stove that runs off a bottle for when they need some wok hei. That's what a mate of mines parents did right through my school days

          • jv on 21/09/2023 - 23:17

            @Jackson:

            They can always buy a small gas stove that runs off a bottle

            They'll be banned soon too.

    • Bman17 on 20/09/2023 - 16:02
      +5

      You want a gas connection? Sure, buy a bottle, have one. No one is saying you can't do that

      bottled LPG connection to the indoor kitchen is not allowed either. Roti / Naan are a daily part of a meal for Indian, and Middle Eastern origin. Surely, they can't cook it outside daily and how about wok noodles on an electric stove?

      • GG57 on 20/09/2023 - 16:10
        +3

        bottled LPG connection to the indoor kitchen is not allowed…

        That is precisely the solution that we currently enjoy at our home. An external gas bottle directly connected to our gas stove top.

        • Bman17 on 20/09/2023 - 16:12
          +1

          I meant to say, "will not be allowed" from 1st Jan. No indoor gas cooktop connection from 1st Jan

          • GG57 on 20/09/2023 - 16:14
            +3

            @Bman17: No new indoor gas cooktop connection?
            So I can retain my current cooking set up until the gas stove top needs to be replaced?

            • Bman17 on 20/09/2023 - 16:17

              @GG57: as of now, you can.
              As the roadmap develops further, it may impact existing connections down the track.

              • GG57 on 20/09/2023 - 16:26
                +1

                @Bman17: Cool, but mine isn't an existing "connection" to the gas network. It is an external bottle connected to the gas stove top.

                Let me know when that is notified as not being possible any longer.

              • idonotknowwhy on 22/09/2023 - 10:41

                @Bman17: If I have an existing gas stove top, but it's like 20 years old and will need replacing, does this mean I need to do it ASAP, or is it fine to replace in a few years provided I have the gas pipes already?

                • MITM on 24/09/2023 - 06:21

                  @idonotknowwhy: I doubt you’ll be able to buy a new gas stove top at all. In USA you can’t buy a petrol mower anymore.

          • Jackson on 21/09/2023 - 23:20
            +1

            @Bman17: I have been using induction for over 15 years, it's as good as gas to cook on and better in just about every other way. You can cook anything on it, and if you desperately wanted to use a wok they do make dedicated induction wok burners, but they are a bit pricey and I wouldn't bother. We cook at home multiple times a day and all sorts of food.

            What you could do if you wanted gas for your stove is one of either putting in an outdoor kitchen with a gas bottle, get a BBQ with a wok burner on the side, or pipe gas from a 9kg bottle that sits outside to the stove since if the bottle is outside you are fine. I know people that do the latter option and the gas is cheaper to buy, more energy dense, and if you have two bottles on hand if you run out you just switch bottles. If I was building a new house I would be doing the first option, but absolutely putting induction inside. Induction is cleaner, safer, cheaper, more powerful, easier to clean, let's you reclaim bench space if you aren't cooking, has built in timers, and means you onky need a stove top Kettle, can run off renewables like roof top solar, and doesn't pollute your home with dangerous gasses. If that's not enough reason to ditch gas you have an illogical attachment to it

      • callum9999 on 20/09/2023 - 19:02
        +10

        You can cook Roti, Naan and "wok noodles" with electric.

        If you're trying to make the argument that you want billions of dollars of natural gas infrastructure maintained across the state to ensure your Roti comes out a bit nicer…

        • jv on 21/09/2023 - 01:58

          that you want billions of dollars of natural gas infrastructure maintained

          same goes with:
          * electricity
          * water
          * internet
          * sewage

          When will Dan ban those too?

          • boomramada on 21/09/2023 - 10:13
            +5

            @jv: Dan the man already working on it, about to screw up the airbnb :)

            • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 10:18

              @boomramada: Your profile shows you are in Canberra.
              So, do you own or use an Air BnB business in Victoria?
              If so, what will the actual impact be, on you, by the imposition of a fee of 7.5% levy?

              • jv on 21/09/2023 - 10:20
                +2

                @GG57:

                If so, what will the actual impact be, on you, by the imposition of a fee of 7.5% levy?

                More expensive to pay for your holiday accommodation.

                • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 10:21
                  -1

                  @jv: Only if the business owner passes on that business expense.
                  How much do you think that will be, on the properties that you own or rent?

                  • jv on 21/09/2023 - 10:22
                    +3

                    @GG57:

                    Only if the business owner passes on that business expense.

                    Of course they will…

                    The fees will be passed on to consumers… The result will be a decrease in tourism into Victoria. This will hurt other businesses in tourism. Less revenue for the government. Dan, once again, did not think this through.

                    He should be encouraging more tourism to this state. That is part of his job…

                    • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 10:42

                      @jv: I don't think that a 7.5% levy will decrease tourism, and I doubt there is any actual evidence that it will, but I'm happy to look at any credible citations.
                      Many places around the world charge a levy or tax for tourists. Most people don't even realise they are being charged, including the $60 we all pay to leave Australia by air.
                      If people can't afford the increase in Air BnB costs, they can consider other forms of accommodation, or a shorter stay.

                      • jv on 21/09/2023 - 10:43
                        +1

                        @GG57:

                        I don't think that a 7.5% levy will decrease tourism

                        Of course it will…

                        That is what price increases do… Economics 101.

                        If they didn't, everyone would just increase their prices to anything they wanted…

                        If people can't afford the increase in Air BnB costs, they can consider other forms of accommodation, or a shorter stay.

                        See, you just contradicted yourself… This decreases tourism and tourist dollars.

                        • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 10:45
                          +2

                          @jv: As I said, I'm happy to look at any credible citations that a 7.5% levy will reduce tourism to the state of Victoria.

                • Roney on 21/09/2023 - 17:19
                  +1

                  @jv: And eventually less Air BnB available. No more affordable holidays for us?

              • boomramada on 21/09/2023 - 10:35
                +2

                @GG57: So what going to happen when Dan introduces levy? Prices will go up on Airbnb. Some will drop off renting as Airbnb (Dan's hope), then hotels get a monopoly, and they increase the prices. for me? holiday accommodation goes up in price.

                After looking at this poll, I can see how to screw up government that dan the man running, just to satisfy few nut cases.

                • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 10:44
                  +1

                  @boomramada: It isn't "Dan's levy" though, is it. It is the Victorian Government's levy.
                  I think that very few people will "…drop off renting…Airbnb…" as a result. It is only 7.5%.
                  Who are the nut cases you refer to?

                  • jv on 21/09/2023 - 10:46
                    +3

                    @GG57:

                    It isn't "Dan's levy" though, is it. It is the Victorian Government's levy.

                    Dan is the one who approved it and is introducing it…

                    You are clutching at straws here…

                    • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 10:46

                      @jv: Does it need to be voted on in the Victorian Parliament?

                      • jv on 21/09/2023 - 10:47
                        +1

                        @GG57:

                        Does it need to be voted on in the Victorian Parliament?

                        Yes, Dan dictates to all the labor ministers how to vote.

                        • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 10:51
                          +1

                          @jv: So the Victorian Parliament will vote on the introduction of a levy.
                          We know how that vote will go, as the Labor Party has an overwhelming majority in Parliament, as the outcome from the last Victorian Government election.

                          Of course, if you are not happy with the decisions by the elected government, you can (try to) vote them out at the next election.

                          • jv on 21/09/2023 - 10:52
                            +1

                            @GG57:

                            So the Victorian Parliament will vote on the introduction of a levy.

                            Where Dan controls the votes of the majority…

                          • jv on 21/09/2023 - 10:54

                            @GG57:

                            not happy with the decisions by the elected government

                            He didn't have a mandate from the last election to introduce these new taxes.

                            He's just being deceitful as usual…

                            • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 10:56
                              +3

                              @jv: The Labor Party does have a mandate in Victoria to govern. If you aren't happy, (try to) vote them out at the next election (assuming that another party or group states that they will rescind the levy).

                              Deceitful is incorrect. It has been publicly announced.

                              • jv on 21/09/2023 - 10:59

                                @GG57:

                                The Labor Party does have a mandate in Victoria to govern.

                                I don't recall them going into the last election spruiking new taxes?

                                • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 11:07
                                  +1

                                  @jv: As will all democratic elections, those standing for election put forward their broad policies etc. Nothing different here.

                                  • jv on 21/09/2023 - 11:08

                                    @GG57:

                                    put forward their broad policies

                                    He kept this one hidden from the public though…

                                    • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 11:16

                                      @jv: Really? You think that the Labor party had this levy in its manifest over a year ago in the lead up to the last election, and has only now announced it (to be brought to Parliament)?
                                      And you think that a 7.5% levy on short term accommodation would have been a game changer for the election?

                    • try2bhelpful on 21/09/2023 - 10:47
                      +6

                      @jv: We get it JV, you hate Dan. It is crystal clear from post after post. Then again given a lot of your other posts your denigration of something doesn’t carry a lot of weight.

                      • callum9999 on 21/09/2023 - 12:09
                        +5

                        @try2bhelpful: I blocked them a long time ago - I highly recommend it for anyone wanting to hold on to what is left of their sanity!

                • try2bhelpful on 21/09/2023 - 10:45
                  +2

                  @boomramada: Actually I don’t think Air bnb will drop off. The 7.5% isn’t going to be a deal breaker. However, there will be more money for housing development. Some of us can see the bigger picture, that is all.

                  • jv on 21/09/2023 - 10:49

                    @try2bhelpful:

                    The 7.5% isn’t going to be a deal breaker.

                    Not for many people, but it will definitely decrease tourism and tourist dollars for Victoria as the cost of accommodation in Vic will be increasing relative to other states… Basic economics…

                    • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 10:52
                      +2

                      @jv: Your thoughts, but do you have any creditable citations that a 7.5% levy, which only applies to short-stay rentals, will detrimentally reduce the level of tourism to the state of Victoria?

                      • jv on 21/09/2023 - 10:55
                        +1

                        @GG57:

                        but do you have any creditable citations

                        Yes…
                        https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/law-of-supply-demand.as…

                        Do you have any that say it won't ???

                        • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 11:01
                          +1

                          @jv: That talks about supply and demand.
                          This 7.5% levy only applies to one segment of the tourism market in Victoria. Wouldn't the potential impact be a move to another segment of the tourism market in Victoria (as the state is not totally dependent on that one segment).

                          • jv on 21/09/2023 - 11:06
                            +1

                            @GG57:

                            That talks about supply and demand.

                            Exactly… Read up on it, you might learn something today…

                            Demand is generally considered to slope downward: at higher prices, consumers buy less.

                            • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 11:13
                              +2

                              @jv: From your comments, I'm not sure of your level of understanding.
                              Again, this small levy is only applicable to one small segment of the overall tourism industry in the state. I can't see any basis for a statement that the overall tourism industry will decline.

                          • jv on 21/09/2023 - 11:08
                            +2

                            @GG57:

                            Wouldn't the potential impact be a move to another segment

                            Will cost more, reducing demand and therefore tourism…

                            • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 11:22
                              +1

                              @jv: I did ask for a credible citation.

                              • jv on 21/09/2023 - 11:27
                                +1

                                @GG57:

                                I did ask for a credible citation.

                                It is taught in every commerce degree in the world…

                                Where is your credible citation that adding an extra tax will not reduce demand?

                                • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 11:41
                                  +1

                                  @jv: Again, you appear to be intentionally misleading. A small levy to be applied to only one small segment of the overall tourism market, does not directly lead to a large impact on the overall tourism market.

                                  • jv on 21/09/2023 - 11:42
                                    +2

                                    @GG57:

                                    A small levy to be applied to only one small segment of the overall tourism market, does not directly lead to a large impact on the overall tourism market.

                                    It's not a small levy. It's 7.5%

                                    I did not say it will have a 'large' impact to tourism. But it will reduce tourism and have flow on effects to other business that rely on tourism.

                                    It makes our state less attractive for tourists compared to other states.

                                    You appear to be intentionally misleading

                                    • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 11:56
                                      +2

                                      @jv: You are yet to detail how a 7.5% levy on a small segment of the tourism market will "…reduce tourism…". By how much will this levy "…reduce tourism…"?

                                      If a short term accommodation is $150/night, the 7.5% levy is $11.25. Hardly life-changing.
                                      Even AirBnB has said that a levy of up to 5% would be ok. In the same example, that levy would be $7.50.

                                      Did tourism in Sydney drop when there was an increase to public transport fares?

                                      Meanwhile, the positive outcome of the levy imposition is being totally overlooked.

                                      • jv on 21/09/2023 - 11:57
                                        +1

                                        @GG57:

                                        You are yet to detail how a 7.5% levy on a small segment of the tourism market will "…reduce tourism…". By how much will this levy "…reduce tourism…"?

                                        🤣🤣🤣

                                        Enough to decrease tourism…

                                        • GG57 on 21/09/2023 - 12:00
                                          +1

                                          @jv: You have backed yourself into a corner. Let it go.

                                          • jv on 21/09/2023 - 12:01
                                            +1

                                            @GG57:

                                            You have backed yourself into a corner.

                                            Only in your little mind…

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join