Self Evident

The Australian ran a story today, that is also the 'Headline' running on the newsagents poster boards 'Business Joins Revolt' read the article for yourself.
My only comment is this, the problem with 'Climate change' is that it is 'Unsustainable' and thing about unsustainable is that the world can not actually support it.
So the Australian Business Council has looked at the books of the biggest polluters and then calculated the impact of an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) as proposed by the Rudd government for implementation in 2010.
The fact that the Australian Business Council has concluded that some of the businesses would have to shut down, cut jobs or move overseas if an ETS is introduced suggests that they might be 'Unsustainable'
What I don't understand is that the Australian (that ran a campaign about being an "informed" Australian) seems to give off the vibe that this is somehow bad.
To me what this suggests is that 'If some businesses actually had to pay the cost of the damage they are doing they would become unfeasible' is the point of an ETS. I mean surely at some point tackling climate change means that we will have to stop doing some things we are currently doing right?
So what does this prove if not that the ETS is already working? That some industries are concluding that the cost of their business is too great? If they want to move to China then go right ahead. The resources will still be here, the pollution can be there for as long as they can sustain it.