Jump to content
Rocket Salad

The Politics Thread

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Prince said:

ScoMo nailed it on anything relating to the budget as he always does but Shortpantz was strong again on climate change. Pretty even and nothing new from the last two debates. The race has tightened and if the costings on Friday reveal any errors, it will be game on. 

Think its game over, Shorten is the PM elect.   Bolt backing Shorten, its done.  The costings are irrelevant, Labor is starting to own the economy with the we invented it peace and the argument is shifting to the libs have just stuffed the economy and its sticking.  Sco Mo is just a lame duck now, even shorter period PM then Abbott.  At least he wont qualify for the trimmings which will save us taxpayers some dollars.

Sports bet now has labor at 1.19 and libs blown out to 4.25.

Even more interesting - they have abbott and dutton, both of them together, ie not separate, both have to lose,  to lose their seats at $1.80.    

they have labor to take qld paying odds of $1.01

labor to take wa at 1.01

labor to take SA at 1.01

Labor to take tas at 1.75

labor to take act at 1.07.

labor to take the nt at 1.24.

libs to take vic at 1.25

libs to take nsw at 1.55

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Oompa Loompa said:

Think its game over, Shorten is the PM elect.   Bolt backing Shorten, its done.  The costings are irrelevant, Labor is starting to own the economy with the we invented it peace and the argument is shifting to the libs have just stuffed the economy and its sticking.  Sco Mo is just a lame duck now, even shorter period PM then Abbott.  At least he wont qualify for the trimmings which will save us taxpayers some dollars.

 

 

I think everyone knows labor doesn't "own' the economy and its their achilles heal, and the costings are not irrelevant as shortpantz has copped out by giving no detail to any of his policies as yet, and the intelligent voters aren't all falling for the 'doesnt matter about what the cost of the emissions target will be, it is more of a cost if we do nothing" line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the emissions target costs, one of the issues I see come up again and again on our local FB group is the "cost" of going to EV's. Other than the fact that governments will have to find a new way of funding roads other than fuel excise (I know that is only part of it), the move is inevitable. Major countries around the world are setting similar targets, so manufacturers will be building what they want. We don't have our own car industry any more, so we can't dictate what cars get built. If Europe want 50% EV's by a certain time, that's what they will build.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't the libs own modelling (or whatever you call it) show that by 2030 nearly 50% of new car sales could be EV?  The difference being that Labor want to make that policy, whereas lnp saw it as a possibility?

Listening to pricey yesterday saying that the article about BS's mum cemented the win for Labor, and that ScoMo's people were in damage control mode over it and over BS's response to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Prince said:

I think everyone knows labor doesn't "own' the economy and its their achilles heal, and the costings are not irrelevant as shortpantz has copped out by giving no detail to any of his policies as yet, and the intelligent voters aren't all falling for the 'doesnt matter about what the cost of the emissions target will be, it is more of a cost if we do nothing" line. 

How would you cost emissions. Like anything else they are models with assumptions, errors, different data sets. It is easy to find some one who will say your costing is wrong because mine is right.

All policies have a cost are you worried about the cost of doing nothing and burning more coal. Doing nothing is a policy that needs to be costed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the 50 % renewable energy target and the 45% reduction in emissions that Labor has promised with no plan how to get there that we all should be worried about. If we are all driving EV's it isn't going to make much difference. He hasn't said it yet, but there is no doubt labor will introduce a carbon tax. He won't say it because we know what happened when they tried this last time. What I can't stand about labor is they have no concept about the ramifications of some of their policies. I.e, the effect on the last of our manufacturing businesses, the effect on the housing and rental market for their negative gear policy, the effect on the job market on reinstating the penalty rates and so on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Prince said:

I think everyone knows labor doesn't "own' the economy and its their achilles heal, and the costings are not irrelevant as shortpantz has copped out by giving no detail to any of his policies as yet, and the intelligent voters aren't all falling for the 'doesnt matter about what the cost of the emissions target will be, it is more of a cost if we do nothing" line. 

What government does own the economy:

Riddle me this: if “free market” politicians think that the role of governments is to get out of the way, then what do they do all day while “managing the economy”?

government crows about the million jobs it created since coming to office, the reality is that population growth of 1.7 million people (over 15 years old) during the same period “created” those jobs.

The economy has a far bigger impact on the budget than the budget has on the economy.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/commentisfree/2019/apr/03/the-coalition-says-the-silliest-things-about-economic-management

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Oompa Loompa said:

Think its game over, Shorten is the PM elect.   Bolt backing Shorten, its done.  The costings are irrelevant, Labor is starting to own the economy with the we invented it peace and the argument is shifting to the libs have just stuffed the economy and its sticking.  Sco Mo is just a lame duck now, even shorter period PM then Abbott.  At least he wont qualify for the trimmings which will save us taxpayers some dollars.

Sports bet now has labor at 1.19 and libs blown out to 4.25.

Even more interesting - they have abbott and dutton, both of them together, ie not separate, both have to lose,  to lose their seats at $1.80.    

they have labor to take qld paying odds of $1.01

labor to take wa at 1.01

labor to take SA at 1.01

Labor to take tas at 1.75

labor to take act at 1.07.

labor to take the nt at 1.24.

libs to take vic at 1.25

libs to take nsw at 1.55

 

Hillary Clinton was unbackable on the morning of the 2016 election

How did that work out for her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BarryBevan said:

How would you cost emissions. Like anything else they are models with assumptions, errors, different data sets. It is easy to find some one who will say your costing is wrong because mine is right.

All policies have a cost are you worried about the cost of doing nothing and burning more coal. Doing nothing is a policy that needs to be costed.

The question of the cost of doing nothing is yet another disingenuous furphy

That's because the effect of Shorten's policy would be exactly the same as the 'policy' of doing nothing.  Which as Australia's chief scientist has confirmed, would be zero

Any cost attributable to a policy which does nothing is simply pissing money up against the wall.  Which is of course one of the few things that Labor is actually good at

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

On the emissions target costs

No-one cares about the cost. Greenies would happily trade their mothers so what's a few hundred billion - especially if it's not released.

If anyone thinks we're going to get accurate costs on anything they're kidding themselves. Bill Shorten can get away with just saying "it costs more to do nothing" which is incredibly stupid because we don't know the cost of either.

Seriously, any pollie can say anything - knowing full well there is no consequence of spouting total bullshit. How many times have we heard an incoming government say "the books were far worse than expected so we can't do what we said".

Bill Shorten is using the classic union tactic of ambit claims. Cure cancer? Sure we can!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

Luckily for Ex you didn't reference one of evil Rupert's papers, so he can take this as gospel 

Nah. I believe the Guardian as much as Rupert's papers. It just leans the other way. If I see the same fact in both it becomes a bit more believable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Oompa Loompa said:

Lol, good line, logic and proof when discussing religion. Quite enjoyed reading that.

What I was saying,and I say this as a born bred sutho boy,  unlike most religions that sit and kneel, the pentecostals at sutho sing and dance, speak in tongues and take a dip in the pool down the front.  That is the pentecostal at Sutho, no idea re hillsong etc, but at Sutho they do all this. They step forward, they dont turn the other cheek.  

 

That makes less than zero sense. Turning the other cheek is clearly about being nice to your enemies, not retaliating and in fact being willing to be taken advantage of again. It's about other PEOPLE.

It has nothing to do with how you worship your God, or how you respond to him, or who to vote for.

We weren't discussing religion, we were discussing politics. Better to focus on policy instead of random cryptic messages and images that don't make sense. 

If you do want to discuss religion start a thread on what Pentecostals get wrong and I'll join in and agree with you on much of it ;) 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

Hillary Clinton was unbackable on the morning of the 2016 election

How did that work out for her?

lol.....could you list the odds of each  US State the morning of the election.  No middle america gun lobby here scared of losing their guns, just ordinary Australians wanting to retire before they turn 70, people wanting penalty rates for not having the luxury of a nice monday to friday office job, and people worried about the economy as it goes pear shaped under the continued mis management of the liberal party of australia, wether abbott or sco mo.  

ffs, even andrew bolt was saying how crap sco mo was last night.

Sco mo should just resign and save us a bi election.  its over, Shorten is the PM elect, the only question now is do we have to wait for booths to shut in WA for Shorten to be PM.

 

Edited by Oompa Loompa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Oompa Loompa said:

lol.....could you list the odds of each  US State the morning of the election. 

Since that would neither prove nor disprove my point, I'm not sure why you are asking 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/04/2019 at 6:34 PM, XCOM.! said:

He was pretty clear on the inheritance tax claims of the Libs - "It is a lie. It is a lie. It is a lie."

The "no plans for" response to the question regarding superannuation was a foot-in-mouth job that he owned up to - he thought he was being asked if there were any additional taxes planned or unannounced, other than the changes they'd already publicly announced in their policy, and he then restated what their policy is.

I think Labor have been pretty clear about their policies and the $34b revenue they should provide them with (which is pretty comfortable position) and they don't need to be sneaky about anything. Obviously the big risk in that approach is the "great big tax increase" campaign the Libs will run against them, and whether or not they can articulate facts from fiction sufficiently for the average voter.

If you want some relatively balanced commentary around pre-election tax claims: https://blog.taxinstitute.com.au/2019/04/baiting-other-side-sorting-myths-from.html?m=1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

The question of the cost of doing nothing is yet another disingenuous furphy

That's because the effect of Shorten's policy would be exactly the same as the 'policy' of doing nothing.  Which as Australia's chief scientist has confirmed, would be zero

Any cost attributable to a policy which does nothing is simply pissing money up against the wall.  Which is of course one of the few things that Labor is actually good at

You have to base anything against the status quo to have a baseline. If the cost of doing nothing is we are extinct as a species within 100 years, okay. Are you saying the impact of us doing anything won't change it?

I can't see the reference from the Chief Scientist, but he seems to support doing something:

https://theconversation.com/the-science-is-clear-we-have-to-start-creating-our-low-carbon-future-today-104774

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

The question of the cost of doing nothing is yet another disingenuous furphy

That's because the effect of Shorten's policy would be exactly the same as the 'policy' of doing nothing.  Which as Australia's chief scientist has confirmed, would be zero

Any cost attributable to a policy which does nothing is simply pissing money up against the wall.  Which is of course one of the few things that Labor is actually good at

https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/uploads/39b9568472864b73a1b1c63e99a0aed5.pdf

Here is the basics of it. Maybe you can explain your position and link to facts, or maybe just stick to saying stuff to intentionally antagonise people online, which you seem to really enjoy , regardless of the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

Since that would neither prove nor disprove my point, I'm not sure why you are asking 

Not sure why, it would destroy your point. Like Shorten has destroyed Sco Mo's worst Government in Australia's history Saturday week for the Australian people on behalf of the Australian people.

Boom, like Sco Mo at Engadine Maccas in 97, but less brown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

You have to base anything against the status quo to have a baseline. If the cost of doing nothing is we are extinct as a species within 100 years, okay. Are you saying the impact of us doing anything won't change it?

I can't see the reference from the Chief Scientist, but he seems to support doing something:

https://theconversation.com/the-science-is-clear-we-have-to-start-creating-our-low-carbon-future-today-104774

The above shows the chief scientist confirming that if Australia ceased to exist, the impact to the climate would be "virtually nothing"

That impact (virtually nothing) is the same, whether it's the status quo, Bill's policy, Scott's policy or doing nothing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, dazaau said:

 

If you do want to discuss religion start a thread on what Pentecostals get wrong and I'll join in and agree with you on much of it ;) 

 

 

 

Or instead bring it up in the Tim Minchin thread...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/uploads/39b9568472864b73a1b1c63e99a0aed5.pdf

Here is the basics of it. Maybe you can explain your position and link to facts, or maybe just stick to saying stuff to intentionally antagonise people online, which you seem to really enjoy , regardless of the topic.

Page one of your document states that it is a political document, not a scientific one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

The above shows the chief scientist confirming that if Australia ceased to exist, the impact to the climate would be "virtually nothing"

That impact (virtually nothing) is the same, whether it's the status quo, Bill's policy, Scott's policy or doing nothing

Fair to say that the leaders in the biggest countries (eg US and China) aren’t referencing what Australia is / isn’t doing when setting their policies impacting emissions.

Edited by trilobite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, trilobite said:

Fair to say that the leaders in the biggest countries (eg US, China, India, etc) aren’t referencing what Australia is / isn’t doing when setting their policies impacting emissions.

 

8 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

The above shows the chief scientist confirming that if Australia ceased to exist, the impact to the climate would be "virtually nothing"

That impact (virtually nothing) is the same, whether it's the status quo, Bill's policy, Scott's policy or doing nothing

If all the other nations did something and the US and China didn't would that change anything. Maybe if some nations start then maybe people will join or I suppose you can just say we are all going to die so who cares.

Do nothing, poke the bear piss people off. do what ever you want Jim. totally unrelated question but when you go out to pubs or did in the past did you get punched out a lot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

 

If all the other nations did something and the US and China didn't would that change anything. Maybe if some nations start then maybe people will join or I suppose you can just say we are all going to die so who cares.

Do nothing, poke the bear piss people off. do what ever you want Jim. totally unrelated question but when you go out to pubs or did in the past did you get punched out a lot?

The whole green thing is a minefield, like how electronic cars have a much greater environmental footprint than fossil fuel cars and the batteries are a toxic nightmare.

It's hard to know what is right and wrong. This is 8 years old though so as tech improves...

"Under present conditions, the overall carbon footprint of a battery-powered car "is similar to that of a conventional car with a combustion engine, regardless of its size." That's the conclusion of a 2011 study by the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IFEU) in Heidelberg"

Everything aaside though no matter what we should all want the cleanest air possible regardless of whether climate change is man made or not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, trilobite said:

Fair to say that the leaders in the biggest countries (eg US and China) aren’t referencing what Australia is / isn’t doing when setting their policies impacting emissions.

It's more likely that the leaders of those other countries are laughing at us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Energy-intensive battery production The production of electric vehicles currently poses the biggest environmental problem. According to a study by the Fraunhofer Institute for Building Physics, it takes more than twice the amount of energy to produce an electric car as a conventional one.

The main reason for that is the battery. The institute estimates that each kilowatt hour of battery capacity involves 125 kilograms (276 pounds) of CO2 emissions. For a 22 kilowatt-hour battery for a BMW i3, this translates into almost 3 tons of CO2. A study by the IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute found that the greenhouse gas burden of current battery production is 150 to 200 kilograms CO2 per kWh. 

Battery manufacturing with current technology requires 350 to 650 Megajoule of energy per kWh, the study says. Batteries also need to be made from minerals such as copper and cobalt, and rare earths like neodymium. Mining activities in countries like China or the Democratic Republic of Congo often cause human rights violations and vast ecological devastation: deforestation, polluted rivers, contaminated soil.

In addition, many automakers use aluminum to build the bodies of e-cars, and a tremendous amount of energy is required to process bauxite ore into the lightweight metal."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

 

If all the other nations did something and the US and China didn't would that change anything. Maybe if some nations start then maybe people will join or I suppose you can just say we are all going to die so who cares.

Do nothing, poke the bear piss people off. do what ever you want Jim. totally unrelated question but when you go out to pubs or did in the past did you get punched out a lot?

If Australia ceased to exist, just the increase in China's emissions would make up for ours in less than a year.  That's how insignificant we really are

And no amount of hissy fitting from you will change that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the election over and Shorten home, and stable Government returning to Australia with the turnstile economy destroying Liberals punted from office by the Australian people next Saturday, should we close the thread and come back in three years? 

 

Nah, to many laughs to be had I reckon...lol

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another lib candidate to bite the dust, with him being asked to resign.

This is almost crazier than the dual citizenship saga.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BarryBevan said:

 

If all the other nations did something and the US and China didn't would that change anything. Maybe if some nations start then maybe people will join or I suppose you can just say we are all going to die so who cares.

Do nothing, poke the bear piss people off. do what ever you want Jim. totally unrelated question but when you go out to pubs or did in the past did you get punched out a lot?

gees bazz, jimbo's all right.  he's just having some fun. and when he use to go to pubs, total chick magnet, never seen anything like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

It's more likely that the leaders of those other countries are laughing at us

With Abbott, and now ScoMo as PM's, I have no doubt.

Things won't get much better in the near future either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, goughy said:

Another lib candidate to bite the dust, with him being asked to resign.

This is almost crazier than the dual citizenship saga.

so thats most of the front bench leaving and their replacements..... im starting to think its not fair calling sco mo the night watchmen as there is nobody left.  At least Abbott is honest.... i'll be back if needed..lol.

what about failed treasurer hockey announcing he is coming home before he is sacked.   

Rome is burning, nero is playing.  we havent had a govt quitting like this since the drovers dog won in 83.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

With Abbott, and now ScoMo as PM's, I have no doubt.

Things won't get much better in the near future either.

On the bright side, as a Qlder you have the fortune of being able to vote for not 1, but 5 candidates In Fraser Anning’s party 🤔

 

E9A88A45-EEAC-43D1-9DE3-35C486387B63.jpeg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Oompa Loompa said:

With the election over and Shorten home, and stable Government returning to Australia with the turnstile economy destroying Liberals punted from office by the Australian people next Saturday, should we close the thread and come back in three years? 

 

 

 

 

As Richo says, Shorten would be best going on a cruise until next Saturday. The more people get to know him the more people realise he aint PM material. What was looking like a landslide 6 months ago is now only a possible 8-10 seat win and that's only thanks to the green preferences which Shorten will pick up thanks to his, "don't worry about the cost" environment policy.

Start saving your money kids as you will need it to get through the next 3 years until the Libs get things back on track again...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Prince said:

As Richo says, Shorten would be best going on a cruise until next Saturday. The more people get to know him the more people realise he aint PM material. What was looking like a landslide 6 months ago is now only a possible 8-10 seat win and that's only thanks to the green preferences which Shorten will pick up thanks to his, "don't worry about the cost" environment policy.

Start saving your money kids as you will need it to get through the next 3 years until the Libs get things back on track again...

I thought the Libs were coming back but a poll yesterday has Labor kicking again. Also I think the bookies have shortened (pun intended) Labor’s odds each day since last Tue. Maybe it’s been the debates?

A week is a long time in politics though, anything could happen I guess 

Edited by Mike Del

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mike Del said:

I thought the Libs were coming back but a poll yesterday has Labor kicking again. Also I think the bookies have shortened (pun intended) Labor’s odds each day since last Tue. Maybe it’s been the debates?

A week is a long time in politics though, anything could happen I guess 

yeah I know... guess you have to look on the bright side though.  

wait...there is no bright side....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mike Del said:

I thought the Libs were coming back but a poll yesterday has Labor kicking again. Also I think the bookies have shortened (pun intended) Labor’s odds each day since last Tue. Maybe it’s been the debates?

A week is a long time in politics though, anything could happen I guess 

They were saying on the ABC last week, that those polls have something like a +-3% merging of error.  Taking that into account they are really saying we're looking at anything from an LNP win to a Labor landslide victory, and anywhere in between.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the above that Bill and labor get in.

Is it to early to start a sweepstake on how long he lasts as prime minister before getting shafted by his own party?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rory-dognz said:

Given the above that Bill and labor get in.

Is it to early to start a sweepstake on how long he lasts as prime minister before getting shafted by his own party?

Bill is safe.  That's because there isn't another Bill running around with a knife in his hand 

I'm curious to see how he's going to convince Donald Trump to take more people from Manus, after having had referred to him as "barking mad" a couple of years back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure Trump is used to doing deals with people that have called him worse!  That's almost a compliment!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, more said:

The whole green thing is a minefield, like how electronic cars have a much greater environmental footprint than fossil fuel cars and the batteries are a toxic nightmare.

It's hard to know what is right and wrong. This is 8 years old though so as tech improves...

<snip>

Everything aaside though no matter what we should all want the cleanest air possible regardless of whether climate change is man made or not.

This is very true and the same argument goes for nuclear power.  Fukushima was forty year old technology and underwent a major earthquake followed by a tsunami so save being hit by an asteroid there wasn't much else could have gone wrong.  Later investigations showed a number of issues with safety procedures and still the likely toll is perhaps a few hundred people.  To put this in context, around 18,500 died from the earthquake and tsunami.  With new technology, masses of land away from densely populated areas, very stable geology and safe places to store the waste Australia not having nuclear in it's power mix for the future is purely driven by ideology.

6 hours ago, Prince said:

yeah I know... guess you have to look on the bright side though.  

wait...there is no bright side....

The bright side is that Labor and Liberal are so damn close to each other on most issues you could find half of either party that would be comfortable on the other side.  A too-short election cycle means that devastatingly high taxes simply won't happen and for the most part it will be business as usual.  Labor will have issues getting stuff through the senate just as the coalition has due to having to deal with disparate minor players.  The only threat to that is if the Greens get enough seats to tip the ALP over the edge by themselves but that is fairly unlikely.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't one of the big issues with Fukushima that a sea wall was built under spec?  One thing you don't short cut on, nuclear power.  Yet it seems it still happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't recall if that's the case or if building to spec would have prevented the tsunami from shutting off the emergency power that prevented proper cooling and thus the "meltdown."  It also needs be acknowledge that eight of the 11 reactors operated perfectly as they should and were shut down safely.

So far the deaths due to radiation from Chernobyl, Three-mile Island and Fukushima total 200 people (all from the Chernobyl.)  That's right, 200 deaths in 40 years.  It's precisely because of its potential danger that it is so incredibly safe.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chernobyl was years out of date even by 1986 standard

As you say, the sole reason we don't use our vast stores of uranium here is ridiculous and unscientific ideology 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

Chernobyl was years out of date even by 1986 standard

As you say, the sole reason we don't use our vast stores of uranium here is ridiculous and unscientific ideology 

 

Science has never really been the forte of either side of politics.

Edit to note: Our current science minister worked as an Engineer in coal fired power stations before entering parliament. She probably gets on well with our Environment Minister, Mr Coal.

Edited by Ex-Hasbeen
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

Science has never really been the forte of either side of politics.

Edit to note: Our current science minister worked as an Engineer in coal fired power stations before entering parliament. She probably gets on well with our Environment Minister, Mr Coal.

We have a science minister? She is very quiet.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stikman said:

With new technology, masses of land away from densely populated areas, very stable geology and safe places to store the waste Australia not having nuclear in it's power mix for the future is purely driven by ideology.

The possibility of nuclear cropped up about 6 months ago on this thread.

Where is an electorally and environmentally feasible place to build a nuclear power plant in Australia?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Paul Every said:

The possibility of nuclear cropped up about 6 months ago on this thread.

Where is an electorally and environmentally feasible place to build a nuclear power plant in Australia?

And that's the dumb bit.  Of course they will ride roughshod over people that don't want wind turbines near them when it suits.

Good government makes difficult decisions because they are the right thing to do, not just when they won't face any backlash.  Neither side could claim to be able to form a good government.  Populist cowards the lot of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...