Emission Trading and climate change

Page 148 of 377 FirstFirst ... 48 98 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 198 248 ... LastLast
Results 7,351 to 7,400 of 18819
  1. #7351
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    Can you show me the debt levels under the last four governments?

    Can you show me the deficit or surplus budgets under the last four governments?

    I'm just curious to see these "flat lines" after the bureaucracy has buffed out the wrinkles.
    I could if I could be bothered to do the Google to confirm the numbers but since you & I (broadly) already know the answer then why would/should I?

    I would ask in return though....can you show me the difference that each of those deficits and surpluses have made to your day-to-day way of life? I'll wager you can't. Well I can't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    And by your bizarre and failed logic, policies on your fictional "Global Warming" delusion are irrelevant anyway, as the government policies of the day are all buffed out to be indistinguishable. So whether a government introduces a "Cool down the Planet Earth TAX" or not, there will be no difference after implementation? Are you seriously buying what you're selling?
    That's right. Yes. Yes (haven't you been selling the same thing?).
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  2. #7352
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    Hands up any clown who thinks this is value for money?
    Depends how much money we get back. Had a look at our terms of trade recently?
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  3. #7353
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    Depends how much money we get back. Had a look at our terms of trade recently?
    How much money back? Have you looked at the dills running the country lately. I would have my money on the second coming happening before this Govt ever got any money back in the future from any of their dopey schemes. I would have to be living in a cave with a rock rolled across the entrance not to realize this
    regards inter

  4. #7354
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Data is always the nemesis of this cult.

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    Your 'information' (like mine) is tainted by your perceptions. I don't percieve a significant difference. You do.
    Perceive this!


    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    You may ask why they are pushing all these taxes so much. Mining taxes, flood taxes, Carbon Dioxide Taxes, cigarette taxes, alcohol taxes, taxes on taxes on taxes???

    Someone has to pay back all this DEBT from useless spending and waste. JuLIAR has nominated you!



    This is an old graph that only went to $130 billion.

    It is currently about $190 billion and rising every day.

    Cool huh!
    Yeh, it's so difficult to "perceive" any difference.

    This is not my information or your information, it is a fact!

    Except this update: Total Commonwealth Government Securities on Issue - $206,892m

    $207 billion debt and skyrocketing!!!

    Your continued semantic distraction and apologist stance for both this cult and this useless government makes you no different to them.

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    I would ask in return though....can you show me the difference that each of those deficits and surpluses have made to your day-to-day way of life? I'll wager you can't. Well I can't.
    Let me know if you have any friends or family in the public health system. I'll be curious if the $10 billion in interest per year we are paying on this debt could have made a difference to their day-to-day life?

    Let me know if you have any friends or family with chronic disabilities. Ask them if the $10 billion in interest per year we are paying on this debt could have made a difference to their day-to-day life?

    As for my day-to-day life, I'm alright thanks Jack! A bit less disposable income thanks to these stupid taxes, soon to include the Carbon Dioxide TAX. But I prefer to think of my country before myself. It's the burden us grunts have to bear I guess.

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    End of story.
    I don't think so champ.

  5. #7355
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Learn to separate facts from perceptions and you will denounce this cult.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    I have posted much information that is significantly different between the last government and this one. And this is but a sample. Are you a "denier" of this information, or does your reticular activating system need some tweaking?
    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    Your 'information' (like mine) is tainted by your perceptions. I don't percieve a significant difference.
    Perceive this!

    Andrew Bolt

    Saturday, July 24, 2010 at 12:13pm



    On Channel 9ís Today show this morning I again was asked if Tony Abbott could really stop the boats, as if this trade was somehow beyond the power of politicians to affect. I think the best proof that Abbott can indeed stop the boats, and that Julia Gillard has increased them lies in the above Department of Immigration graph, two which Iíve added the two dots and the explanatory words.
    The yellow dot marks when John Howard turned back the Tampa and introduced the Pacific Solution, in August and September 2001. The red dot marks on 31 July 2008, when Kevin Rudd, having already abolished the Pacific Solution four months earlier, announced a dramatic weakening of Howardís other boat people laws. Rudd was following a blueprint largely of Julia Gillardís own design.
    What the graph doesnít show is that since that red dot, up to 170 boat people have died at sea trying to get here. We might with justice say that Labor lured them to their deaths.
    (Just an aside, but why have the Liberals never used this case-closed graphic themselves?)



    Proof that Gillard brought in the boats that Howard stopped | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog
    Again, this is not my information or your information, it is a fact.


    The AGW hypothesis cult ignores facts of this nature regularly and enables this corrupt and inept government to foist an environmentally useless yet economically destructive TAX on all Australians.


    The data is plain for all to see. You just have to be willing to open your eyes.


    But for you, you perceive no change to the data lines on charts above, but you "perceive" a massive and unprecedented spike in the last 100 years data below?





    I hope your powers of perception are improving.

  6. #7356
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default What do you expect when you see how they run union accounts?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    The best part is we get ZERO temperature change for this.

    Hands up any clown who thinks this is value for money?

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    Depends how much money we get back.
    You really don't get this do you?

    We don't get any money back. These hundreds of billions of Australian taxpayers dollars will be shipped out to shonky (mostly African) nations who "promise" not to cut down trees. A lot of them are still cutting down their own people, but JuLIAR says "trust them". She certainly has earned our trust, not!

    Do you really think these shonks are going to send any money back?

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    Had a look at our terms of trade recently?
    This isn't driven by the Carbon Dioxide TAX, but will soon be reduced by it. I'll post some stuff soon on this. But you are right, we are facing massively high national income levels due to high terms of trade. The question then is - What the hell is the government doing with all this money? Or - Why are we racking up unprecedented national debts AND spending all our savings AND raising more TAXES while receiving this massive national income?

    This time, the big jump in demand for iron ore, coal and now gas from China and other emerging market economies is fuelling big gains in export prices and national income.

    But the surge in export prices also has boosted spending power across the nation by stoking job growth, company profits and government tax revenue.

    We need to prepare for this by saving more of today's income surge, investing more of it in growth and promoting policies that will make the economy more flexible.

    Terms of trade not seen in 140 years | The Australian
    I say again, the most corrupt and inept government this country has ever seen!

  7. #7357
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default What is the opportunity cost?

    How much time, effort and energy has been wasted on this cult?

    Now they waste even more time and space, and push out people with real problems to fuel their cultish beliefs that their "status" is higher than others who can't afford the hybrids.


    Reader Waxing Gibberish wonders why greens are considered more crippled than the disabled:
    I parked underneath the Darling Harbour exhibition center the other night and noticed that you can park closer to the exit if youíre Ďgreení than if youíre disabled.
    To recognise a mental disability? | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog
    So the rich latte drinkers get a good parking spot anyway.

  8. #7358
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Will the Footy Tax kill the Carbon DioxideTax?

    PRIME Minister Julia Gillard faces a damaging AFL revolt over pokies reforms with club presidents calling crisis talks tomorrow over the changes.

    One AFL president, who asked not be named, said: ''This is not about politics, this is about survival.


    ''The clubs are on the hook for millions of dollars on pokies. We've spent millions buying the machines and now the Government goes bang and changes the rules, undermining our revenues.''


    Under his agreement with Ms Gillard, Mr Wilkie demanded mandatory pre-commitment by the 2012 Budget, forcing punters to register for smartcard or PIN before betting.


    But if the reforms don't pass Parliament, Mr Wilkie, who helped deliver government to Labor, is threatening to switch his support to Tony Abbott.


    Collingwood president Eddie McGuire told Channel 9 on Friday that clubs were endangered by the changes.


    "To suddenly out of nowhere, without any consultation, to have what looks like being a footy tax imposed is going to hit football clubs right between the eyes," he said.


    Hawthorn president Jeff Kennett yesterday predicted the Wilkie amendments would fail.


    AFL pokies revolt hits Prime Minister Julia Gillard | Herald Sun
    If Wilkie doesn't get his "Footy TAX", then he'll dump JuLIAR and we won't get the Carbon Dioxide TAX either. Then NONE of these ridiculous taxes will be introduced.

    We can but dream that this comes to pass.

    Or that Craig Thomson has an attack of the guilts and quits.

  9. #7359
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    The link is a Treasury document with some historical revenue/spending information along with some other bits and pieces. A pretty dry piece of information but a longer time frame than some of the short term graphs we see pushed by one side or the other.
    http://cache.treasury.gov.au/budget/.../bp1_bst10.pdf

    What it doesn't give is just where the claimed increased spending is going, but both sides and the press could do a better job of explaining what new spending there is, and if the problem is really just increases flowing from existing programs rather than any major blowout. Have a look at spending growth, 2001 and 2009 (stimulus) are two big years, however spending as a percentage of GDP has remained fairly steady since 1976 moving between a band of 24% to 26% (currently 26%). I wouldn't pay any attention to the forcast years, world events will have knocked our forcast GDP growth and these numbers should be assumed to be unreliable in the face of uncertainty.

    Although tax revenue has grown up until 2008 the GFC impacts have seen it steady, not increase, and then drop a little in 2010, using the % of GDP as a more meaningful measure it has dropped from around 25% in 2008 to around 22% in 2010 with a similar estimate for 2011 and that is the real problem, stagnant revenue in collections, or a decline in GDP terms with spending slightly higher than the average over the last decade. In real terms it (tax) was fairly steady at around 25% during the last decade up until the GFC and as a result has now dropped to around that 22% of GDP.

    Ignoring political standpoints to fix the problems we either have to wait for the economy to move back to growth, raise taxes or cut programs to bring things back to the black. All the talk of better or worse money managers is nothing but talk, in simple terms there is probably no spending blowouts to identify, or if there are they are insufficient to "fix" any deficit. The uncomfortable truth may simply be that the increased spending (other than the stimulus) is a function of the size of the economy rather than increases from any recent spending decisions. This means to balance the books something has to be cut, and I can't see either side to keen to do that, so deficits may be with us for some time.

  10. #7360
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    How much money back? Have you looked at the dills running the country lately. I would have my money on the second coming happening before this Govt ever got any money back in the future from any of their dopey schemes.
    Haha!! As for the dills that think they run the country........which particular dills are you refering to? There's quite a number of them and not just the ones that get voted for....

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    I would have to be living in a cave with a rock rolled across the entrance not to realize this
    Ahhh........so that's my problem!
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  11. #7361
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    Yeh, it's so difficult to "perceive" any difference.

    This is not my information or your information, it is a fact!

    Except this update: Total Commonwealth Government Securities on Issue - $206,892m

    $207 billion debt and skyrocketing!!!
    It's not about facts. It's about whether you a) accept the facts and b) percieve them as a problem. $207 billion debt is only a problem if you can't pay it back. Since our national debt stands at roughly 20 to 25% of our national annual income then the capacity to pay it back is well within our grasp.

    Since most city based punters in this country seem to have mortgages that stand as high as 500% of the annual household income........you can understand the depth of my antipathy to your economic perceptions.
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  12. #7362
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    Perceive this!

    Again, this is not my information or your information, it is a fact.

    The AGW hypothesis cult ignores facts of this nature regularly and enables this corrupt and inept government to foist an environmentally useless yet economically destructive TAX on all Australians.

    The data is plain for all to see. You just have to be willing to open your eyes.
    Yes it is a bunch of facts. Question is whetheryou percieve the fact to be a) real and b) a problem worth acting on.

    With respect to the first beat up on the totally not relevant topic of boat based immigration....yes it is real but no I don't percieve it to be a problem

    With respect to the second graphic that is topic related (congratulations)...I'm happy to accept the data on the face of it but......I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to say except something along the lines of "it's happened before".....to which I respond.....no poo, Sherlock.....but the wrinkle is that, unlike previous epidsodes, human civilisation was not quite at the scale that it is today.....
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  13. #7363
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    How much time, effort and energy has been wasted on this cult?

    Now they waste even more time and space, and push out people with real problems to fuel their cultish beliefs that their "status" is higher than others who can't afford the hybrids.

    So the rich latte drinkers get a good parking spot anyway.
    Actually.....I think they might be pandering to the Government fleets (and therefore the lure of Government contracts) rather than the rich latte drinkers. Most hybrids around today are purchased by fleet buyers rather than private individuals.

    Smart thinking by the building owner.
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  14. #7364
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    Haha!! As for the dills that think they run the country........which particular dills are you refering to? There's quite a number of them and not just the ones that get voted for....

    They aren't the local footy side your supporting you know, its has a bit more depth than that, the dills are the ones who lied to get voted in, the others are the the little hitler bureaucrats with a badge that follow the dills legislation & will happily spend $100 to have a low chance at getting back $1

    Ahhh........so that's my problem!

    Sometimes called "a light bulb moment"

    regards inter

  15. #7365
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    If you got rid of all those who told or used party fibs in their electioneering there wouldn't be many if any left in parliament. As for the bureaucrats, the Australian lot aren't that bad, there are exceptions but the bulk are good. Political appointees and some of the over paid contractors on the other hand are an entirely different matter.

  16. #7366
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    They aren't the local footy side your supporting you know, its has a bit more depth than that,
    Really? I've seen more depth in a crepe pan than in the standard of political jiggerypokery over the last two decades.

    As for the self centred sheep who vote for them.....the less said the better.

    I support whichever candidate irritates the current local member the most at the time of the election...in whichever electorate I happen to occupy at the time. Makes it hard when the member is a National...there's just too many irritants to pick from sometimes. At least a Labor canditate can hate with some decisiveness
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  17. #7367
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    Sometimes called "a light bulb moment"
    Doubt it. I've only got candles in my place.
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  18. #7368
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    Doubt it. I've only got candles in my place.
    Be carefull at night for a stray puff of wind when you roll the door open, you could be further in the dark.
    regards inter

  19. #7369
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    I've seen more depth in a crepe pan than in the standard of political jiggerypokery over the last two decades.
    How true, seems like its a merry go round of voting out the dills of the day, but with these ones I'd be pretty certain they will have their rein of kaos cut shorter than they intended through their own stupidity
    regards inter

  20. #7370
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    If you got rid of all those who told or used party fibs in their electioneering there wouldn't be many if any left in parliament.
    I must be one of the silly millions that based my voting preference on a key election promise that she made, you may be able to justify to yourself for her actions but the masses will never elect her again. And while the other ones still have a rumor of workchoices around Bob Katter could be in with a chance.
    regards inter

  21. #7371
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    ...but with these ones I'd be pretty certain they will have their rein of kaos cut shorter than they intended through their own stupidity
    Oh absolutely. Though I'm not quite sure that chaos is supposed to be this entertaining...
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  22. #7372
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    I must be one of the silly millions that based my voting preference on a key election promise that she made, you may be able to justify to yourself for her actions but the masses will never elect her again. And while the other ones still have a rumor of workchoices around Bob Katter could be in with a chance.
    regards inter
    Distort at will if you must, but my reference was to the lot of them from all sides. I have never voted for a PM as like most Australians we realise we actually vote for a sitting member to represent us. Those who decide to elect Julia Gillard are only those from her own electorate, it is for her party to decide if she continues as leader and the whole country decides if it will give her party sufficient votes to govern. The lack of decent leadership and lack of direction on both sides is galling, but despite all cries to the contrary we have had worse leadership, try reading up on the Billy Hughes period it makes the current crop look quite tame.

    I doubt Bob Katter has a chance but with the current situation someone with leadership, talent and direction could give a new party a start. If they did the Libs, Nats and Labor could join ranks, the Nats and Labor have climbed into the same bed before in the distant past.

    Australian politics is littered with election promise U turns, I'm surprised you thought our current leader would be any different. We have had core and non core promises along with LAW tax cuts both U turns that everyone seemed to get over quickly, bit of a mystery why this one has hung around so long.

    In todays press it gives two estimates one that a carbon tax could cost each household $500 per year, and that each household throws out $600 per year of uneaten food. If we can afford to waste that much fruit and veg we have no reason to be bitching about a teeny weeny tax have we?

  23. #7373
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    95

    Default

    And the beat goes on...

    But, after Andrew's day (and the boltist-type and sheepish-following performers), may the ignorant people see that Mr. Bolt's commentary, be it a commentary on indigenous affairs or, well, whatever he thinks he is qualified to "report" on, to be an absolute joke.

    Is this guy qualified to discuss the "science" of climate change? He can't even address 'socio-political'-type discussion accurately yet, some here subscribe to inking their blood to Mr Bolt assertions. Shame really.

    It is concerning when some people so steadfastly and strongly hold fast to the discussions of someone who purports to have an absolutist idea about everything.

    Despite their discussions otherwise,... some people just don't read widely enough.

    The Judgment of the Federal Court against Bolt is embarrassing to Bolt and those who place him on a pedestal.

    Shame.

  24. #7374
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    95

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    How much time, effort and energy has been wasted on this cult?

    Now they waste even more time and space, and push out people with real problems to fuel their cultish beliefs that their "status" is higher than others who can't afford the hybrids.



    So the rich latte drinkers get a good parking spot anyway.

    What do you drive?

  25. #7375
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    95

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    You really don't get this do you?

    We don't get any money back. These hundreds of billions of Australian taxpayers dollars will be shipped out to shonky (mostly African) nations who "promise" not to cut down trees. A lot of them are still cutting down their own people, but JuLIAR says "trust them". She certainly has earned our trust, not!

    Do you really think these shonks are going to send any money back?



    This isn't driven by the Carbon Dioxide TAX, but will soon be reduced by it. I'll post some stuff soon on this. But you are right, we are facing massively high national income levels due to high terms of trade. The question then is - What the hell is the government doing with all this money? Or - Why are we racking up unprecedented national debts AND spending all our savings AND raising more TAXES while receiving this massive national income?



    I say again, the most corrupt and inept government this country has ever seen!

    People really need to get their own thoughts. I'm so sick of sheep. Why do people shade themselves with the colour of other peoples perspectives and not write publish their own research/writings?

  26. #7376
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesmelbourne View Post
    And the beat goes on...

    But, after Andrew's day (and the boltist-type and sheepish-following performers), may the ignorant people see that Mr. Bolt's commentary, be it a commentary on indigenous affairs or, well, whatever he thinks he is qualified to "report" on, to be an absolute joke.

    Is this guy qualified to discuss the "science" of climate change? He can't even address 'socio-political'-type discussion accurately yet, some here subscribe to inking their blood to Mr Bolt assertions. Shame really.

    It is concerning when some people so steadfastly and strongly hold fast to the discussions of someone who purports to have an absolutist idea about everything.

    Despite their discussions otherwise,... some people just don't read widely enough.

    The Judgment of the Federal Court against Bolt is embarrassing to Bolt and those who place him on a pedestal.

    Shame.
    Far be it for me to actually defend the Bolter....but crowing about his recent legal failings doesn't really add to this topic. His views with respect to climate change reflect those of his audience (and his own genuine need to be entertaining) but they are most certainly not contrary to law. The saving grace is that they are easily either recanted or ignored.

    Misrepresentation of science is a sport.....a fairly stupid sport it may be but at least any idiot can play.
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  27. #7377
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    Far be it for me to actually defend the Bolter....but crowing about his recent legal failings doesn't really add to this topic. His views with respect to climate change reflect those of his audience (and his own genuine need to be entertaining) but they are most certainly not contrary to law. The saving grace is that they are easily either recanted or ignored.

    Misrepresentation of science is a sport.....a fairly stupid sport it may be but at least any idiot can play.
    The judgement did point to an onus on the journalist to be factually correct when quoting or making assertions and to make a reasonable effort to do so. It is possible this judgement may have implications beyond this case. However in the end he was found guilty on the basis of what was patently incorrect along with demeaning statements rather than the subject matter,

  28. #7378
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    Distort at will if you must, but my reference was to the lot of them from all sides. I have never voted for a PM as like most Australians we realise we actually vote for a sitting member to represent us. Those who decide to elect Julia Gillard are only those from her own electorate, it is for her party to decide if she continues as leader and the whole country decides if it will give her party sufficient votes to govern.
    I would have to be smoking the curtains to think that as distorting. Even myself with an average sort of intelligence knows that voting for their local member is like throwing my vote away when it comes to the party policys, they have no say, unless its a marginal seat & they want to throw away gizzillions of dollars buttering up people like you

    try reading up on the Billy Hughes period it makes the current crop look quite tame.

    Maybe you should as well, back then Australia had one of the highest standards of living in the world, jobs for everybody, cheap power & connected for free, people could survive & prosper on one household income, the list goes on.....

    I doubt Bob Katter has a chance but with the current situation someone with leadership, talent and direction could give a new party a start. If they did the Libs, Nats and Labor could join ranks, the Nats and Labor have climbed into the same bed before in the distant past.

    The masses are pretty well fed up with all of this lot, Bob has timing on his side at this moment.

    Australian politics is littered with election promise U turns, I'm surprised you thought our current leader would be any different. We have had core and non core promises along with LAW tax cuts both U turns that everyone seemed to get over quickly, bit of a mystery why this one has hung around so long.

    You seem to have swallowed the whole sharade hook, line & sinker, have a look at the polls for the people that haven't

    In todays press it gives two estimates one that a carbon tax could cost each household $500 per year, and that each household throws out $600 per year of uneaten food. If we can afford to waste that much fruit and veg we have no reason to be bitching about a teeny weeny tax have we?

    See above for answer
    regards inter

  29. #7379
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    Most of the previous post isn't worth responding to but the reference to the standard of living in Billy Hughes time lacks perspective. Some of what you say is right but the average wage was about $10 per week. A young person generally could forget about Uni secondary school was a dream for many and even by 1930 year 9 was about it. There was little health care and you had a 95% chance of dying if you went to hospital at the start of the 1900's. Power was not cheap compared to average wages and a new car out of the question for most. Women seldom had a job once married, and regardless of that earned less than men anyway. Your wardrobe may have had a suit but really didn't extend beyond a couple of changes of clothes and a second pair of shoes. There was no unemployment benefits and the age pension arrived in his time, not that it mattered not many lived until 65 or much beyond it anyway.

    Yes people survived but they didn't prosper, except for a couple of brief periods, they got WW1, the depression and few opportunities, but we did have a good standard of living compared to the rest of the world and it is still very good today.

    The sheeples follow the last populist line, currently run by the opposition, without even thinking about it, Labor will probably be out on its ear at the next election but do you really believe that things will change much, I don't. The problem remains that revenue as a percentage of GDP is dropping, spending doesn't fully explain our current problems and neither side seems capable of on one hand explaining the situation and on the other how they will do better. I do not swallow the line that our problems are just the actions of the current government, it is more than that and the actions that paid off the debt last time are not options that exist this time around. We do not have assets we can sell off nor do we have rising mining and company tax revenues in real terms.

  30. #7380
    Daniel Morgan
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    The problem remains that revenue as a percentage of GDP is dropping, spending doesn't fully explain our current problems and neither side seems capable of on one hand explaining the situation and on the other how they will do better. I do not swallow the line that our problems are just the actions of the current government, it is more than that and the actions that paid off the debt last time are not options that exist this time around. We do not have assets we can sell off nor do we have rising mining and company tax revenues in real terms.
    Hello, thank you for finally admitting and confirming the Tax has nothing to do with Global Warming or Climate Change, it is purely an alternative revenue stream.

    The Greenies are going to love you.

  31. #7381
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Guest
    Hello, thank you for finally admitting and confirming the Tax has nothing to do with Global Warming or Climate Change, it is purely an alternative revenue stream.

    The Greenies are going to love you.
    Don't make connections that aren't there, although from a budget perspective there will be ingoings and outgoings associated with a carbon tax those stand alone within the budget framework. The impact on carbon emmisions and global warming of an economic lever such as the carbon tax is a different matter, the tax is created to have an impact on emmissions and that in turn has an impact of some form on the budget.

    Your line is similar to saying unemployment benefits don't impact on poverty, it's just an alternative expenditure stream.

  32. #7382
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    The impact on carbon emmisions and global warming of an economic lever such as the carbon tax is a different matter, the tax is created to have an impact on emissions and that in turn has an impact of some form on the budget.

    :
    Thank goodness the followers of this stuff are in the minority & getting smaller by the day. Again for the non believers of this garbage just look at the polls
    regards inter

  33. #7383
    quality + reliability - 3k Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,315

    Default

    Sorry for my absence guys. I have been doing a very complicated plastering job in a school the past few months and organising my daughters wedding .

    One down one to go!!

    Will be back posting soon once I get caught up with all the things I have been neglecting.

    Cheers rod
    GREAT PLASTERING TIPS AT


  34. #7384
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    Again for the non believers of this garbage just look at the polls
    Why limit oneself to living life dominated by a popularity contest?

    Now if our pollies did a bit of poll dancing then I might take things more seriously...that takes skill!
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  35. #7385
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    Will be back posting soon once I get caught up with all the things I have been neglecting.
    Don't feel the need to hurry. We've been travelling in a sufficiently mediocre fashion even without you...
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  36. #7386
    1K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Logan Qld
    Posts
    1,401

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    Sorry for my absence guys. I have been doing a very complicated plastering job in a school the past few months and organising my daughters wedding .

    One down one to go!!

    Will be back posting soon once I get caught up with all the things I have been neglecting.

    Cheers rod
    Pass on our best wishes to the soon to be newlyweds, hope there's a long and prosperous future ahead of them.

  37. #7387
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    Sorry for my absence guys. I have been doing a very complicated plastering job in a school the past few months and organising my daughters wedding .

    One down one to go!!

    Will be back posting soon once I get caught up with all the things I have been neglecting.

    Cheers rod
    Best wishes to the Bride and Groom, hopefully they do their bit to continue the family line and bring the joyful patter of little feet at some point.

  38. #7388
    2K Club Member chrisp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,815

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    Best wishes to the Bride and Groom, hopefully they do their bit to continue the family line and bring the joyful patter of little feet at some point.
    And may all their walls and ceilings be straight, true and finished to Level 5.

    There is no middle ground between facts and fallacies - argumentum ad temperantiam

  39. #7389
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    Why limit oneself to living life dominated by a popularity contest?

    Now if our pollies did a bit of poll dancing then I might take things more seriously...that takes skill!
    popularity & polls in the world we live in are just about everything, especially in political la la land, when the pollies dont believe the polls then they are believing their own lies, the very thing that finished the howard gov't & this lot are about to do the same thing, bright aren't they !
    regards inter

  40. #7390
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    What finished the Howard era was not that they stopped believing the polls but people stopped listening and believing in them. It was a case of the spin catching up and credibility lost, is the same happening to Labor? who knows for sure. It is possible the polls mainly reflect Liberal spin winning which could be correct but it might also be that Labor can't work out what message they want to spin. Abbots risk is he over does it and it blows up in his face, other than that Labor's has to hope they manage to pull something out of the bag (aka Tampa) which seems unlikely.

  41. #7391
    quality + reliability - 3k Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,315

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silentbutdeadly View Post
    don't feel the need to hurry. We've been travelling in a sufficiently mediocre fashion even without you...
    nice
    GREAT PLASTERING TIPS AT


  42. #7392
    quality + reliability - 3k Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,315

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisp View Post
    and may all their walls and ceilings be straight, true and finished to level 5.

    lol
    GREAT PLASTERING TIPS AT


  43. #7393
    4K Club Member Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    13,914

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamesmelbourne View Post
    And the beat goes on...bla

    But, after Andrew's day ...bla..... whatever he thinks he is qualified to "report" on, to be an absolute joke.
    bla...
    Is this guy qualified to discuss the "science" of climate change? ....bla

    more bla...
    If we must find an equivalent to today's (conceded fast declining) hunt for the "climate change denier" we will have to go as far back as the Catholic Inquisition and more recently the Americans' hunt for the communist or "anti-American activities".

    It is not surprising that if one states "belief" in "climate change" no one will bother asking for the basis of such radical statement of faith. "I believe" is enough. Does God exist? No one asks for proof. Not openly anyway.

    Utter the contrary and you will be required to spill out not only why but also the credentials of those who you have borrowed the logic behind your assertion.

    And here is the problem.

    Those who are busy out there purporting lies and half truth in order to defend one flimsy position, do so as professionals. Fully and generously funded by large state grants, they are there to defend their very existence.
    Like the monks of old, their life depends from the fallacy that humans are changing the climate, and that therefore humans can change it back. Two fallacy in one.

    When the yes-minister vast funding is not in discussion, the focus is always on the conspiracy theory of mysterious "Oil-company" funding to the opposing view. I have searched for this so called funds to see if I can get some, with no success. If someone knows how I can get paid for writing about my opinion on this matter please let me know.

    The credentials of the officialist yeasayers is as unspecific and varied as the credentials the opposition has, yet such is also hardly ever the focus of attention.
    The reality is that there aren't many people who have made climatology their main focus of study simply because there was never money in such line of specialization until now. So you find that in this "Climate change" debate, from physicist to economist to sociologist to psychologist all feel to have a contributory opinion, and an interpretation of the little data that is not yet corrupted, distorted, falsified or otherwise skewed towards one or another position.

    Reporters, opinion writers news readers and commentators, have no qualifications by definition. They do not collect data and make studies to arrive to a conclusion. They take the information in the public domain and either simply read it to you or go one little step further and interpret it for you based on their own personal values.

    The "A.climate change" supporters do exactly the same, since they also do not hold climatology credentials yet their opinions carry more weight simply because they belong to the church.

    Furthermore, in the case of the A.Climate change, it is not credentials in climatology that are required but credentials in political science, mass psychology, lobbyist science, stage magic and other instruments of deception.
    Anthropogenic climate change was never about science and always about mass deception shifting power and funds towards an alternative political and social hidden agenda.
    The "science" is just a distraction.

    What makes one person decide to support one opinion over another has nothing to do with their qualifications or lack of research and all to do with their own personal values.
    Just like hardly anyone has ever embraced a religion based on research and logic, sociopolitical positions like "A.Climate change" are made based on personal values and research into it made at a later stage to justify the side taken.
    A bit like the impulsive buyer who after the purchase frantically researches prices.

    Funny hey?
    Enjoy present pleasures in such a way as not to injure future ones.
    Seneca

  44. #7394
    4K Club Member Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    13,914

    Default

    Climate Change: an emetic fallacy

    By James Delingpole Politics Last updated: May 11th, 2011
    1503 Comments Comment on this article

    personally I prefer mine with fruit....

    Yesterday I was at Downing College, Cambridge, for a Climate Change conference organised by Professor Alan Howard, the scientist/philanthropist/entrepreneur known, inter alia, for having devised the Cambridge diet and for funding the magnificent lecture hall in which the event took place. (For more reporting – and some brilliant cartoons from Josh who sat right next to me sketching in a most impressive way – see Bishop Hill; and many, many thanks to the Howard Trust for organising it.)
    The big difference between this and almost any other Climate Change conference is that it was the first – in Britain, anyway, so far as I know – to field a solid team of scientists from both sides of the debate. The Warmists included Professor Phil Jones of the Climatic Research Unit, Professor Andrew Watson – also of the UEA and Professor John Mitchell, former chief scientist at the Met Office. The Sceptics – Realists if you prefer – included Professor Henrik Svensmark, Professor Nils-Axel Morner, and Professor Ian Plimer. Any mention of "Climategate" announced Prof Howard at the beginning would result in immediate ejection: he wanted to keep this event civil and scientific.
    So no, I didn't go up and introduce myself to Phil Jones as the man who made him world famous. I think he may have given me a long, hard, hollow stare at breakfast yesterday morning; and there was a dodgy moment during a coffee break where he perched his cup near me, suddenly noticed the danger, and fled elsewhere. But I certainly wasn't going to bother him, not least because I think he cut a rather pitiable figure. His talk – essentially on why the CRU's adjusted temperature figures are kosher – was slightly nervy and resolutely dull. I got the impression he now wishes climate science were just an apolitical backwater in which yer average PhD could happily eke out his career untroubled by the kind of controversy which has all but ruined Jones's life.
    Some of the presentations were excellent. It was particularly good to hear Professor Svensmark make his compelling case (which no one on the other side could successfully refute) on cosmic rays and cloud formation. But overall, I shared the disappointment expressed by one of the final speakers, Czech President Vaclav Klaus that there had been almost no honest, open debate between the two sides. One side made its case; then the other put its contradictory case. But apart from a bit of snide questioning and the odd sniping shot from the wings, there wasn't much by way of robust exchanging of ideas. It was more – as Klaus noted – a series of monologues.
    You'd have to be very naive, though, to conclude that the fault lay on both sides and that if only they could communicate with one another we'd all attain the sensible middle ground position where wisdom, truth and sweet reasonableness resides. That would be to fall for what I call the "Dog S*** Yoghurt Fallacy."
    It goes like this: one side of this debate thinks that the best thing to put in yoghurt is fruit; the other side is of the view that what really needs to be added to yoghurt is a nice bit of dog poo. Now suppose we were to compromise. Suppose the latter faction were to concede sufficient ground to agree that only a tiny quantity of dog poo should go into the mainly fruit-rich yoghurt, would this constitute a victory for commonsense?
    Of course it wouldn't. Even if just the smallest, smidgen of a fraction of dog poo were to go into that yoghurt it would still be irredeemably tainted. Similar rules apply to the current debate on global warming. On one side – what you might call the fruit side – you have those scientists, economists and, yes, bloggers who maintain that CO2 is a generally beneficial trace gas which encourages plant growth and poses no risk of catastrophic global warming. On the other side – the dog poo side, obviously – you have "scientists", politicians, spivs, rent-seekers, cranks, whackos, eco-loons, EU fonctionnaires and such like who believe that CO2 poses a major problem to global climate and must be taxed and regulated to oblivion.
    Which side is right? One of the very few things which emerged from yesterday's debate with pellucid clarity was this:
    WE DON'T KNOW.
    The Warmist scientists are quite capable of talking a good game about their belief system, even to the point – almost – of being persuasive on the subject of their computer "projections" of future global temperatures.
    But then, so too are the Sceptics. You'd need to be very set in your belief system indeed to come away from one of Professor Ian Plimer's feisty, funny engaging lectures and not be convinced that the whole idea of AGW is a complete crock. Same goes for Professor Nils Axel Morner's hilarious, crazy-Swede lecture on his experiences measuring sea-level rises in the Maldives (there hasn't been any: whatever the Maldives president and his underwater cabinet tell you). Same also goes for Prof Svensmark: really his cosmic ray theory is gloriously compelling.
    In other words there is still an enormous amount of uncertainty out there about the chaotic system which causes climate. But here's the rub: global policy makers are acting as if there isn't.
    And the reason they're acting as if there isn't because, essentially, they have been hijacked by the scientists on the Warmist side who – behaving far more like political activists than dispassionate seekers after truth – have exaggerated the strength of their case, even to the point of tweaking their data and suppressing contradictory research, in order to ensure that their "correct" interpretation of reality is the one that prevails.
    This was the whole point of the Climategate scandal and why it mattered. And since Climategate – as we saw from the entirely unapologetic, nay struttingly arrogant in some cases – behaviour of the Warmist scientists present absolutely zip-all has changed.
    Hence Dr Klaus's frustration. Apart from being the only European leader (apart from Hungary's) worth his salt, Dr Klaus is also an economist and a former serf of a Communist state.
    He said: "The arrogance of global warming activists and their fellow travellers in politics is something I know well from the past. They wish to suppress truth, control the market and dictate policy and I, who have spent most of my time living under communism feel obliged to warn against it."
    Enjoy present pleasures in such a way as not to injure future ones.
    Seneca

  45. #7395
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    What finished the Howard era was not that they stopped believing the polls but people stopped listening and believing in them. It was a case of the spin catching up and credibility lost, is the same happening to Labor? who knows for sure. It is possible the polls mainly reflect Liberal spin winning which could be correct but it might also be that Labor can't work out what message they want to spin. Abbots risk is he over does it and it blows up in his face, other than that Labor's has to hope they manage to pull something out of the bag (aka Tampa) which seems unlikely.
    What finished howard & will finish this lot is the lack of backbone from the party members to cross the floor & vote against idiotic legislation which will sink them in the end & finish their political careers, Ah thats right they have a pension for life as soon as they get the boot, a real incentive for doing the right thing at the right time & looking after the people of the country.

    regards inter

  46. #7396
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    What finished howard & will finish this lot is the lack of backbone from the party members to cross the floor & vote against idiotic legislation....
    That's seriously unrealistic...they are members of a Party, a team, an organisation. That's like expecting an Australian rugby union player to start playing for the All Blacks on Saturday simply because he thinks that they are a better team.

    All we have in this country is the Red Team, the Blue Team and the Green Team. Plus a few random shouters. If you want random politics driven by individual opinions then perhaps we should all vote for independents...or we could have multiparty coalitions as in Europe (where it's working out swimmingly!?).

    Politics is all about compromise. It's not about what people actually think. Which is probably fortunate.
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  47. #7397
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    What finished howard & will finish this lot is the lack of backbone from the party members to cross the floor & vote against idiotic legislation which will sink them in the end & finish their political careers, Ah thats right they have a pension for life as soon as they get the boot, a real incentive for doing the right thing at the right time & looking after the people of the country.

    regards inter
    Idiotic legislation is in the eye of the beholder, what one hates another may love. SBD is right we are watching a team sport and unless you want 100% independents it will stay that way. Oddly enough the constitution wasn't really designed with a party system as strong as what we have at the moment and our parliaments systems including question time could do with an overhaul perhaps looking at the way the poms manage debate and their question time.

    I think the problem has a lot more to do with the shortening media cycle as observed by many commentators, our polititians are currently stuck in a gold fish bowl where every word is scrutinised and rehashed. It is little wonder we get served up the quick sound bites and lack of substance that passes for political debate these days. We don't have decent discussion anymore just grab any old point and bash it to death. Truth is lost in a vacuum created by the word no floating in a bucket of vitriol.

  48. #7398
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    That's seriously unrealistic. Only for you guys

    That's like expecting an Australian rugby union player to start playing for the All Blacks on Saturday simply because he thinks that they are a better team.
    You seem to mixing up sport with something more serious with far reaching implications, no wonder your having trouble seeing past the smoke screen & mirrors.

    All we have in this country is the Red Team, the Blue Team and the Green Team. Plus a few random shouters. If you want random politics driven by individual opinions then perhaps we should all vote for independents...or we could have multiparty coalitions as in Europe (where it's working out swimmingly!?).

    Who cares what the sides are called they were voted in to follow the wishes of the majority of the masses, hence the importance of polls
    Politics is all about compromise. It's not about what people actually think. Which is probably fortunate.
    See above
    regards inter

  49. #7399
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,222

    Default

    [QUOTE=johnc;857381]Idiotic legislation is in the eye of the beholder
    Yes thats right, all you have to do know is work out what it is, 70% of the population has already
    SBD is right we are watching a team sport
    Amusing for some, but not for those who know the difference between a sides on football field & the Australian population who are against idiotic legislation

    QUOTE]
    regards inter

  50. #7400
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    [QUOTE=intertd6;857506]
    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    Idiotic legislation is in the eye of the beholder
    Yes thats right, all you have to do know is work out what it is, 70% of the population has already
    SBD is right we are watching a team sport
    Amusing for some, but not for those who know the difference between a sides on football field & the Australian population who are against idiotic legislation

    QUOTE]
    regards inter
    Aren't you in that case arguing that all votes should be poll driven, pandering to electoral whims rather than weighing up the facts and voting according to what is right. Supposedly it is the slavish following of focus groups and the whim of the electorate that delivers bad policy and outcomes.

    In the end we need politicans that can explain policy and debate cleanly without spin (which will never happen but can be better than it is in 2011) to lead, not behave like sheep running after the populist masses. Great leaders aren't sheep they set direction and carry a country forward.

Page 148 of 377 FirstFirst ... 48 98 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 198 248 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •