Australian Politics thread [merged]

[Penelope]

When was the last time a government, of any persuasion, repealed a tax they disagreed with in opposition, when they next got into govt.

You watch, your beloevd libs will not repeal any carbon tax when they have the power to do so. This makes them them no better.

They are all tarred with the same brush.

keep barracking though.

[Tigeritis™©®]

When was the last time a government, of any persuasion, repealed a tax they disagreed with in opposition, when they next got into govt.

You watch, your beloevd libs will not repeal any carbon tax when they have the power to do so. This makes them them no better.

They are all tarred with the same brush.

keep barracking though.

yes they will. Unlike Julia who said "there will no carbon tax under the government I lead"   

They will get rid of it like Julia got rid of workchoices. All we ask as a democratic country is to vote for it.
Let's bring it to the people and we can all decide once and for all if we want a carbon tax.

[Tigeritis™©®]

Lets look at some facts here regarding global carbon emissions.

97% of Carbon emissions are caused by nature
3% of Carbon emissions are caused by Humans
Australia as a country is responsible for 1.5% of the 3% of human carbon emissions meaning we are responsible for .0005% of global carbon emissions.
You' don't hear these FACTS being mentioned in Parliament by the government do you!

Ah this old chestnut  . Sorry tiga but that claim conveniently leaves out that the emissions caused by nature have been part of the natural carbon cycle in the atmosphere for thousands arguably millions of years whereas the human component produced from the burning of fossil fuels is not (fossil fuels are buried underground, then mined to the surface, burnt to extract the energy stored within them, and the waste produced CO2 is released unhindered into the air) We are artifically adding to the CO2 levels in the atmosphere which has seen a rise by almost 40% over the past 150 years (280ppm to 390ppm). For those who argue it's not man-made (ie. burning of fossil fuels and deforestation) could they state what natural phenomena has increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere by 40% in 150 years and continues to increase it? I'll give you a help it's not volcanic or solar activity either. And could they then publish their findings in a recognised scientific journal on climate science. I'm sure the scientists would love a good laugh  .

Furthermore by artifically increasing CO2 levels which is a greenhouse gas we are artifically enhancing the greenhouse effort which as we know is a feedback mechanism so the Earth absorbs more thermal energy. As the amount of thermal energy absorbed has to equal the amount emitted to reach an equilibrium, if more thermal energy is being absorbed thanks to significantly increased levels of CO2 then the average global temperature of the Earth has to rise. This is basic physics FFS! More thermal energy = rising average global temperature = global warming and climate change. Of course to the Andrew Bolt's of this world it's all a conspiracy theory because all these nasty scientists aren't telling them what they want to hear  .

why is it getting colder then? I'm freezing my balls off every morning.

[WilliamPowell]

yes they will. Unlike Julia who said "there will no carbon tax under the government I lead"   

They will get rid of it like Julia got rid of workchoices. All we ask as a democratic country is to vote for it.
Let's bring it to the people and we can all decide once and for all if we want a carbon tax.

al was talking about the repealing of a tax not a specific piece of legislation.

Though you are correct the Libs/Nats have said they will repeal the carbon tax if they win office at the next election. However they've also said (via Barnaby Joyce) that the will also repeal any income tax cuts that get introduced along with the carbon tax ... that would be really smart

What I am finding really amusing in all this is how the goal post keeping moving.

Another month another reason why we need to go to the polls. Back in Sept people wanted another election because we had a minority govt that they didn't vote for when in fact we got exactly what we voted for 

In Dec an election was needed because of the boats. In May it was the budget and the means testing of family allowances, now it's the carbon tax.

I'm looking forward to seeing what excuse/reason we get in July     

[mightytiges]

Lets look at some facts here regarding global carbon emissions.

97% of Carbon emissions are caused by nature
3% of Carbon emissions are caused by Humans
Australia as a country is responsible for 1.5% of the 3% of human carbon emissions meaning we are responsible for .0005% of global carbon emissions.
You' don't hear these FACTS being mentioned in Parliament by the government do you!

Ah this old chestnut  . Sorry tiga but that claim conveniently leaves out that the emissions caused by nature have been part of the natural carbon cycle in the atmosphere for thousands arguably millions of years whereas the human component produced from the burning of fossil fuels is not (fossil fuels are buried underground, then mined to the surface, burnt to extract the energy stored within them, and the waste produced CO2 is released unhindered into the air) We are artifically adding to the CO2 levels in the atmosphere which has seen a rise by almost 40% over the past 150 years (280ppm to 390ppm). For those who argue it's not man-made (ie. burning of fossil fuels and deforestation) could they state what natural phenomena has increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere by 40% in 150 years and continues to increase it? I'll give you a help it's not volcanic or solar activity either. And could they then publish their findings in a recognised scientific journal on climate science. I'm sure the scientists would love a good laugh  .

Furthermore by artifically increasing CO2 levels which is a greenhouse gas we are artifically enhancing the greenhouse effort which as we know is a feedback mechanism so the Earth absorbs more thermal energy. As the amount of thermal energy absorbed has to equal the amount emitted to reach an equilibrium, if more thermal energy is being absorbed thanks to significantly increased levels of CO2 then the average global temperature of the Earth has to rise. This is basic physics FFS! More thermal energy = rising average global temperature = global warming and climate change. Of course to the Andrew Bolt's of this world it's all a conspiracy theory because all these nasty scientists aren't telling them what they want to hear  .

why is it getting colder then? I'm freezing my balls off every morning.

Local temperature and seasonal conditions. Something called Winter  . Earth's axis is tilted at 23 degrees and (ignoring precession over long time scales) remains in place as the Earth orbits the Sun. So in our Summer the southern hemisphere is closer to the Sun and in our Winter the northern hemisphere is.

Speaking of orbiting the Sun, the political conservatives of Galileo's time were alsoall up in arms as they didn't like what they were being told. Some things never change  .

[mightytiges]

yes they will. Unlike Julia who said "there will no carbon tax under the government I lead"   

They will get rid of it like Julia got rid of workchoices. All we ask as a democratic country is to vote for it.
Let's bring it to the people and we can all decide once and for all if we want a carbon tax.

al was talking about the repealing of a tax not a specific piece of legislation.

Though you are correct the Libs/Nats have said they will repeal the carbon tax if they win office at the next election. However they've also said (via Barnaby Joyce) that the will also repeal any income tax cuts that get introduced along with the carbon tax ... that would be really smart

What I am finding really amusing in all this is how the goal post keeping moving.

Another month another reason why we need to go to the polls. Back in Sept people wanted another election because we had a minority govt that they didn't vote for when in fact we got exactly what we voted for 

In Dec an election was needed because of the boats. In May it was the budget and the means testing of family allowances, now it's the carbon tax.

I'm looking forward to seeing what excuse/reason we get in July     

I must have missed Abbott asking for an early election when he broke his promise after the 2004 election about not raising the health safety net or when the Libs introduced Workchoices without a mandate after the same election when they realised they had control of both houses. Oh that's right Tony said back then a Government had a right to change its mind  .

[WilliamPowell]

I must have missed Abbott asking for an early election when he broke his promise after the 2004 election about not raising the health safety net or when the Libs introduced Workchoices without a mandate after the same election when they realised they had control of both houses. Oh that's right Tony said back then a Government had a right to change its mind  .

I must have missed that one because I was captivated by the then Prime Minister promising us all he wouldn't abuse the power of having control of both houses of parliament.... come to think of it was that another example of a  politician lying to teh electorate 

 

[mightytiges]

I must have missed Abbott asking for an early election when he broke his promise after the 2004 election about not raising the health safety net or when the Libs introduced Workchoices without a mandate after the same election when they realised they had control of both houses. Oh that's right Tony said back then a Government had a right to change its mind  .

I must have missed that one because I was captivated by the then Prime Minister promising us all he wouldn't abuse the power of having control of both houses of parliament.... come to think of it was that another example of a  politician lying to teh electorate 

 

Yep every pollies manifesto should come with an asterix


* promises may be reneged at any stage after you vote for me

[Tigeritis™©®]

I must have missed Abbott asking for an early election when he broke his promise after the 2004 election about not raising the health safety net or when the Libs introduced Workchoices without a mandate after the same election when they realised they had control of both houses. Oh that's right Tony said back then a Government had a right to change its mind  .

I must have missed that one because I was captivated by the then Prime Minister promising us all he wouldn't abuse the power of having control of both houses of parliament.... come to think of it was that another example of a  politician lying to teh electorate 

 

Yep every pollies manifesto should come with an asterix


* promises may be reneged at any stage after you vote for me

I acknowledge that workchoices wasn't a great idea. They shouldve gone to the voting public with this agenda and put it to the people. I think it's wrong to deceive the people like this.
 
Can you both acknowledge that Julia & the labour party deceived the voting public on carbon tax?
Can you both acknowledge she and her deceiving party should have gone to the election with this agenda?
 

[Tigeritis™©®]

Lets look at some facts here regarding global carbon emissions.

97% of Carbon emissions are caused by nature
3% of Carbon emissions are caused by Humans
Australia as a country is responsible for 1.5% of the 3% of human carbon emissions meaning we are responsible for .0005% of global carbon emissions.
You' don't hear these FACTS being mentioned in Parliament by the government do you!

Ah this old chestnut  . Sorry tiga but that claim conveniently leaves out that the emissions caused by nature have been part of the natural carbon cycle in the atmosphere for thousands arguably millions of years whereas the human component produced from the burning of fossil fuels is not (fossil fuels are buried underground, then mined to the surface, burnt to extract the energy stored within them, and the waste produced CO2 is released unhindered into the air) We are artifically adding to the CO2 levels in the atmosphere which has seen a rise by almost 40% over the past 150 years (280ppm to 390ppm). For those who argue it's not man-made (ie. burning of fossil fuels and deforestation) could they state what natural phenomena has increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere by 40% in 150 years and continues to increase it? I'll give you a help it's not volcanic or solar activity either. And could they then publish their findings in a recognised scientific journal on climate science. I'm sure the scientists would love a good laugh  .

Furthermore by artifically increasing CO2 levels which is a greenhouse gas we are artifically enhancing the greenhouse effort which as we know is a feedback mechanism so the Earth absorbs more thermal energy. As the amount of thermal energy absorbed has to equal the amount emitted to reach an equilibrium, if more thermal energy is being absorbed thanks to significantly increased levels of CO2 then the average global temperature of the Earth has to rise. This is basic physics FFS! More thermal energy = rising average global temperature = global warming and climate change. Of course to the Andrew Bolt's of this world it's all a conspiracy theory because all these nasty scientists aren't telling them what they want to hear  .

why is it getting colder then? I'm freezing my balls off every morning.

Local temperature and seasonal conditions. Something called Winter  . Earth's axis is tilted at 23 degrees and (ignoring precession over long time scales) remains in place as the Earth orbits the Sun. So in our Summer the southern hemisphere is closer to the Sun and in our Winter the northern hemisphere is.

Speaking of orbiting the Sun, the political conservatives of Galileo's time were alsoall up in arms as they didn't like what they were being told. Some things never change  .

very funny MT.
But all the doomsayers were preaching "global warming" have conveniently switched the term to "climate change" everytime there is a blizzard.
Is there ANY evidence that these increases and decreases in global temperatures are cyclic occuring atleast in approximately every 30 years? 
 

[tiger101]

Tigra it is unfortunate that people (mainly green voters)now a days because we have been riding a mining boom for the past decade have turned into pro taxes and anti business supporters. They have somehow got it in there head that this carbon tax will save the planet from any change in climate change. They think that by Australia leading the world in pushing through a carbon tax it will make India, China, Brazil, Indonesia and USA the big and growing emitters of the world change there way and turn there back on there own manufacturing sector like we are doing.

[Tigeritis™©®]

I think it's hilarious that people get caught up in a scientific idea that keeps changing more times than the weather in Melbourne.

These videos I think are very interesting. But who could argue with Dr Spock?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvsAIyUAGyY&feature=youtube_gdata_player

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ox2gmyCXjWk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFN3fGuSSlg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[mightytiges]

I think it's hilarious that people get caught up in a scientific idea that keeps changing more times than the weather in Melbourne.

These videos I think are very interesting. But who could argue with Dr Spock?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvsAIyUAGyY&feature=youtube_gdata_player

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ox2gmyCXjWk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFN3fGuSSlg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Didn't mamma tell you not to believe everything the papers and tv tells you  .

The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus

Thomas C. Peterson
NOAA/National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina

William M. Connolley
British Antarctic Survey, National Environment Research Council, Cambridge, United Kingdom

John Fleck
Albuquerque Journal, Albuquerque, New Mexico

Abstract

Climate science as we know it today did not exist in the 1960s and 1970s. The integrated enterprise embodied in the Nobel Prizewinning work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change existed then as separate threads of research pursued by isolated groups of scientists. Atmospheric chemists and modelers grappled with the measurement of changes in carbon dioxide and atmospheric gases, and the changes in climate that might result. Meanwhile, geologists and paleoclimate researchers tried to understand when Earth slipped into and out of ice ages, and why. An enduring popular myth suggests that in the 1970s the climate science community was predicting “global cooling” and an “imminent” ice age, an observation frequently used by those who would undermine what climate scientists say today about the prospect of global warming. A review of the literature suggests that, on the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking as being one of the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales. More importantly than showing the falsehood of the myth, this review describes how scientists of the time built the foundation on which the cohesive enterprise of modern climate science now rests.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1

Full paper here:
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1


In any case no one denies knowledge of Earth's climate has improved over the past 40 years which advances in technology and understanding. That goes for every field of endeavour.

[mightytiges]

Lets look at some facts here regarding global carbon emissions.

97% of Carbon emissions are caused by nature
3% of Carbon emissions are caused by Humans
Australia as a country is responsible for 1.5% of the 3% of human carbon emissions meaning we are responsible for .0005% of global carbon emissions.
You' don't hear these FACTS being mentioned in Parliament by the government do you!

Ah this old chestnut  . Sorry tiga but that claim conveniently leaves out that the emissions caused by nature have been part of the natural carbon cycle in the atmosphere for thousands arguably millions of years whereas the human component produced from the burning of fossil fuels is not (fossil fuels are buried underground, then mined to the surface, burnt to extract the energy stored within them, and the waste produced CO2 is released unhindered into the air) We are artifically adding to the CO2 levels in the atmosphere which has seen a rise by almost 40% over the past 150 years (280ppm to 390ppm). For those who argue it's not man-made (ie. burning of fossil fuels and deforestation) could they state what natural phenomena has increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere by 40% in 150 years and continues to increase it? I'll give you a help it's not volcanic or solar activity either. And could they then publish their findings in a recognised scientific journal on climate science. I'm sure the scientists would love a good laugh  .

Furthermore by artifically increasing CO2 levels which is a greenhouse gas we are artifically enhancing the greenhouse effort which as we know is a feedback mechanism so the Earth absorbs more thermal energy. As the amount of thermal energy absorbed has to equal the amount emitted to reach an equilibrium, if more thermal energy is being absorbed thanks to significantly increased levels of CO2 then the average global temperature of the Earth has to rise. This is basic physics FFS! More thermal energy = rising average global temperature = global warming and climate change. Of course to the Andrew Bolt's of this world it's all a conspiracy theory because all these nasty scientists aren't telling them what they want to hear  .

why is it getting colder then? I'm freezing my balls off every morning.

Local temperature and seasonal conditions. Something called Winter  . Earth's axis is tilted at 23 degrees and (ignoring precession over long time scales) remains in place as the Earth orbits the Sun. So in our Summer the southern hemisphere is closer to the Sun and in our Winter the northern hemisphere is.

Speaking of orbiting the Sun, the political conservatives of Galileo's time were alsoall up in arms as they didn't like what they were being told. Some things never change  .

very funny MT.
But all the doomsayers were preaching "global warming" have conveniently switched the term to "climate change" everytime there is a blizzard.
Is there ANY evidence that these increases and decreases in global temperatures are cyclic occuring atleast in approximately every 30 years? 

No evidence whatsoever. There is a cycle over 10,000s of years based on what is known as Milankovitch cycles relating to the precession and change in the tilt of the Earth's axis over such large time scales. Global warming due to increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere has occurred over just the past 150 years (40% increase and rising). The phrases global warming and climate change aren't new either.

I'm sure Andrew Bolt will tell you the world is cooling because there's blizzards in North American and northern Europe  .

[mightytiges]

Tigra it is unfortunate that people (mainly green voters)now a days because we have been riding a mining boom for the past decade have turned into pro taxes and anti business supporters. They have somehow got it in there head that this carbon tax will save the planet from any change in climate change. They think that by Australia leading the world in pushing through a carbon tax it will make India, China, Brazil, Indonesia and USA the big and growing emitters of the world change there way and turn there back on there own manufacturing sector like we are doing.

Most of Australia's old-school manufacturing sector was killed off long ago. The price of opening up the Australian economy by abolishing tarriffs and trade barriers. There was plenty of short-term pain in the switch (1990 recession) but the country is now better for it. Imagine if we tried to hold on to a protectionist policy - apart from the country been driven into the ground as was by 1982 for a further 30 years  , we'd be living in country with high prices for basic items, high unemployment because we didn't move to towards the good, services and jobs of the future (2011) and we'd be copping it left, right and centre from other countries imposing similar trade barriers on the goods we would want to sell to them making us uncompetitive. Look at the USA - Ford and GM failed to move with times and virtually sent themselves to the wall because they stuck to old ideas about Americans wanting big cars. You don't move with the times you get left behind and go out of business.

I'm not that naive to believe this current push around the world to put a price on carbon is just pollies and big business suddenly finding a green heart. IIRC being "developing" nations like China and India don't have to complete system in place reducing their emissions until 2030 (develop nations like us need to have one by 2020; underdeveloped nations by 2040-50). Getting your hands on updated or new superior techology equates to power and $$$ which is why they are starting to act now. There's also the advantage for service industries if you're a low-carbon emission country selling carbon permits to those high-carbon emitting countries who'll need to buy them to meet their emission targets.

I'm no greeny just because I support a carbon price unless you believe Malcolm Turnbull is a greeny and anti-business lol. My first preference is a ETS as market-mechanisms have a history of working best and being most efficient. We'll be moving to one after 3 years of a fixed-priced carbon tax. As for being anti-business - was Henry Ford anti-business because mass-producing an accessible inexpensive car would've been most people working with the horse-drawn carriages, blacksmiths, etc out of business? That's life and that IS business. New technologies and industries are developed and they replace old outdated ones.
 
The whole point of pricing carbon is to increase the investment and development in new "cleaner" energy technologies and make them price competitive. I'm no pollie saying there'll be no price to be paid. However the longer we leave it or worst still we don't act at all then the price will be higher and not just environmentally. We'll be left behind. We've spent and wasted the best part of 10 years already squabbling with idiotic neo-cons over the validity of the science who have been shown to be wrong.