- Joined
- 3 July 2009
- Posts
- 28,916
- Reactions
- 26,739
Obviously Shorten will get the gig till the election, if Labor loose (which I don't think they will) it will be all down to Shorten, he will be skidded out quicker than Turnbull was that's for sure.That's the thing. Money. CFMEU and the Maritime Union merged around 6 months ago and they pull in around $130million a year. For the ALP it's a nice gravy train but also a leash as well.
They spent a truckload of money in Longman from what I've read.
Watch for yet another leadership change if they decide to "short" Shorten as well
The unions won't get rid of him. He owes big time. Rudd wasn't union backed, but Gillard and Bill are.That's the thing. Money. CFMEU and the Maritime Union merged around 6 months ago and they pull in around $130million a year. For the ALP it's a nice gravy train but also a leash as well.
They spent a truckload of money in Longman from what I've read.
Watch for yet another leadership change if they decide to "short" Shorten as well
If Morrison has any hope of leading the coalition to victory, he'll need a policy on climate change.
It wouldn't be a pseudo-Green, pro-Paris accord policy: but any policy.
"Every nation for itself", for example. Why not? At least it's a policy.
Your call on it is spot on Rumpy, the technology is there to start and move over to renewable energy, the problem is it is in its infancy and will take time to happen.Both parties face the dichotomy of the electorate over climate change, people want something done about it, as long as it doesn't result in higher bills.
The party than can successfully present both sides of the argument will win. Total denial of CC is a loser, as is over ambitious targets, the middle view is likely to be the winner.
https://theconversation.com/lowy-in...action-at-its-highest-level-in-a-decade-98625
Your comment reminds me of a very old (1930's) HEC (now Hydro Tas) print advertisement that was run internationally at the time.What people have to accept is, it can't happen quickly without chaos, as you say the parties need to present a sensible goal and an orderly way to achieve it.
At the moment, the real issues are drowned out by white noise.
Having been around it all my adult life I've met very few people who aren't directly involved who are able to comprehend it all.I read that PZ99 and the thing it really brought home, was how little these people who write these articles, know about the enormity of the problem.
What government needs to do is not baffle people with science or big numbers or misinformation but to have a plan, with properly qualified and experienced people behind it, and explain to the public in layman's terms why it's necessary, the sequence in which things need to happen and with a projected time and cost. Then just get on with it. Put the technical details on a website and hold some information sessions for the few who really want to know the nuts and bolts of it all.
It's a pity your self appointed superiority isn't matched by an ability to do it politely, sptrawler.Instead you post up nonsensical cartoons, in the disguise of intelligent comment, the situation is lampooned enough by fools in the media. Without bringing it into our conversation. Just my opinion.
Your comment reminds me of a very old (1930's) HEC (now Hydro Tas) print advertisement that was run internationally at the time.
So far as the whole energy issue is concerned, all Australian states need to get back to being able to make the claims as per this old advertisement noting that it's not just energy but other infrastructure as well.
As background, the advertisement was run during the Great Depression when the Hydro was looking for private investors to establish manufacturing industries in Tasmania. Any industry would do, so long as it put people into work (and with the implicit assumption that big factories would need a lot of power).
The need to be internationally competitive is something we seem to have forgotten these days in Australia. Failing to do so isn't going to help us in the long term that's for sure.
It's a pity your self appointed superiority isn't matched by an ability to do it politely, sptrawler.
I didn't write the article, someone else did. The cartoon was relevant to the topic. I don't need your permission to post it.
Your provocation(s) are unnecessary. Don't do it again.
That was the ideaMore cartoons !
They often sum up a subject much better than words do.
Besides they are usually funnier.
It's a pity your self appointed superiority isn't matched by an ability to do it politely, sptrawler.
I didn't write the article, someone else did. The cartoon was relevant to the topic. I don't need your permission to post it.
Your provocation(s) are unnecessary. Don't do it again.
I don't care whether our ideas are aligned or not. If you think it's fair/polite to be condescending to another poster for having a contrary opinion then chances are you will come out looking second best. Got something against cartoons? Free speech?There is no superiority on my part, actually far from it, I try and post only on what I have some understanding of and I thought my comment was very polite considering.
I don't see how lampooning someone who has only just sat down in the job, can be considered intelligent input, I would class it as derogatory innuendo.
You certainly don't need my permission to post whatever you like, but if I feel it is against what I think is fair, I will say so.
As for not doing it again, this isn't a school room and you aren't the teacher, if I wish to do it again I will. This is a forum where people exchange beliefs, ideas and thoughts, if mine don't align with yours, you always have the option of blocking my posts, feel free to do so.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?