Another great contribution from Speedy 🙂
If the ABC was relevant (Part 37)
(The Collector)
[Scene: A street corner. JOHN is carrying a clipboard. He approaches BRYAN.]
John: Hi – I’m Bob Brown from the Greens. What’s your name?
Bryan: I’m Bryan Dawe from around the corner. What’s up?
John: The Greens are holding a raffle to raise funds and save the world. Would you like to buy a ticket?
Bryan: What’s the prize?
John: Prize?
Bryan: What do you win?
John: The lucky winner will receive… [consults clipboard] a lifetime supply of free air.
Bryan: Sorry, I’ve already got one. [Keeps walking]
John: Come back! You haven’t got a ticket!
Bryan: You haven’t got a prize…
John: But everyone wins a prize in this raffle – we’re going to save the world!
Bryan: What from?
John: Everything!
Bryan: What does Everything do?
John: Everything does Everything, Bryan! Droughts, floods, heatwaves, blizzards, hurricanes, volcanoes, melting ice caps, rising sea levels, species extinctions, plagues, pestilence and starvation. And that’s only for starters…
Bryan: You mean Global Warming?
John: We no longer use that term as it is not sufficiently encompassing. We find the term “Everything” is more satisfactory. Or, more precisely, AIE.
Bryan: What’s AIE?
John: Artificially Induced Everything. As we all know, mankind is responsible for Everything.
Bryan: I’ve never heard of it.
John: That’s because you know Nothing about Everything Bryan. But we do. We know Everything about Everything. And when you give us your money, Everything will be Alright.
Bryan: What would you spend my money on?
John: On Everything, of course, Bryan.
Bryan: But before you spend my money on Everything, you would have to start with Something.
John: Of course we’ll have to start with Something if we’re going to fix up Everything.
Bryan: But if you just go and spend my money on Something, you could make a mistake and spend it on Anything. And all that spending on Everything would be for Nothing…
John: Nothing isn’t the problem. Everything is.
Bryan: That’s what I’m saying – you might spend Everything on Something that could be Anything and finish up with Nothing!
John: When Everything’s at stake Bryan, then Anything is better than Nothing. And we have to do Something now, so it might as well be Anything.
Bryan: But if Everything is the top priority, then Nothing actually happens. Nothing to do with Everything and Everything to do with vanity and tokenism.
John: Something like that would never happen, Bryan. Nobody would permit it.
Bryan: Nobody likes to admit it, but Sometimes it can happen to Anybody.
John: I disagree. Nothing like that would happen to Nobody at Anytime.
Bryan: Didn’t Abraham Lincoln say that Somebody could fool Anybody, Sometime? In that case, how don’t you know that Somebody is wrong and that Everybody is responsible for Nothing?
John: Everyone knows that Everybody caused Everything – Somebody said so.
Bryan: But you’ve got Nothing to prove it!
John: Yes we have! Whenever Everybody says the same thing, it proves Something!
Bryan: No, it proves Nothing. Because Sometimes Nobody is as dumb as Everybody.
John: I disagree. When Someone who’s a Somebody talks to Anybody, then Everybody needs to listen! What’s the point of having Somebody who can explain Everything to Everybody if Anybody who’s a Nobody can disagree with Anything that Somebody says?
Bryan: That’s science – there’s no knowing that we know all the knowing that there is to know. And if Everyone knew Nothing more than Someone who’s a Somebody Already knew, then Nobody would ever know Anything new.
John: That’s not science!
Bryan: All I know about science is that Anytime Anyone said they knew Everything about Something, if Anyone discovered Something new that isn’t Anything like Everything Everybody Already knew, then all that we know is that that Somebody never knew all that there was to know about Something.
John: You have to be a Somebody to know Everything about Anything…
Bryan: But what if Someone were to say that Nowhere is there evidence that Anybody has proven Anything to show that Everyone is responsible for Everything?
John: Then they’re a Nobody. Because Everybody who knows Something about Anything knows that Everything is caused by Everybody. And Everyone knows that Something needs to be done to stop Everything from happening Anytime soon.
Bryan: But how do we know that Everybody doesn’t know they barely know Anything about Everything; they actually know Nothing about Something and are just taking us Nowhere?
John: Are you going to buy a ticket or what?
Bryan: I’m just getting started…
John: There is Something you need to know about my little raffle…
Bryan: What would you say if, in fact, Everybody didn’t cause Everything, but that Everything was natural – it’s been happening Everywhere, Anytime over the last few billion years. That would mean that Everybody had Nothing to do with Everything! It would mean that Someone could do Anything to prevent Everything but it would achieve Nothing. And Anything they did do would cost Everyone Something but help No-one at all! Everything would still happen Anyway but Nobody would have done Anything to prevent it because Somebody had spent Everything on Something that did Nothing.
Whoever would believe Anyone who claimed to know Everything, but then… [Clunk]
[JOHN has clubbed BRYAN on the head with a large, obviously foam, mallet. BRYAN falls to the floor unconscious.]
John: There is Something that Everybody, Everywhere will understand Sometime, Bryan. It’s that Everybody buys a ticket in my raffle. [Removes BRYAN’s wallet.] EVERYBODY.
Other posts tagged Speedy (yes I need to find a way to add in links to his previous 30 odd articles hidden in the comments!)
Posted up on Stop Gillard’s Carbon Tax Facebook page.
Please join if you haven’t already – lots of good info.
10
Sounds like in the vein of –
What is the difference between the Queensland Vegetation Management Act and the Nigerian scam?
Not much really, except participation by landholders is mandatory in the VMA
10
More “the sky is falling” booga booga from NOAA
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20110706/ARTICLE/110709744/0/FRONTPAGE?p=1&tc=pg
I like this version instead:
“There is no warming trend. The Carbonazis desperate to sell you a carbon tax are playing the same silly trick all around the world. “Yes, it may be cold where you are, but trust us, everywhere else is really warm!” So ice in Sarasota.”Yes, it may be cold where you are, but trust us, everywhere else is really warm!” It snowed here in Hawaii last month. “Yes, it may be cold where you are, but trust us, everywhere else is really warm!” California ski resorts were open July 4th. “Yes, it may be cold where you are, but trust us, everywhere else is really warm!” Record snow is producing record flooding. “Yes, it may be cold where you are, but trust us, everywhere else is really warm!”
Thanks to http://www.whatreallyhappened.com
10
[…] key difference is, you have to pay. It’s added on to everything, you can’t avoid it. Everybody pays their carbon taxes to appease the great and almighty […]
10
ROFLMAO! side slitting!
10
ROFLMAO! side slitting!
10
more on the trillions the UN wants, with Delingpole on fire:
7 July: UK Telegraph: James Delingpole: UN reveals its master plan for destruction of global economy
The report argues that over the next 40 years our governments must spend an annual minimum of $1.9 trillion – that’s an eyewatering $76 trillion – steering the global economy onto the path of “green growth.”
But “Green growth” – as the report more or less acknowledges – is an oxymoron. That’s why, even though it was supervised by an alleged economist, Dutchman Rob Vos, the report is not at all ashamed to advocate limiting economic growth through rationing, punitive taxation and other forms of government intervention. Why? To combat “Climate Change”, of course…
As the report primly tells us, none of us actually needs to earn more than $10,000 a year. Anything more is greedy:…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100095817/un-reveals-its-master-plan-for-destruction-of-global-economy/
10
followup:
7 July: Nicholas Lewis: Climate sensitivity follow-up
JC (Judith Curry) note: Pursuant to Nic’s post on “The IPCC’s alteration of Forster & Gregory’s model-independent climate sensitivity results,” he has sent a letter to Gabi Hegerl, who was coordinating lead author on chapter 9 of the IPCC AR4.
Dear Gabi,…
http://judithcurry.com/2011/07/07/climate-sensitivity-follow-up/#23more-3997
10
Good one Speedy, you hit the nail on the head!!
10
Funny it makes more sense than Boob and Ju-liar(grin).CO2 is life Cheers
10
Throwing darts or empty and hollow barbs is one way to deal with the stupidity of the Carbon emission debate – another is to demand a debate on the real cause of all this hoo-ha and that is: global and sustainable population growth. –
The UN and OECD have reams of reports on this data and nobody is asking the right question – how can we have a Carbon Tax – or emissions – or economic modeling reports on the impact of so called climate change – if global population and limits on population growth is not part of that discussion … read more here …
The EYE-BALL
10
I have the feeling that Speedy is actually John Clark (aka Fred Dagg), just that he knows he can’t ever do this on the ABC so he has to use another outlet here.
10
Hello EyeBall,
I think you will find the people on this forum will have little patience for this real problem of industrial civilisation whilst they are focussed on defeating the CO2 climate alarm monster.
You are completely correct about sustainability. It is both logical and practically obvious that the only sustainable rate of growth in anything real is zero. But mortal minds don’t have enough room for multiple looming calamities, especially not one as pervasive and uncomfortable as Peak Everything, Overpopulation, and the resulting Long Emergency. Try reposting about this in two months, or whenever the carbon tax has been defeated.
10
Andrew – you are of course right and in knowing this – educating the ship jumpers and the knowledge base of people joining the debate midstream – is and can be a mindless task …
If the greatest minds in the land and their paid for opinions are being used to sway the debate – sceptics and those who just want to oppose a new tax – need to be made aware of the weakness’s in the Government’s position – even at this site and its commentary – and at the risk of barbing the barbers – many talk as if they know – but there is a vast gap in talking the talk as opposed to actually knowing what the debate is truely about …
10
G’dam’it Speedy. You made me laugh…. I’m gonna have to condense it and stick it on the ‘fridge, it makes all the political statements in this place. 🙂
10
Everytime this “sustainable” word is used Alarm Bells should start ringing LOUDLY.
The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights: “Sustainable” Development’s Unsustainable Contradictions
http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=7380
Liberty or Sustainable Development?
http://www.newswithviews.com/Shaw/michael118.htm
10
‘Sustainable developement’ to the globalists is the ideas of a certain John P (Nazi eco nutcase) Holdren. His book ‘Ecoscience’ sends shivers down spine of all but the most hardened eco loons and jack boot wearers. I kid you not he wrote this ““planetary regime” that would use a “global police force” to enforce totalitarian measures of population control”. And hes an ardent warmist and adviser to Obama.
10
Off Topic
My reply is as follows.
The ‘Your Rights at Work’ Team.
If any one feels like overloading them with similar emails the e- address is; ccemails@actu.org.au
10
To Eye Ball Opinion and Andrew McRae. To paraphrase, Whenever I here the word “sustainable” I go for my gun. Will you central planning totalitarians stop with the “Lets limit population growth” crap. What are you going to do, run around and shot a whole bunch of people to get to the population levels that you think are sustainable in order to cut the population. The only way to get everything to work is for all of the socialist, fascist, collectivist, central planners to get out of the way and let the free market work it out. The peak oil crap is an example. As oil gets more expensive then substitutes will be found. The recent finds of oceans of shale gas is an example. By the time this is getting scarce, in a couple of hundred years, I am sure that something else will be discovered. The other substitute is coal to liquid conversion. China is already setting up plants to convert the huge quantities of brown coal, in their north, to oil. Australia still has centuries worth of gas and coal that we can develop. This is the way the world has allways worked. You only need to look back over the last century to see the extraordinary developments that we have seen. I advise that you take your eugenic, genicial, totalitarian, collectivist, central planning fantasies and bugger off.
10
CameronH – another dunderhead comment that often appears hereto –
Who said anything about limiting population – sustain means being able to feed a global population – something that 2/3rds of the population struggle to do now. The research has been largely done on this – the political will to bring it into the open has not emerged – so instead we talk about a by-product like carbon or emissions –
Have you personally ever gone hungry? Never know where your next meal will be?
The CARBON TAX debate and the sceptics engagement to deny the science is peripherial to what should be the more focused concern –
Population 1927 – 2 billion – 1974 – 4 billion – 1999 – 6 billion and estimated for 2050 is 9 billion – source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
China is the only Nation with a population policy – their one-child policy has reduced births by 400 million since the late 70’s.
So when the Carbon or emission debate rages – and blames human influence – surely population growth is part of that equation – and therefore – at what level can the planet continue to feed and support a global population doubling from 1927 levels each third of a generation – especially when it took thousands of years to get to the 2 billion level.
So to CameronH – spray yor barb – but you don’t contribute to the real debate – just attempt to distract via a spur leading to ignorance and a self awakening that you will realise that you have no idea what you’re talking about – learn that you don’t understand what it is that you don’t understand …
10
the eye ball opinionated
But Eye Ball – that’s not in the speech above – but could be! Brilliant!
10
why is it that the tribal/native know things are happening but the IPCC disregards the evidence?
Something astounding is going on and the elders in the Arctic Circle are telling us that even the position of the earth relative to the sun and stars has changed. NASA certainly is saying nothing about this but these elders are anything but idiots about their domain in the far north. It serves us to listen to these natives who live close to the earth, sun, moon and stars.
http://justmeint.wordpress.com/2011/07/08/wisdom-and-warning/
10
Bob Brown is “Chicken Little” that is for sure. I am amazed that the suckers are taken in by his “The Sky is Falling, the Sky is Falling” crap.
Funny that Julia allowed the announcement about the Carbon Tax to be made today by that Greenie woman today, whose name escapes me. My guess is that Julia allowed it, so that she could share the blame.
10
Do keep promoting IAN. It’s the next progressively dangerous CAGW term following global warming, climate change, extreme events, etc.
IAN covers every climate eventuality that can be blamed on hateful Mankind. It stands for “Increasingly Absolute Normality”. Be prepared, projections are that we are due to cop a lot of blame for it. It might even be logarithmic with time.
10
Apparently the Australian Food and Gocery Council are frightened of the GetUp thugs. Please send them messages of support at the contact details below 🙂
Head Office Phone Number: (02) 6273 1466
General Email: afgc@afgc.org.au
CEO: Kate Carnell – kate.carnell@afgc.org.au
Media Contact: Brad Watts – brad.watts@afgc.org.au
You can also leave them feedback via http://www.afgc.org.au/contact.html
10
Slightly OT, with apologies
Just caught the tail end of an interview on ABC radio with one of the NSW Labor inner party machine faithful, who proposes to radically transform the Labor brand to be MORE progressive in the wake of their ignominious defeat at the last election. His proposition (with apologies for not catching his name) was to tear down the old Labor infrastructure and appeal to young voters who want action on climate change, and other “progressive” issues! When asked what policies the new version would pursue, he stated he wasn’t interested in focussing on policy (very telling) but rambled on about “vision for the future” (god how I loathe these mindless catch cries). My question is, does this party just not get it? One of the main reasons Labor’s brand is sinking into the abyss is that they have moved so far away from their working class power bases and focussed on the latte set! They are in a self-deluded fantasy world with a complete disconnect from reality, much like their federal counterparts. Unbelievable!!
10
BRUCE thanks for the links I left them a supportive message
10
Winston did you catch the ABC news item tonight from Europe tell Australia NOT to go down the Carbon Tax Route?
Transcript now available from “Aunty”………… should we gold plate it and send it to Julia and Bob?
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2011/s3264996.htm
10
JustMEInT,
Perhaps the ABC are starting to hedge their bets.
Not before time!
10
Winston @ 24 I would guess that “vision for the future” would infer TWG (total world govt) hidden in there somewhere. Gotta watch these catch phrases but when you look around you see the same types of phrasing occurring time again from these clowns
10
Jo,
GOVERNMENT: “Bend over citizens of Australia. You won’t fell a thing.”
;-(
10
Nah, Eyeball… you lost me at,
Totalitarian decrees by an unelected Communist political class forcing more indignities on their subjugated masses…. Is not a good example to give.
Mao’s disasterous agricultural policies caused mass starvation and the death of tens of millions, because they were based on the bad science of Lysenko, the economics of Marx and the disasterous ideologies of Communism, all enforced by a fanatical bureaucracy… The one child policy stems from that cruel system.
Sustainability was not the issue….
You say that….
But that isn’t quite right. Acutally it’s not right at all. For a start Western nations produce massive amounts of foodstuffs using modern technology and modern methods of agriculture…
The reason Third world countries do not, is not because there are too many people, but because there is tyranny and strife. Any farmer or company who undertakes to use modern methods and equipment, ends up victimized….Zimbabwe was the “bread basket” of Africa…Socialist Politics and racial strife have reduced it’s people to poverty and starvation under an oppressive regime…..
Population is not the problem Eyball….. Tyranny is.
Capitalism is the answer. Unshackle the individual from tyranny. Give them the freedom to speak and to benefit from their own enterprise. The right to their own property. Allow them to use technology to free themselves from the tyranny of their fellow man and the tyranny of nature.
Sustainability is an efficiency equation that technology often solves.
10
The EYE-BALL Opinion: your statements that world population is un-feedable is utter nonsense. Theres plenty to feed everybody its a matter of energy supply to the poorer nations instead of blowing them up with endless wars and corrupt govts. You sound like you are a supporter of this Nazi Malthusian idea that all humans are bad for the planet except a few chosen elitists.
And JustMEInT: @21 I think some of these so called event are within statistical norms if records are checked back. Like ‘hurricans are increasing’ etc which arent. Another one is the dust bowl one yes its bad but it was not like 1934.
10
J. Hansford @ 31
Good post.
Might I add the following:
China is just now beginning to realise the folly of their “one child” policy.
For starters they now have an young adult population with a serious imbalance of males to females.
Second, as a direct result of the above, they now have an “aging population” similar to the situation here in OZ and best exemplified by Japan. Not enough young people coming on to support the previous generation.
Next, someone needs to point out to our resident Malthusians that there is no shortage of “food”. The world currently produces 2.1 kg of human food per head of population, EVERY day. When was the last time any reader ate 2.1 kg (nearly 5 lbs) of food a day.
The problems are politics and poverty, NOT sustainability. For instance continental Africa already produces more than enough to abundantly feed the resident population. The first problem is that lack of roads, transport and refrigeration means that over half of it never makes it from producer to consumer. Second, the local politics makes such trade impossible anyway.
In 2006 (the latest figures I have available) in the EU alone, 8 million tons of potatoes were turned into salted and flavoured potato crisps. While such a situation exists it is very difficult to argue that “the world is running out of food”.
10
When the buzzards circle here they circle for scraps don’t they – somehow I’ve become a Nazi Malthusian – someones though up catch phrase to make them feel good – a China supporting Totalitarian – and someone who stated the world can’t feed itself etc … sounds like Friday night desperates spoiling for a fix of verbal …
The debate notwithstanding all the error fixes by people who think their much cleverier – it still comes down to the original point – at what point does population become the issue if it is not already – it was the same original question …
Growing more food and expanding the habitat – are semantics – but in my children’s lifetime – the population debate will happen – why is it not even being talked about openly in this timeframe …
10
When the buzzards circle here they circle for scraps don’t they – somehow I’ve become a Nazi Malthusian – a China supporting Totalitarian – and someone who stated the world can’t feed itself to quote a few … sounds like Friday night desperates spoiling for a fix of verbal …
The debate notwithstanding all the thankful error fixes by people who are obviously much cleverier – it still comes down to the original matter raised – at what point does population become the issue if it is not already –
Growing more food and expanding the habitat and becoming better distributors- are semantics – but in my children’s lifetime – the population debate will happen – why is it not even being talked about openly in this timeframe …
10
Cameron,
What drugs are you on. We all want some.
America espouses free markets and has an annual deficit of 4 trillion, and outstanding debts of 14 trillion. All of those countries currently showing surpluses are planned economies.
Marxism is a broken model, so is self regulated markets. Is it true that congress has a bill before it to officially name 1000 trillion.? Maybe they are leaving that to Compaq, a giga billion.
10
J. Hansford,
There are none so blind as those who we not see.
Winston,
Can I assume you were named after our own John Winston Howard, or is that really you, little Johnny, using your middle name. Either way can we move on from the policies of the 1950’s.
All politicians have their day in the sunshine, and sadly when it is over someone else has to pick up the pieces. Maybe that is anyone, hence Kevin 07, and now our own Julia Dullard, or is that Bob Brown cross dressing?
It simply comes down to egotism. Not sure about Everybody/Nobody, or Everyone, Someone or Know one, but it would be good if we could just stay with something, that makes sense.
The population explosion since 1830 is the cause and effect of many many things. It also means new forms of enslavement.
10
@ The Eye-ball Opinion
While population growth (or in some nations, lack of growth) is a very important and worthy subject for discussion, this may not be the forum for it. Western civilization finds itself laboring under a pervasive anti-science CAGW meme, and this forum is more immediately centered on that subject.
Without a clear and accurate knowledge of what (non)effect human produced CO2 has on the Earth, there is no way to decide what technologies may be prudently used. Without a knowledge of what technologies are prudent, we cannot debate what the population carrying capacity of the planet is.
Untill the CAGW meme is resolved we do not know whether the Earth can sustain 500 million, or 50 billion.
10
T E_B O seems to have missed the reality that ACC is a front for sustainability. One can be pretty sure that the alarmists are not terminally stupid and are just as aware as are skeptics that the science is at best ambivalent about the causes of the very slight temperature increases over the last 100 years or so and thus know they are on fragile ground with predictions about the distant future. Sustainability, in the Malthusian sense, is what drives the CACC agenda not climate science.
Those with little understanding of human ingenuity and how industrialisation and the rich and diverse technology that flows from it, fail to grasp that the Malthusian connection between population growth and the means of subsistence is not valid in modern technological societies.
The UN projection of the world population is about 9.5 billion by 2100. Other demographers put it at about 10.5 billion. There seems to be some evidence that the best way to plateau the world’s population at about 9 to 10 billion is by improving the living standard of the under developed nations. The quickest and most reliable way to do that is to provide cheap reliable energy to all. Thus there is a disconnect between the use of expensive alternative renewable energy sources and sustainability/population control. That fatally flaws “Sustainability” as promoted by most of the Climate Change instrumentalities.
Without the CACC rationale as a Trojan horse for population control those who promote the idea of sustainability via population control are very unlikely to get much support from citizens in democracies.
10
I prefer to think of the human population as a very large Petri dish waiting for the next big inoculation.
Historically, human population growth was “artificially” restrained by war and naturally restrained by illness. We seem able to keep peace well enough that war is no longer a big problem. Illness, on the other hand, is only barely kept at bay with wealth. If we cannot sustain higher standards of living as I interpret J. Hansford @ 31:
then illness will ultimately take care of population. Illness may very well reduce population even IF we raise the standards of living. This is why demonizing Co2 is foolish and a complete waste of effort. We should be spending billions on improving medicine.
Unfortunately Malthusians LIKE dead people.
10
The EYE-BALL Opinion @ 34:
I think half a trillion people before we even have to consider dispersing out from this rock. Think about how much land there is on this planet. Hopefully in a a couple of hundred years we’ll have great cities under the sea, inside mountains and orbiting in the atmosphere. The food/water shortage hypothesis is a lie. It is purely an energy problem. With the ability to tap the atom we can purify and transport any volume water and directly light high-rise hydroponic greenhouses. We have the technology to do all these things for half a trillion people today.
So, half a trillion is my back of the envelope figure which would still leave vast tracks of environmentally significant land untouched. Who knows, we could probably fit many times that without a reduced quality of life.
It is also my wish to see Oz reach the billion milestone in my lifetime but, the racist and bigoted among us who have captured public opinion will prevent us from being any kind of globally significant country. Too bad. Most of my friends are immigrants and being around people from all four corners of the globe makes the wider world feel feel much more familiar. Not to mention it has been my privilege to witness how much more they to this country than the average aussie.
10
Hm, I keep dropping words words from my sentences. 😛 Sorry folks the keyboard on this machine is not up to the job of expressing my thoughts as they come to me.
Not to mention it has been my privilege to witness how much more they contribute to this country than the average aussie.
10
Reading that one made my head hurt! Kudos to Speedy! But alas, it apparently made some heads explode – like the one that has only an eyeball left!
Great work Speedy! Thanks for the laugh.
10
Great work speedy – I’d hate to have to learn it as a stage play 🙂
10
You really have to marvel at the “carbon price” scam and spin. Today we see in The West how modelling shows that 1.85 million households will be $200 better off under the scam, I mean scheme:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/9811675/pensioners-to-be-200-better-off-under-tax/
Now let’s not get confused here… this is a less-than-zero-sum game. The tax cannot create wealth and money, it only redistributes it. Because the mode of “carbon” accounting and assessment for taxation purposes is hideously inefficient you know you can’t possibly get back out of the system what you put in. That doesn’t even begin to address the fact billions shall be purloined from this tax for other purposes than buying off voters.
They even go on to say:
What they refuse to admit is that 10 out of 10 households will lose most, if not more, than the amount of the compensation through cost of living increases.
But then this is the Government as we know it… always presenting just one side of an argument.
10
Once again Abbott is talking sense in describing the “carbon” market:
Love the turn of phrase… see the full article here at The Australian:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/commentary/abbott-mounts-a-powerful-argument-against-gillards-carbon-tax/story-e6frgd0x-1226091000884
It’s chock full of common sense (other than the desire for a 20% renewables target, which is silly).
10
Green extremists abuse children in class !!!!!!!!
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/green_extremists_abuse_children_in_class/
10
Wicked @37
Winston is a literary reference, obviously. Nothing to do with Johnny Boy, a politician with whom I have many issues as far as his ideology on certain policies, but whose partnership with Costello at least had the virtue of reducing government debt in times of prosperity and setting a platform for sustainable (that word again!) economic development. That makes them light years ahead of almost any recent Australian PM/Treasurer combination. Hawke/Keating was a distant second, with the rest distanced or in the failed to finish category. The success of these 2 combinations had more to do with the OPPOSING views of each member of the partnership which each kept the other “honest”, rather than which party they represented, and this should be a template for future combinations at the apex of government as mutual admiration tends to only compound mistaken ideas and failed policy directions.
As far as representing the politics of the 50’s, my point in the post above ( which you completely missed) was
that Labor is distancing itself from the people who vote for them and who will turn will turn to the Liberal party in droves, as evidenced by dyed in the wool heartland Labor voters like my own father in law. This demographic is being alienated by Labor trying to ” green ” itself and appeal to the youth vote with superficial policies that appeal to the prejudices of the immature and the uninformed. I don’t believe that this statement makes me reactionary or regressive at all, just pointing out the virtue of not taking your traditional voter base for granted. As much as you might mock them, they deserve a voice in political life and their interests need to be considered rather than reducing your policy stream to a trickle on one issue, which all here agree is a “storm in a teacup”- a pretext to bring the budget into surplus and a social control mechanism to kill off the upwardly progressive middle classes, the self employed, the small business sector, in short the productive members of society whom Julia and her ilk hate with a passion! This is class warfare, pure and simple, making for a bipartite society with the wealthy elite and political inner sanctum at the top, with a large gap to the serfs and plebs at a very distant base where they are then ripe for control and exploitation. Instant NBN access to Centrelink for the “benefit” of the proles doesn’t ring any Orwellian bells does it?
10
Waffle @42, “purely an energy problem” I’m with you there, but rather than splitting the atom, I’m expecting a silver bullet in the shape of a single proton… Hydrogen produced by solar-powered electrolysis is clean, limitless, decentralised, distributable and soon (within my lifetime I bet) will be cheaper $/MJ than energy from coal. When that happens, our main problems will simply boil down to getting along with the neighbours and educating the children. Maybe the one-eyed Malthusians need a comedy mascot too to cheer them up; “The Scared Weird Little Guys” might be available.?
10
OT this is appalling! Tyranny in USA council.
http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/dpp/news/local/julie-bass-of-oak-park-faces-misdemeanor-charge-for-vegetable-garden-20110630-wpms
Citation for growing veges!
10
Here is an extract from an article in “DISCOVER” (science) magazine recently published. It suggests scientists believe less in climate change than lay people.
10
PhilJourdan@ 44
Know how you feel. My ears were bleeding by the time it was finished. But the main thing is that it’s only got one joke – that it is plainly stating the obvious truth in a very convoluted manner…
J.Hansford @ 15
Agree – I got a bit carried away there and a condensed version would be better. When time permits, I’ll post a cut-down version at the end of this thread. The bottom line is that when there is Nothing wrong with Everything, then it is unnecessary to do Anything, and Anything that we do do is going to cost Everybody Something. There I go again… 🙂
Thanks,
Speedy
10
OK this is so bad its funny and insane.. from “the american spectator”
“Meanwhile, from the other side of the planet comes a story which is perhaps the ultimate proof that “climate change” policy has gone Through the Looking Glass: Under the name of “Management of large feral herbivores in the Australian rangelands”, an Australian company has applied for a patent to “obtain a carbon offset credit or emission permit” for…wait for it…shooting camels from helicopters based on the theory that camels emit enough methane from their rear ends to be impacting climate.”
Anybody else heard of this?
Whole article here which deals more with the CAGW scam etc.
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/07/08/global-warming-tales-and-tail#
OK here’s the rub so when the camels are killed I guess their rotting carcasses wont give of as much methane as their rear ends if they were alive?
10
“theRealUniverse” (51),
Have a read about this outrageous S510 law in the US !
US Senate Bill “S510” Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOups0dfdwM
10
“OK here’s the rub so when the camels are killed I guess their rotting carcasses wont give of as much methane as their rear ends if they were alive?”
Seeing as the Camels are going to die and rot anyway the point you make is nonsense.
10
“theRealUniverse” (51),
Here is more about this US “S510” law…….
http://www.infowars.com/senate-bill-s510-makes-it-illegal-to-grow-share-trade-or-sell-homegrown-food/
So much for the US being the “land of the free” !
10
GREENS AND WINDSOR AND OAKESHOTT IGNORE PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION REPORT !
Just pure coincidence that Greens deputy leader Christine Milne and Independents Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott rejected the findings of a recent Productivity Commission report (May 2011) on the high costs of renewables especially the solar energy component
Solar Industry Newsletter “Energymatters” reports
(http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=1592)
10
GET UP DONATIONS – Billionairs, Big Tobacco, Big Oil, and the Govenor General’s Party.
.
I did some quick research on a few of the ‘Get Up’ big donors last night, it was an interesting exercise.
It appears that some of the large donors are interlinked by their ties to the largest Private Equity Venture Capital firm in Australia. (CHAMP).
Joseph Skrzynski (DONOR), Chair of SBS, is the Co-founder of CHAMP, together with Bill Ferris.
Their shares in CHAMP are held by another ‘Investment’ vehicle, HEYEDE Pty Ltd (DONOR).
(Nick Greiner – ex NSW Premier, holds, or has held the positions of, Deputy Chairman of CHAMP Private Equity and Australian Chairman of British American Tobacco).
Governor-General’s Program
11 April 2008
On Friday 11 April 2008, at Government House, Canberra, Their Excellencies the Governor-General, Major General Michael Jeffery AC CVO MC and Mrs Marlena Jeffery attended, and the Governor-General conducted, two Investiture Ceremonies.
In the evening, the Governor-General and Mrs Jeffery hosted a dinner for Investiture recipients. Guests included:
Mr William Ferris, AC and Ms Lea Ferris;
Mr Joseph Skrzynski, AO and Mrs Roslyn Horin;
Joseph Skrzynski(DONOR)and Mrs Roslyn Horin (DONOR) might be an ‘item’, they were also mentioned ‘together’ on the Garvan Institute site.
.
There is another common theme in all of the above ‘Investors’, it appears they are heavily invested in Life Science and Biomedic companies.
Maybe a coincidence – Maybe not !
.
One shy Billionair investor, Boris Liberman, owns 10% of a company that makes Electric Vehicles (Enova Systems, Inc. formerly U.S. Electricar, Inc), in the US via his JAGEN (DONOR) private companies.
SHELL also owns 19% of this company.
.
Last but not least is Graeme Wood (DONOR) head of Wotif.com and major sponsor of the Greens.
.
@Bruce #25
“Apparently the Australian Food and Gocery Council are frightened of the GetUp thugs.”
Well Bruce, two can play that game.
Might I suggest that we all send an Email to ‘Wotif’ on the lines of the following:
.
Dear Mr Wood
I notice that you are a sponsor of the ‘Get Up’ activist organisation.
Before I book my next Holiday with your company, I would like to know that you roundly condem the intimidatory tactics that ‘Get Up’ are using against the Australian Food and Gocery Council.
yours sincerly
‘name’
Email: info@wotif.com
.
HYPOCRISY: (from Get Up’s own website)
GET UP – Donations enquiries
What is your donations policy?
Politics should be about movements, not millionaires. So while our politicians are bankrolled by huge cheques from big business, GetUp is funded by you.
.
10
GetUp and the closing down of debate
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_getup_and_the_closing_down_of_debate/
10
Speedy – if it was the footy!!
Second half about to get under way here at the ‘G’ as Monckton leads them back out. He looks heavily strapped after a bruising first half but looks a certainty to run it out. The warmers attacking thrusts were getting erratic and desperate in the closing stages of the 2nd quarter so is there a shift coming in this game? That breeze which has favoured the warmers all day is now a bit more tricky. With Bolt taking control across half back the warmers need to find a way to goal but Gillard looks wobbly on both legs and Nova’s work at the stoppage has frustrated the warmers. Flannery hasn’t touched it since Bolt flattened him and his effectiveness is well down too. Players like Carter, Franks, and Kininmonth look to have a lot more in the tank than Combet, Milne, and Brown so keep an eye on the rotations with Wong out of action as the crowd gets involved in this game. Should be a cracker Speedy.
10
This is wonderful – an instant classic. Easily on a par with “Who’s on First?”
10
TrueNews –
if only the young CAGW crowd who are being manipulated by the very crowd they despise would wake up and see how they’ve been played by the big boys.
of course, Skrzynski is in charge of SBS. wonder why the staff there never ever put across a sceptical view. SBS is even worse than ABC, but gets less criticism. i long ago stopped watching the channel.
10
Could they stoop any lower ?
Australian children are being terrified by climate change lessons
Federal Schools Minister Peter Garrett said the government would not stop the teaching of climate science, despite moves in Britain for the subject to be withdrawn.
This sickens and angers me , if only there was some way to drag this traitor before a court !
http://www.news.com.au/national/australian-kids-are-living-in-climate-of-fear/story-e6frfkvr-1226091097398
10
Just got home from the Sydney rally. Good crowd, but we need to get our relo’s and neighbours out to make them bigger.
I was at the sydney rally in March and I feel there was a bigger turnout to that one.
You were right the first time BD.
10
“Bob Malloy” (65),
The communist gillard federal “governmnet” is kidding themeselves if they think that Australians will be fooled by this $200 BS !
The sum of $200 wouldn’t cover a third of our CURRENT household electricity bill.
THEY’RE DREAMING !
10
That should have read……
“The sum of $200 wouldn’t cover a third of our CURRENT QUARTERLY household electricity bill.”
10
Damian Allen: @ 57 yes I did hear about that law probably from the source you linked it from..criminally stupid. Just shows how far the US has fallen from a pillar of freedom.
10
More insanty..Chris Huhne UK energy
idiotminister.(the photo does him justice too)“Wars, food shortages and mass immigration: How global warming poses dire threat to Britain’s security
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2012349/Wars-food-shortages-mass-immigration-How-global-warming-poses-dire-threat-Britains-security.html#ixzz1RarmuXaP
Wars? Oh yes like Obama’s illegal one on Libya. Maybe he got the hots from too much CO2. Immigratiion um like what escaping from all those countries supposedly drowned? Well if the warmists were right London will drown along with it.
10
Mostly everything around climate and environment these days are politically motivated.
Its Not about saving the Earth or the climate.
Its about Changing the world. Or as I see it, Destroying the World.
Its about implementing political solutions too the World, step by step, that in the end will give us radical eco/enviro-socialism or even worse -communism.
Why is there no focus at all on these amtempt to radicalize the world and take away freedom and democracy?
If you tell the people what kind of radical political future the Greenpeace/WWF/UNEP/leftist track will give us. I bet very few will go along?
10
Is it fair, branding Joolya a Liar ?
She did say there would be No Carbon Tax ( or was it an ETS) under a Government I lead, but then she isn’t leading the Government , while the Greens clearly are.
10
Listen to the audio of both Swan and Gillard BLATENTLY LYING to all Australians about the carbon DIOXIDE (PLANT FOOD) tax………
http://www.hotheads.com.au/carbon%20tax%20scam.htm
10
crakar24 @3,
Methinks NOAA needs to build another ark and be ready for the next flood they’re so sure is always just around the corner. They can take a breeding pair of every species of alarmist along just to be sure the poor babies don’t die out completely.
10
Reading some of the “leaked” detail on what Julia Gillard will be announcing today it seems Tony Abbott will have a major problem when he gets in after the election. The Govt. appears to be linking the carbon tax to a major shake up of personal tax –so if Abbott wants to repeal the carbon tax then aside from the issue of the Green’s control of the Senate there will be a major unravelling excercise needed.
But it does reinforce the point that the tax is nothing to do with the environment (the targets are so pathetic anyway) but more just a tax grab / more big government exercise.
10
Roy @ 73
That’s the trouble with that softy Noah. If he hadn’t let the two socialists on board there would have been none to multiply.
Just sayin……..
10
Speedy,
Can you give some comedy lessons to John Brookes? The poor boy actually thinks the kind of remarks he makes are funny. Perhaps lessons from a master could help.
10
Today we officially become the most stupid country on earth – an economically petrified socialist outpost of the failing European Union experiment turning our back on the world we inhabit, led by China and the USA. How long will it take to undo the self-destruction about to be wrought upon us by our 12% minority tribe of Gaia zombies?
10
Mark D. @75,
You wouldn’t really want them all to just die out would you? Think about how dull this blog would be without them. 😉
10
Roy @ 78 and acknowledging Tom @ 77 above; YES
But since I don’t get to choose, I’ll vote for a total economic collapse worldwide instead. I think I’ll be one of the survivors and I wouldn’t give 2 bits bet on any of the so-called academia and their socialist ways, surviving the first wave of hungry mobs. It’ll be sweet seeing them devoured as if by the zombies.
10
this morning in the newspapers they are quoting Bob Brown as saying once the CT announcement is out in the public arena Aussies will change their minds – because they will see it is not going to be all disater like Tony A is predicting.
Just let me say this (as a thought) if there is a huge swing (currently it is sitting at 30% only) in favour of the carbon tax that will prove Aussies can be cheaply bought off…… sad to say but that as I see it will be the reality.
A few additional dollars in the purse, and a change to personal income tax levels and we will all be happy? Not this little Kitten!
And anyway – PM says regardless of what we think, feel or desire – the CT will go ahead anyway… so much for democracy they know what is best for us…. despite what the EU has warned this week.
10
Ross #74
Not necessarily so. In 1975 the ALP suffered a nation wide swing of around 7%. Malcolm Fraser had thumping majorities in both houses and proceeded to do….absolutely nothing. This was unforgiveable. He had the golden opportunity to uproot the welfare mentality planted by Whitlam but “wussed” it.
With a large enough swing such as that just seen in NSW, all three Green Senate seats up for reelction in 2014 will probably go to the Coalition and/or conservative Independents. So the “left” side of the Senate loses three and the “right” side gains three. Net difference of six and a real game changer. Bob Brown in his hubris forgets that the ALP will have taken such a bashing from the people that those remaining mightl be only too happy to sever the knot with the Greens once and for all.
The issue for Abbott is to decide if he wants to be another Malcolm Fraser or to make a real difference. I don’t think he would be allowed by the party or the public to repeat that, such will be the public anger by that time.
I can’t believe that the Gillard actually told the electorate that they would have to “reform” themselves in order to face her view of the future. Straight out of Leninist Russia, that!
Fasten the safety belts folks, it’s going to be a bumpy ride through “interesting times”.
10
We of the sceptical persuasion owe this gentleman a dept of gratitude. His letter of resignation shines like a beacon in our time.
10
Mark @ 81
All I was trying to say is that if Gillard is linking it all to personal tax cuts etc then it makes it more difficult to unravel the tax. If it was simply put on as a carbon tax with nothing else “attached” then theoretically it would be easy to remove by regulation or act of parliament. But by linking these other things to it is practically more difficult –not impossible just more time consuming.
I wasn’t trying to suggest Abbott would not do anything.
BTW, I think if Bob Brown keeps going on like I saw him on Sky News yesterday he will make it very easy, from a political view point ,for Abbott to push for a double dissolution when the time comes, because Brown will antagonise the Australian public so much ( and his ego will not allow him to pull back on some of these outlandish comments)
10
Elsie # 52
In other words, those who believe the theory of dangerous man-made global warming, leading to catastrophic climate change are less educated and more easily led. Now, of course, we can see the very reason for the dumbing down of science and maths in schools. It creates a population more easily manipulated. Baaaaa
On top of that you have the sickening lefties who think it is ok to scare children in schools with their Green ideology (Peter Garrett springs to mind). I know of parents who have had to set about de-programming their young teenage children after they have been exposed to Gore’s eco horror flick here in Qld. Those are the aware parents, so imagine how many parents out there who are less educated themselves and/or involved in their kid’s education. It is no wonder that it is predominantly the young who have swallowed this crap!
It is dangerous when our schools cease to be about education (teach them the basics of reading, maths and science) and have become more about political indoctrination. At least when it came to religion, you had a choice to send your kids to a secular state school. On ideology, the choice has been taken away from parents as Green thinking has infiltrated the curriculum.
Scaring children is not a new phenomenon though, as most fairy tales have a wicked character as a cautionary message. Now the wicked characters are the evil polluting energy suppliers who are destroying our planet and of course us for wickedly using energy. Children are turning up to psychologists with feelings of self-loathing and guilt induced anxiety (told to me by a psychologist concerned with the schemas, or deep mental structures that many children and adults have developed around environment). What they are doing in schools is not benign.
In the 1980’s we were at the tail-end of the cold war and I remember being shown a film on what a nuclear winter would be like – I would have been about 14. I still remember it, including the video room and other small details around that event, so it must have been emotionally salient. I’m educated enough now to put my schooling into a historical social context, but I can see that it will take generations for the Co2 climate hysteria to diminish.
10
As an owner of a 2.1kW solar feed-in system on my roof due to taxpayer/billpayer greening and a resultant 9-10% risk free after tax return, casual observations of its inverter readout gives me considerable cause for alarm when my Govt talks of closing Hazelwood and Playford power stations among other such things. Modern inverters have facilities for comms interfacing and there’s always some tech-head prepared to use such a facility to the limit for the benefit of us all. I’ll let one such guru take up the story with lots of lovely graphs, etc when you peruse all the links on his website here- http://htpc.avenard.org/power/home
When you recognise the extreme volatility and variability of solar collection you too will be alarmed at lunatic fringe talk of closing power stations.
10
Ross.
Sorry if you took my comment as an attack; not the intention I assure you. Just trying to say that if a week can be a long time in politics, imagine what’s possible in a couple of years.
10
“JustMEInT” (80),
This communist gillard “government” MUST be stoipped by ANY AND ALL MEANS !
My suggestion – Shut down Canberra. Hundreds of thousands of Australians to picket parliament house and have the truck operators close down all the roads, until these COMMUNIST agree to call an election. Anything less is an affront to Democracy and all Australians!
If this does not work then I see no ither alternative but riots and bloodshed.
This is a fight for our very existence.
It is a WAR.
Let us hope that we do not shirk the responsibility to defend our freedom and have the guts to do what is necessary, whatever the cost !
10
Mark — No I did not take is an attack. Just thought I’d better explain my point abit better.
10
Ross.
No sweat
10
Damian Allen: #87
You are a lunatic my fellow commentator – no better that a common thug – representative of everything that is primitive in the human instinct –
Have you ever been in a WAR – I dare say NO – yet pipsqueaks like you get up and whether it be induced bravado or mental brain snap you advocate WAR – because someone disagrees with your opinion – sceptic debaters’ do not need you elk – go hug a tree – build a tree-house and fight your own demons by yourself – whatever – just go …
10
People of Australia you have to believe in the Human Carbon Pollution Mantra to want to accept the handouts (if you are eligible) from this government.
Talk about being bought off to silence opposition.
10
Well there we had it… the big lie writ large by the red queen and her henchmen. I lost count of the number of times all three amigos used “carbon pollution” like the brain-impaired parrots they are.
I see they are providing a fake tax cut (yes, you have all been the subject of bracket creep in the last year and this coming year, my friends) to sell this policy to tax an invisible gas which increases crop yields.
But the best part was possibly the opening lines… like a moronic Goreacle devotee the red queen repeated (several times) “tuh science is innn…” with hands gesticulating like a broken animatronic robot. Oh well, she has a job opportunity in Disney World when she gets unceremoniously dumped next election.
10
Just:
They are morons if they think the compensation is enough to offset two years of bracket creep and the additional impost of the carbon (dioxide) tax. If people are that stupid, then they are too stupid to be swayed from voting Green/Labor.
10
(
Dont forget us parents who are not toeing the line…. we are damaging the future for our children……
10
person answeing live chat during foxtel viewing stated:
Truck to pay carbon price thru reduced excise. It will be costly for the transport industry.
BullDust….. in effect they are buying the silence of the nation. Over 99% of people asking questions during live broadcast wanted to know What is IN IT for ME!
10
This person (Gemma Jones) also said: a feature of this Carbon Tax is waelth redistribution.
DID ANYONE hear them mention how much goes to the UNITED NATIONS….. I missed that
10
It appears taht the recommendations of the Henry Tax review – are being introduced and funded by a ‘Carbon Tax’ – it’s all a great big misunderstanding – or so they would have us all believe …
Threshold creep is relevant (Bulldust #93) – but income splitting acheives the same result – but to use a ‘big new tax’ to cover/disguise a tax reform agenda is quite smart and blaming CARBON POLLUTORS is misdirection that even SPIN CITY or YES MINISTER script writers would never thought of …
Much to digest in the package and the confusion of the – ‘can’t stand to hear ‘BIG RED’ speak’ position – to really trying to understand what some very smart people think will take a few days …
10
I do agree that it will take a few days to get all of this straight in my brain Arghhhh, but I think this is worth noting:
But why bother at all?
BoltA does the calculations:
Julia Gillard on Thursday:
The plan I will announce on Sunday will be a plan to cut 160 million tonnes of carbon pollution by 2020.
So what difference would this make to the world’s temperatures?
So the calculations. Gillard’s massive taxes and billions in subsidies for green powers will over the next decade avert (a measly) 0.00024 degrees of warming, providing she does all she claims she will, and provided global warming theory works as advertised.
And to achieve even that, how much will Gillard have to ratchet up her tax over the next decade?
Economic Pain for virtually ZERO environmental Gain.
Andy Semple
10
The CT package that was just announced by Julia et al exposes how weak and feeble Monckton’s alarmist campaign is.
Where is his economic modelling to back up his claims that Australia will become a third world banana monarchy?
10
Bingi,
So you would be talking about the great wealth redistribution package by a government without a mandate full of kickbacks and and loopholes to combat a trace gas rather than real polluters like, let’s say Lihir Gold in PNG?
Wow, you really are easily led there Bingi. Kind of like a lemming really.
10
Madjak @ 100
Bingi is a dive-bomber troll.
Drops in, drops one his pearls of wisdom, and then disappears.
Not worth the electrons to reply to.
10
What a complete and total FRAUD from Juliar/Brown coalition.
Even if you believe Oz could reduce emissions by 160 M tonnes by 2020, China and the developing world increases will dwarf our reductions by many 100’s M’s of tonnes over the same period.
http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/ieo/emissions.html
Lindzen just laughed this morning on Bolt Report when asked what effect this would have on the climate.
What stupid dummies and fantasists these fools are to actually believe this fanatical nonsense.
10
So over the last decade we have gone from having the following:
1) A Civilian supersonic flight programme
2) A reusable space shuttle programme
to
1) No Civillian supersonic flight
2) No Space shuttle programme
3) A minority government led by a person who sees no problem with conducting a coup on an elected PM
4) A Minority government which is determined to tinker with the economy using a wealth redistribution system all under the guise of conducting some ideological war on an element in the periodic table.
5) The greens waiting in the wings with their mates just champing at the bit to get the prices raised many times over.
Oh yes, once this is in, anyone who thinks these bribes will remain really doesn’t have an intellect worth conversing with IMO.
Good grief. If this moronic package does get up, australia needs to bow it’s head in complete and utter shame for it’s neglect of democratic values.
There is No excuse for allowing this to occur people. Remember that.
10
People of Australia you have to believe in the Human Carbon Pollution – Global Warming Mantra to want to accept the handouts (if you are eligible) from this government.
Talk about being bought off to silence any and all opposition.
http://justmeint.wordpress.com/2011/07/10/a-new-generation-of-frogs/
10
Of course the govt’s chief extremist spokesmen Flannery and Garnaut both admitted there is zero we can do about CAGW and Dreyfuss agreed as well.
See Bolt Report today for their admissions and silly Timmy actually states that the temp wouldn’t change for hundreds of years or perhaps a thousand years, even if the entire world stopped emitting co2 today.
This stupid govt has saddled us with 4 B$ more debt for a ZERO return, all that pain for buggerall gain.
Bolt’s 4.30 pm repeat today on CH 10 will have Terry McCrann’s take on this idiotic package.
Abbott’s reply will be shown at 6.30pm tonight and at 9 pm tonight Bolt will take on the Hewson looney and some other embecile on ch 10 as well.
10
I liked one of the comments on Bolt’s blog re the level of the tax on the companies affected and this should be thrown in Brown’s face to shut him up — he thinks he has control now but when Abbott gets in all he has to do is reduce the level of to 1 cent /tonne to make it irrelevant. Don’t need to actually get rid of the tax all.
Brown does not have control at all.
10
Good essay by Ben Pile. Seems our friend Will Steffen has been busy in Stockholm putting humanity on trial for crimes against the planet in the name of ‘sustainability’.
“We don’t have to stretch our imaginations to get a glimpse of what these new institutions and powers – the object of the sustainability agenda’s ambition – will look like and what they are really about. The mock trial of humanity allowed the laureates to play out their fantasy in which humanity’s guilt is turned into political power. In this intertwined relationship, there is no need of democracy; political power is simply justified on the basis of humanity’s guilt and the inevitability of catastrophe. The laureates imagine themselves in a state administrated by Plato’s philosopher kings. Us mere plebs are deemed incapable of determining things for ourselves. They appoint themselves, in case our base ambitions, desires and needs get the better of us and we send the world into ruin…..”
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/10549/
10
“The EYE-BALL Opinion” (90),
YOU ARE A ….. snipped by Yoda the Mod for breach of commenting rules…
10
The same applies to you “Bingi” !!
10
Damian Allen:
July 10th, 2011 at 3:45 pm
“The EYE-BALL Opinion” (90),
… Snipped – Yoda…
Keep going with this global warming FRAUD and this is what will start to happen to your ilk !
Damian Allen:
July 10th, 2011 at 3:47 pm
The same applies to you “Bingi” !!
Nice one Damian – facepalms all round for team sceptic.
10
I see the trolls are out in force… no feeding the trolls people, it only makes the whole site look ridiculous, or worse still, like the ABC drum/Crikey blogs.
10
Just watched the Bolt Report on the web … one thing I found very relvealing is the snipey remark of one of the feeble Labor stooges insulting Lord Monckton from behind the shield of Parliamentary Priviledge. It is quite unseemly and abundantly clear that Monckton would be able to bedate that individual to the point of being a blubbering puddle in the corner. I call foul on that member and his cowardly insults.
Also revealing in the questions after the presentations by the Carbon Queen that she could not or would not answer the very simple question of how many households will be worse off under the new tax. Very telling the dishonesty.
10
Damian Allan #108 …
What are you – like 10yo … what sort of person expresses his ‘jibber jabber’ this way …
…snipped – yoda the mod…
Yea right – I wiped my ass in your face – what does that get me … ‘burnt at the stake’ … where are you from!!!!
10
Damian Allen.
You are doing this site and its owner a grievous disservice. Can’t you express yourself adequately without resorting to profanity and endless links to Andrew Bolt’s blog?
10
Jo
I agree – many of them are very odd! But nowhere near as odd as our [ahem] “government”. The “Carbon Tax” looks like something borne out of a committee – the Greens wanted a Carbon Tax and Labor wanted to stay in power. Or, more precisely, to be entitled to the trappings of power – we all know who’s pulling Julia’s strings!
Cheers,
Speedy.
10
Tax Rates To Go Up Even More Under Carbon Tax !!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.menzieshouse.com.au/2011/07/tax-rates-to-go-up-even-more-under-carbon-tax.html
GILLARD$ 1.5 BILLION DOLLAR CARBON DIOXIDE TAX BRIBE !!!!!!!!!!
http://www.menzieshouse.com.au/2011/07/15bn-in-carbon-tax-bribe.html
10
Well done YODA – wondered where you were … nothwithstanding it is Sunday …
10
memoryvault@101:
OMG. Are you implying… putting a price on electrons?!! Noooo!
How could we be so blind. This is surely the next (il)logical step in the green left agenda. I can see the next speech by the Red Queen…
My fellow Australians, I can now announce the details of my government’s new law to address a looming catastrophe that should be alarming to all of us.
We had control of the lamestream media, yet those evil dirty bloggers were able to POLLUTE the public discourse with skeptical lies using their web pages and their climategate emails and their Internet access. They claim objectivity, but behind the scenes these so-called skeptics are often found to be secretly funded by Big Electron.
We can no longer allow our political spaces to be polluted by unrestrained use of electrons. From now on, Australia’s 1000 biggest electron emitters are going to pay The Electron Tax, starting with the most popular blogs and online journalists. When the price of electricity goes up for everybody and with almost no practical alternative nor benefit, remember it is not an indefinite and wholesale tax on energy to stuff UN coffers but merely a stepping stone to the beginnings of a fair and open Electron Trading Scheme.
We must take action urgently on electron pollution. It is clear that the modern rise in electron emissions correlates very closely with increases in Internet-based subversion and the total number of violent crimes committed every year in this country. Electron deniers’ claims of a Medieval Warring Period when violent crime was high even without electron use are nonsense and are just another example of electron pollution to spread misinformation. Claims of a “lightning effect” are speculative and cannot be taken seriously in models of future electron impact. Far from being a natural subatomic phenomenon exhibiting wave-like properties and being necessary for life, electrons are now known beyond reasonable doubt to be particles that disrupt the political climate. The science of electron exchange is settled.
I want to assure the people of Australia that the less fortunate amongst us, those whom are short of electrons, should remain positive. They will be fully compensated by my Labor government for the increased living cost of the electron tax. This will be done by regular compulsory elections. I’m sorry, I meant electrocutions. Public electrocutions.
[switches to different camera angle.]
Solar power!
[switches back to first camera angle.]
I know that Australians, people who are truly Australian, people who would do whatever I ask to avoid being called “un-Australian”, can see the reality of electron exchange happening around us. They will apply the Aussie values of a pioneering spirit and hard work to take on the harness… erm I mean… opportunity.. of fighting electron exchange…. and living the tough pioneer life once again.
[Fade to carbon black]
How’d I go Bob? Can I make you a cuppa?
10
Andrew
Nice one – I’m a fan of puns. “Medieval Warring Period?!”
You should be hung, drawn and quoted!
Cheers,
Speedy
10
Andrew McRae @ 118
Good one – you’ll be putting Speedy out of a job next.
I’m not fussed out an electron tax.
I don’t use a spam filter on my email.
That way I can post places like here using recycled electrons.
10
Andrew @ 118 and Speedy @ 119
You two should form a comedy duo and see if Bolt will give a five minute segment at the end of his show each week.
10
Speedy,
I also prize my puns. It is sadly a dwindling currency in our culture; typically eliciting accusations of making “dad jokes”. When I’m in a punning mood it is tempting to force a pun, but this time the MWP just popped right in there when I had already picked violence as the scary correlate. I guess puns work as the icing, but not as the cake.
Memoryvault,
I am honoured to merit the comparison.
Ta.
10
Any Australian scheduled for a colonoscopy tomorrow would only have had to experience the sight of Windsor, Oakeshott and the Greens. Would have totally negated the need for the “magic sachet”. To think that Julia(r) is still to come. Not that I’ll be watching.
I didn’t think Abbott, Hockey or Hunt were convincing at all. They’re only singing from a different page in the same hymn book.
10
CARBON DIOXIDE TAX ONLINE POLLS………..
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/national/cast-your-vote-in-national-plebiscite-on-carbon-tax-hosted-by-news-ltd-websites/story-e6freooo-1226091387866
10
Taxpayers to help subsidise UN’s $100 billion climate fund
http://www.newsweekly.com.au/issue.php?id=296
10
More Online Polls to vote in!………………
Are you worried the carbon tax will drive up living costs?
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/vote-archive.aspx
Are you for or against a carbon tax?
http://au.news.yahoo.com/polls/popup/-/poll_id/4fdf8659-10cc-3882-9508-66c8f0e449a3
10
Carbon DIOXIDE (PLANT FOOD) tax Sunday
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/carbon_sunday/
10
Mark D. @79,
I didn’t get a chance to stay logged on yesterday so I didn’t see your response until early this morning. I just want to say it’s not so much a joke as it may look. Things keep getting a little worse, a little worse and a little worse. I don’t see anything getting better and it’s been that way for a long time. So you may get your wish.
Violence is a terrible thing! TV gave me a front row seat to the Watts riots in Los Angeles years ago. In a rage people began to destroy their own nest. It’s not rational.
The internet gave us all a front row seat on 9/11. No one at my office worked that day. Every computer was glued to the scene and when those towers went down I was as terrified as those on the street trying to escape it. That act of terrorism wasn’t the slightest bit rational either. More than 3,000 died that day.
The meltdown you describe will be infinitely worse than anything any terrorist ever thought of. And it won’t be the slightest bit rational either. No one can be sure of surviving it. I don’t hope for it. It scares me to death.
Let us all work diligently to try to change course and avoid such a thing.
—————–
Damian Allen @87,
Peaceful civil disobedience is one thing and violence is another. If you’re a man of goodwill with good judgment, don’t go there. If you’re a fool then keep on talking about it.
Show us which you are by how you proceed from here on. Don’t let your anger make your decisions for you.
10
Are you for or against a carbon tax?
http://au.news.yahoo.com/polls/popup/-/poll_id/4fdf8659-10cc-3882-9508-66c8f0e449a3
RESULTS
for (5029) 16%
AGAINST (26403) 84%
10
Raven, do we risk throwing out the science with the bathwater?
Although it is tempting to call for the doctrine of man-made climate change to be removed from Australian schools, as Tim Oates is now removing it from UK schools, that may not be the best solution. In the US, some school districts have demanded and implemented a different approach: that various climate theories are canvassed including arguments that differ from the greenhouse scare. It is known as “teach the controversy” method. It was (controversially) used by creationists to teach intelligent design alongside evolution. And its use to tackle the greenhouse scare has warmists scared and angry. Parents and local school boards have insisted that a diversity of views on climate are canvassed and that curricula follow through on this approach. When you reflect, isn’t that what our society is based on, people being exposed to a diversity of competing arguments and ideas? It is the essence of science and of democracy. Those attempting to shut down the debate, saying the climate ‘science is settled’, playing the man (‘deniers’) and not the ball, and teaching the CO2 meme like a cult catechism are the ones on the outer here. Should we copy them and ban stuff, or instead stand up for our freedoms?
Original report: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/may/17/global-warming-school-teaching-controversy
10