Tas 2018 Tasmania Election - LIBERAL WIN

[boncer34]

First, it wasn't a view just directed at this election.

Which was his point.

Election spending isn't a new issue, but I can't recall Labor being upset about it until now.

 

[HairyO]

Which was his point.

Election spending isn't a new issue, but I can't recall Labor being upset about it until now.

Only once unions and GetUp were no longer the biggest 3rd party spenders did it become an issue?

 

[madmug]

Health, education and anything other than regional tourism is not the responsibility of the council. They do not fund these departments and they don't have the means to do so either.

Regional Tourism, check.

The local Federal, state & council reps should work together with local business on the other issues I mentioned.

 

[Financialpanther]

Regional Tourism, check.

The local Federal, state & council reps should work together with local business on the other issues I mentioned.

Great in theory but remember how many councils there are.

 

[pugsville]

Now the Tasmanian Liberals are claiming a mandate for policies only announced by mail outs so select groups.

How can democracy works when politicians just don't say publicly what their policies are?

This is why elections are undemocratic,

Just have a rolling election all the time, they change their policies nip down to the electoral office and change your vote.

 

[Engimal v3]

Interesting that neither the Greens nor Labor chose to focus on the Liberal government's love of opening up native and old growth to the timber industry. All I heard about was pokies, which is a non-issue to most. Losing our rainforests is probably a bigger concern to most.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

Interesting that neither the Greens nor Labor chose to focus on the Liberal government's love of opening up native and old growth to the timber industry. All I heard about was pokies, which is a non-issue to most. Losing our rainforests is probably a bigger concern to most.

Losing the Rain Forest is continually way overplayed in Tassie. There is plenty of Rain Forest, but the greens keep trying to claim previous logged and mined areas to appease the inner city support base.

 

[nobbyiscool]

Losing the Rain Forest is continually way overplayed in Tassie. There is plenty of Rain Forest, but the greens keep trying to claim previous logged and mined areas to appease the inner city support base.

Yep, theres plenty of inaccessible, useless forest still standing.

Do you know what was involved in clearfelling and 1080 poisoning?

 

[Bomberboyokay]

How many governments lose in their first election.

3 in the last 4 years.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

Yep, theres plenty of inaccessible, useless forest still standing

The Greens are just trying to lock up more forest and make it inaccessible and useless. The environmental value of the forest is not diminished just because it is inaccessible.

Do you know what was involved in clearfelling and 1080 poisoning?

There was certainly a period where there was an excess of clear felling, but most areas were more subject to selective logging. If you visit some areas that were logged 50 plus years ago the forest has clearly regrown.

The 1080 poisoning was more to do with plantations.

 

[nobbyiscool]

The Greens are just trying to lock up more forest and make it inaccessible and useless. The environmental value of the forest is not diminished just because it is inaccessible.



There was certainly a period where there was an excess of clear felling, but most areas were more subject to selective logging. If you visit some areas that were logged 50 plus years ago the forest has clearly regrown.

The 1080 poisoning was more to do with plantations.

The environmental value is not even half the argument. The argument was the industrial society vs post-industrial society, where you pit the industrial approach of pillaging a finite resource at the expense of the potentially infinite post-industrial society approach where that resource is utilised for it's tourism value. This is a particularly relevant argument in Tasmania as it tries to market itself as "the natural state."

The suggestion that "most areas" were subject to "selective logging" is abjectly, demonstrably false.

 

[King Brown]

Post industrial societies are bleak low employment, poorly educated hell holes, with parts preserved in aspic that wealthy tourists love because they stay in nicely furnished AirBnBs away from the drug addicted riffraff. This is the real Tasmania:




Not to mention the dozens of towns lack potable water.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

The environmental value is not even half the argument. The argument was the industrial society vs post-industrial society, where you pit the industrial approach of pillaging a finite resource at the expense of the potentially infinite post-industrial society approach where that resource is utilised for it's tourism value. This is a particularly relevant argument in Tasmania as it tries to market itself as "the natural state."

The suggestion that "most areas" were subject to "selective logging" is abjectly, demonstrably false.

You are free to believe anything you wish.

 

[nobbyiscool]

You are free to believe anything you wish.

So what you're really saying is "I'm going to continue denying facts because I am free to believe anything I wish."

As people have started to say in recent years Joe, you're entitled to your own opinion - you aren't entitled to your own facts.

The reason the forests peace deal was necessary was that selective logging was a practice that had pretty much ceased. It was pretty much all clearfelling by the turn of the century.