Opinion Politics (warning, may contain political views you disagree with)

Remove this Banner Ad

Taylor said:
Well I did try and ask people what expectations they had projected into the ALP government but nobody was interested in detailing what differences they expect.

It would be a shame for people to feel happy or sad purely because the team they have decided they are on, who both doesn't even know they exist or care at all about them, won or lost.
Click to expand...
It's a very difficult question to answer days after an election., but I'll give it a crack.
We will see an integrity commission of some sort established.
A large investment by government in community/social/low cost housing.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a change in tax rates for our most wealthy.
Obviously we'll have environmental policies implemented, but I can't say what, that box has too many options.
I really don't want the Greens having the balance of power because their history of negotiating/compromise is terrible.
Biggest mistake Albo can make is to try and do too much. But if he believes in something and someone has the power to block the legislation, I'm all for him calling a double dissolution election. For example if the Greens try to block any nuclear development, Labor should push it through. I'm hopeful of good things.
 
poshman said:
I expect very little from the media. Don’t trust any of them. I am talking to people on here who have been engaging with me for years now. And I am looking forward to them being as passionate about issues with the greens or ALP as they have been the last few years.
Click to expand...
You know these people will most likely agree with the decisions right?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Bicco said:
You know these people will most likely agree with the decisions right?
Click to expand...

Oh most things. But they should be able to call their side out on missteps or bad behaviour. Especially if they have been so passionate about the other side.

Not exactly holding my breath but I will hold onto some small hope.
 
poshman said:
I’m not sure what is confusing?
Click to expand...
well for me it's emissions reductions targets of even up to 75% (Greens) or 60% (Steggall, Ryan) by 2030 without using nuclear (like European countries), or coming up with a completely new energy source that can replace current base load power.

Great to be trying to do our part but all election I just heard percentages and no one actually discussing how they would get there. Very confusing for a (former) scientist.
 
Big Animal said:
well for me it's emissions reductions targets of even up to 75% (Greens) or 60% (Steggall, Ryan) by 2030 without using nuclear (like European countries), or coming up with a completely new energy source that can replace current base load power.

Great to be trying to do our part but all election I just heard percentages and no one actually discussing how they would get there. Very confusing for a (former) scientist.
Click to expand...
Very important point. Well said.

Unrealistic emissions targets raise many questions with no solutions.

I was raised on a farm and can't help but think what energy source is going to drive those big tractors, headers etc all around Australia from 2030 ?

What effect would a significantly reduced national crop have on our food source.

What would the impact be on the many communities around Australia reliant on agriculture ?

Who pays for the significant capital investment in equipment running on "clean" energy (if that is an option) ? This capital outlay is in the tens of billions. There is no way farmers can stump up with that.

Etc etc etc

This is but one industry.

This is from the ALP website :

Alongside the economic benefits, our plan will reduce Australia’s emissions by 43% by 2030 – which will become Australia’s target under the Paris Agreement, keeping us on track for net zero by 2050.

Genuinely like to hear some answers from supporters of these 2030 targets.
 
Last edited:
I think we should have nuclear power plants that spend the low demand at night powering water pumps and desal plants to refill the rivers or rewater the inland areas to make them more productive and more assured of production.

It's zero emissions, green and makes the local world healthier.
 
Big Animal said:
well for me it's emissions reductions targets of even up to 75% (Greens) or 60% (Steggall, Ryan) by 2030 without using nuclear (like European countries), or coming up with a completely new energy source that can replace current base load power.

Great to be trying to do our part but all election I just heard percentages and no one actually discussing how they would get there. Very confusing for a (former) scientist.
Click to expand...

Completely agree with you. Yet the sentiment seems more important than any practical real world application.

Saying they want to get rid of all fossil fuel use… that should send every voter running from the greens and that isn’t even their worst idea.
 
Taylor said:
I think we should have nuclear power plants that spend the low demand at night powering water pumps and desal plants to refill the rivers or rewater the inland areas to make them more productive and more assured of production.

It's zero emissions, green and makes the local world healthier.
Click to expand...

They seem to have finally gone back to nuclear in Europe. I’m hoping we aren’t too far behind. We could achieve a lot with the water used in the plants.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Britain's reduced emissions targets that were being thrown in our faces a few months back as to why we are "doing nothing" are based on importing more nuclear power from France.

Nuclear could also be used to manufacture the power intensive process to process hydrogen for powering our vehicles quickly and easily including industrial and farm equipment that won't leave the cleanup in decades to come from battery disposal or the limited minerals required to make the batteries if we are continuing to put batteries in everything.
 
You wouldn't even get an agreement on finding a suitable location to build a nuclear power plant in Australia by 2030. let alone start the process of building one.
 
Nuclear has to be a part of any serious discussion about reducing emissions.
Labor should go back to being the workers party. If the Greens want to make changes, they need to show exactly how employment will migrate. It's all very well printing numbers, but how it actually happens is a completely different matter.
 
stax on the mull said:
You wouldn't even get an agreement on finding a suitable location to build a nuclear power plant in Australia by 2030. let alone start the process of building one.
Click to expand...

It would be possible if there was enough leadership strength in either of the major parties. So unlikely... but even that is more likely than the targets the greens and others have set, all the while taxing big corps more. Which are predominantly in resources that would no longer be operating. It is a mind bender.
 
Liberal vote collapsed . Hopefully voters will realise the destruction that the national party has forced upon Australia and they disappear.
Their non action on climate has caused energy prices to go through the roof.
The LNP from Howard to Morrison has been a brake on Australia moving forward.
 
salim malik said:
Liberal vote collapsed . Hopefully voters will realise the destruction that the national party has forced upon Australia and they disappear.
Their non action on climate has caused energy prices to go through the roof.
The LNP from Howard to Morrison has been a brake on Australia moving forward.
Click to expand...

The primary vote of both major parties collapsed.

I'd argue that the political reality for Australia, and probably the world, is that whether or not something was in the control of influence of the government is irrelevant. If it makes life better, government gets the reward and if it makes life worse the government gets the blame.

So when the cost of living is rising, interest rates are rising, fuel is showing it in lights to everyone in their car every day they drive past the petrol stations - life isn't going well and whoever is in charge will get the blame - and a protest vote against will occur. It shouldn't be taken as a vote of confidence in the ALP as a viable alternative, we vote out governments - we don't vote them in.

The teals don't have influence in the parliament anymore and the next few years are not going to be happy globally in regards to inflation, supply chain issues and potentially conflict - those voters in those Teal seats who were never going to vote ALP will blame the ALP and their existing Teal representative will be seen as useless.

If the LNP has anything close to a viable plan as opposition they will claim back all those Teal seats.

As we saw during the covid years, nobody cares what the green message is when they don't have a job or can't afford the simple luxuries that we have grown accustomed to.


And I'll reiterate it again, it doesn't have anything to do with the government's ability to influence outcomes - whatever the outcomes are will be attributed to the government.
 
Taylor said:
The primary vote of both major parties collapsed.

I'd argue that the political reality for Australia, and probably the world, is that whether or not something was in the control of influence of the government is irrelevant. If it makes life better, government gets the reward and if it makes life worse the government gets the blame.

So when the cost of living is rising, interest rates are rising, fuel is showing it in lights to everyone in their car every day they drive past the petrol stations - life isn't going well and whoever is in charge will get the blame - and a protest vote against will occur. It shouldn't be taken as a vote of confidence in the ALP as a viable alternative, we vote out governments - we don't vote them in.

The teals don't have influence in the parliament anymore and the next few years are not going to be happy globally in regards to inflation, supply chain issues and potentially conflict - those voters in those Teal seats who were never going to vote ALP will blame the ALP and their existing Teal representative will be seen as useless.

If the LNP has anything close to a viable plan as opposition they will claim back all those Teal seats.

As we saw during the covid years, nobody cares what the green message is when they don't have a job or can't afford the simple luxuries that we have grown accustomed to.


And I'll reiterate it again, it doesn't have anything to do with the government's ability to influence outcomes - whatever the outcomes are will be attributed to the government.
Click to expand...

So wrong in so many ways. Governments do shape the economy, 9 years of the coalition reinforces that.
The LNP,S inaction and fighting every policy put forward on climate change has been a pox on the country since Abbott's lies and ditch the witch campaign on Gillards cost on carbon legislation.
We would have had a reliable renewable energy source up and running now. We would not be solely relying on coal and gas,
An expert on energy on the ABC this morning said coal was in short supply because the mines are flooded because of the heavy weather caused by climate change.
Now that's food for thought for the climate deniers in the coalition
 
salim malik said:
So wrong in so many ways. Governments do shape the economy, 9 years of the coalition reinforces that.
The LNP,S inaction and fighting every policy put forward on climate change has been a pox on the country since Abbott's lies and ditch the witch campaign on Gillards cost on carbon legislation.
We would have had a reliable renewable energy source up and running now. We would not be solely relying on coal and gas,
An expert on energy on the ABC this morning said coal was in short supply because the mines are flooded because of the heavy weather caused by climate change.
Now that's food for thought for the climate deniers in the coalition
Click to expand...

If that's the rule you want to set, that's fine, but in three years when I'm saying that the Albanese ALP government has been the leaf on the river of the global issues it has zero influence in - such as the massive global inflation and supply chain issues, you need to be arguing against me that no, it is in-fact the ALP government's fault that the price of fuel will continue to rise, that interest rates will continue to rise and the measures taken by them over the last three years have inadequately mitigated the circumstances they inherited.

Your argument will need to be that either the ALP is so incompetent that in three years they are unable to resolve structural issues leading to cost of living increases or that the situation inherited was so bad that it couldn't be fixed in three years.

The second one is closer to the truth which is that Australia is the leaf on the river.

And you don't need to listen to me about governments in Australia being voted out, not voted in, because that's a widely accepted and known fact. As is the fact that the major parties had their primary vote smashed.

.... and it's because of global conditions and events Australia didn't have the ability to influence regarding inflation and supply chain breakdowns resulting in significant cost of living pressures that the population wanted to protest.

When the next election rolls around the opposition only need to have a reasonable plan to compare to the lived experience of the people who are about to be full of higher bills, higher interest rates and businesses closing down. It's going to be a hard time. The entire world is going to go through this and whoever is in charge will be punished at the polling stations for it.

That's the way it is.
 
Bicco said:
It's a very difficult question to answer days after an election., but I'll give it a crack.
We will see an integrity commission of some sort established.
A large investment by government in community/social/low cost housing.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a change in tax rates for our most wealthy.
Obviously we'll have environmental policies implemented, but I can't say what, that box has too many options.
I really don't want the Greens having the balance of power because their history of negotiating/compromise is terrible.
Biggest mistake Albo can make is to try and do too much. But if he believes in something and someone has the power to block the legislation, I'm all for him calling a double dissolution election. For example if the Greens try to block any nuclear development, Labor should push it through. I'm hopeful of good things.
Click to expand...
Labor would not be wise to go all out on Nuclear.
Nor will they.
Renewables unshackled will realise their massive potential under a wise government.
Nuclear is just DUMB.
One of the smartest goals they can pursue is to make sure the Community Independents (aka Teals) have a good term and thus are well placed for re-election in 2025. Failure in this will see "nature" reassert itself and those electorates trend back to Liberal.
Backing nuclear would also expose Labor to their own Community Independent assault, and strengthen the building Green campaign.

It is not a thing to take to an electoral showdown with the greens.
 
Big Animal said:
how about we put the politics aside for 5 minutes and people actually explain what these "renewables unshackled" and "We would have had a reliable renewable energy source up and running now" comprise of.
Click to expand...

Wind, sun and tides.
Giant sun solar panels being built up north that will supply a 1/4 of Singapores energy needs.
The energy will be transmitted by cable.
If a cable can be built from Australia to Singapore a cable from a large solar farm in the hot centre of Australia to the city's should be a doddle.
That's one reliable source, the sun .
Wind and the tides have the same reliable source.
 
salim malik said:
Wind, sun and tides.
Giant sun solar panels being built up north that will supply a 1/4 of Singapores energy needs.
The energy will be transmitted by cable.
If a cable can be built from Australia to Singapore a cable from a large solar farm in the hot centre of Australia to the city's should be a doddle.
That's one reliable source, the sun .
Wind and the tides have the same reliable source.
Click to expand...

You should look into how that transmission cable, both of them because it's two cables, actually takes to get made.

I read a report on that venture and the estimations were the majority of the entire planet's capability to produce cable for half a decade.

To supply a battery to hold the solar power for regular home usage in Australia would take the entire planet's output of lithium mined for about 330 years.

I don't think people appreciate just how lucky we are that there are things that burn that we can access relatively cheaply to power us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top