Speaking of the Gillard Government…

What we’ve got here, is a #GoatRodeo.  With monkeys.  And dogs.

Although they actually seem a little more well-organised and disciplined than Julia Gillard’s Labor-Green minority government.

“Labor has lost its way.”

h/t William A Jacobson (@LegInsurrection)

Fisking Sarah Hanson-Young

Oh goody, shes written another piece full of “facts” for the age

Were you to arrive in Australia and read the front pages of our newspapers you would be forgiven for thinking that we are living in some type of black hole, devoid of information, news and expert opinion from the rest the world.

I dont know if shes noticed, but the thing shes writing on is called a “newspaper”, what shes being fisked on is a new fangled “computer”.

What other possible explanation could there be for the ignorance of those who warn of the end of civilisation were a carbon tax to established than by claiming Australia would be out on a limb, leading the world.

The explanation that they see a scam, and your best efforts at convincing them are crap? Have a look at your side, they are the ones claiming 50,000,000 climate refugees would be created by…last year…

Leading the world? You’ve got to be joking. Many other countries have already put a price on carbon and introduced realistic pollution reduction targets.  And while they are spending significant public and private dollars firming up investment in the technologies and energy sources for the future, Australia is still locked in a debate over whether big polluters should even pay for their pollution.

Baby steps first Sarah, you havent convinced 51% of the Australian population that carbon dioxide is going to cause global catastrophe yet. Get that out of the way and you’ll find it much easier.

Ill Type this slowly so you can comprehend it. China is now the worlds highest overall emitter of carbon. This chart is from the “union of concerned scientists” they are on your side.

	Country	Total Emissions (Million Metric Tons of CO2)	Per Capita Emissions (Tons/Capita)
1.	China	6534	4.91
2.	United States	5833	19.18

What does that tell you Sarah? China is going to expand its energy consumption roughly fourfold to western standards over the next few decades. Even if you assume 75% of that growth will be “renewables” the absolute growth in emissions would double.

Unfortunately this isn’t just leaving us with a reputation of being environmentally blind, it is also costing us real jobs right here in our own backyard.

No its not costing us jobs, point out a job lost, right now,  which isnt relying on a subsidy generated by taxing someone?

Let’s just take Europe for example, where many countries have already had a carbon tax for 10 years or more.

Let look at France then eh? One of the biggest movers and shakers in the EU.

“Since an EU-wide carbon tax is unlikely to gain approval in months ahead, if at all – the Swedish government pushed the idea with little success during its EU presidency last year – the French levy has, in effect, been shelved.

France would have been the largest economy to impose a levy on energy use linked to a notional price of carbon. France has one of the lowest “carbon footprints” in Europe largely because of 88 per cent of its electricity comes from nuclear plants.”

And they use Nukes… the buggers!

I’ve just returned from an official parliamentary delegation to Denmark, Sweden and Greece, meeting with various governments, MPs, businesses and industry leaders. Meeting after meeting the message was clear –  Australia is far behind in tackling greenhouse gas emissions and absent in using smart investment choices to drive the use of renewable energy.

Hmm lets look at Greece then. Heres George Papandreou, the Greek prime minister….

“We need a mechanism which can be funded through different forms and different ways,” he said. “My proposal is that taxes such as a financial tax or carbon dioxide taxes could be important revenues and resources for funding such a mechanism.”

Im sure Swedens much better eh?

• Sweden gets all its electricity either from hydroelectric power or nuclear plants

Business leaders wanting to invest in Australia would say “Australia has great wind, solar opportunities but until there’s a carbon price we can’t afford to start-up there”.

Otherwise know as “we can’t operate at an economically competitive price, please cripple the competition and give us subsidies”…

The delegation would have to explain that Australia is lagging because we still don’t have an agreement from some parties that polluters should pay for their pollution and that the market should be given the signals to drive reform.

“The market” will be artificially created by legislation, will rely on legislation to sustain it, and will cripple the non-services based sectors of our economy. Your “Market” is much like saying the Taliban have established a “Market” in beards. Its not a market if it is forced on people.

Admittedly, many European countries had to change their ways some 30 years ago as a result of the oil crisis in the Middle East, forcing them to find more self-sufficient ways to power their homes and industry. Development in wind-power, hydro-electricity and bio-fuel among others ensured that there has been a multi-source mix of power for decades.

No nukes still?  Hmm what else was happening here in Oz about that long ago?? (cough/Franklin river dam/cough) If only we’d had politicians enlightened enough to build hydro power eh? Still we are smarter now eh?

Now, in the face of climate change, the EU members have signed up to the 20-20-20 platform (20 per cent emission reductions with at least 20 per cent of renewable power and energy efficiency increase all by 2020).  And as a result there is now a race between the countries as to who can be more ambitious in order to secure the industry investment on their soil.

You need to adjust a policy or 2 of your own first Sarah

“President Barroso began by stressing how today’s unprecedented global financialcrisis has made the EU all the more determined to “move ahead with its climatechange package” and fulfil its 20-20-20 targets and. He then delivered his coremessage, namely that all low-carbon energy sources, including nuclear energyand renewables, must be exploited if the goals of the package are to be achievedand Europe’s low-carbon future is to be secured.”

While countries like Sweden have had a carbon tax for 20 years, the debate in parliaments throughout Europe is how they can become carbon neutral by 2050. The idea that those who pollute should pay for the cost of that pollution is simply understood as commonsense. Political parties from the far-right to the far-left agree with a carbon tax and the need to reduce pollution. 

You can spout Sweden has had a form of the tax for 20 years, yet you missed this little tit-bit

Sweden currently has three operational nuclear power plants, with ten operational nuclear reactors, which produce about 45% of the country’s electricity. The nation’s largest power station, Ringhals Nuclear Power Plant, has four reactors and generates about a fifth of Sweden’s annual electricity consumption. The power plants in Forsmark and Oskarshamn each have three reactors.

You might also note they are a huge consumer of their own populations monies through taxes. Funnily enough politicians of all stripes like lots of money.

“Those who pollute” are THoSE WHO CONSUME, ford doesnt make cars and force them on people, coke doesnt make drinks that force you to drink them. Can you explain, in small simple words, how a tax on energy isnt a consumption tax of the most basic variety?

With no exemptions for bread/water/heating etc.

They all agree with the polluter pays system and that taking action on climate change can also be good for business.

How is taxing industry a good thing? Are you seriously trying to lower the living standards of whole populations for the first time since the industrial revolution?

The message to take home from our European cousins is that we are falling embarrassingly behind in facing the realities of climate change. From a business perspective our lacklustre someone-else-will-wash-the-dishes attitude is costing investment opportunities and real jobs in manufacturing, construction and service delivery.

You are really stupid enough to write this?

“.. investment opportunities and real jobs in manufacturing, construction and service delivery.”

While Australian industry at the moment complains of constraints caused by labour shortages due to massive investment in real, existing, producing things economy now?

And to Barnaby Joyce, who doesn’t want Australia to lead the way – well, it’s okay, no need to worry, we’re not.

Id take a one Barnaby over a dozen of your sort any day sweetheart.

 

Ps: When will you be taking a “hard hat” tour of the mining regions of the pillbara like Mr Abbot just did? You know go out among the great unwashed and prolesterise to the non-converted?Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/blogs/gengreens/australia-is-an-embarassment-on-climate-change-20110418-1dl2b.html#ixzz1K2zTGYkY

What would Mohammed do?

Quite a good interview on the ABC between Mike Duffy and Reverend Mark Durie.

Durie is not an apologist for Mohammed and quite correctly points out that violence in the name of Christ goes against his teachings, though violence in the name of Mo is actually following his example.

Therefore Jihadists are probably being “closer” to their example by being violent, rather than those who are peaceful.

He touches on the religious rulings of Muslims in the west and takes a dim view on that as well.

Good to see a decent Christian bloke not afraid to speak out, and on the ABC as well.!!

Full transcript under the fold, or follow the link at the top