The ELECTION Thread

[*smee*]

Did Obama get any votes just coz he is black and it was the first black president ?

will Julia get any votes just coz she is a Woman and it will be first elected woman prime minister ?


Perhaps a few but I trust it would not be a big enough % to determine the outcome .... perhaps Abbott will get equally as many votes coz he is a man and some people just dont want a woman in the job ......

who really knows ???? would people admit that they voted purely on gender or colour ... not many would admit to that I wouldnt think

[mandurahmum]

Did Obama get any votes just coz he is black and it was the first black president ?

will Julia get any votes just coz she is a Woman and it will be first elected woman prime minister ?


Perhaps a few but I trust it would not be a big enough % to determine the outcome .... perhaps Abbott will get equally as many votes coz he is a man and some people just dont want a woman in the job ......

who really knows ???? would people admit that they voted purely on gender or colour ... not many would admit to that I wouldnt think

Obama got elected because he was black - and I hope he knows that.  He also got elected because of the 2 idiots they put him up against. 

I think Julia will also get votes because she is a female.

People are so disillusioned with Politicians that some (including me at times) dont really think it matters who is in power - they will both lie to us to get elected.

I do think the fact that Julia is not married may be important to some people, and the fact that she has no children.

Some may be put of Abbot because of his laugh - it drives me up the wall - sounds too evil.

But Mr Abott should not have said that About the Australian People - you should never insult the people who you are trying to get onside.  That was a Big Mistake.

My son gets to vote this election - his first ever - he hates both of them - he thinks no man should ever wear budgie smugglers in public and he says that he has had enough of women telling him what to do.  (yes in my family the women rule the roost and the men drink lol),

But its ok - I will tell him who to vote for

[Rebel*1*]

No, I doubt many would admit to it but then, I don't consider the Australian people to be that shallow.  I think what we all want is a considerate and intelligent approach to Govt.  Economic Responsibility yes, but with moral, environmental and social responsibility as well.   It shouldn't be a choice between one or the other. Both sides should be responsible in BOTH directions.

I think all the Aussie people are hoping for is that someone gets the balance right finally, and actually consults the Australian people on issues that are of such great National importance.  We all need a say in those issues including mining.  All we can do is hope.  

BTW, I was listening to Julie Bishop 'whine on' in the press conference that followed Abbotts speech and if it actually does come down to gender, then I'll ask other women on this forum what they think of Bishops style by comparison to Julia Gillard.  She too is nowhere near as intelligent or articulate as her female adversary in the 'gender' stakes.  

I wouldn't vote for Julie Bishop on a bet.  It's not about her gender, it's her total lack of intelligence that I notice.  She's snipey and a tad 'catty' by comparison.    I agree Smee, it doesn't come down to colour, gender or race.  It comes down to what they are offering to a now much more INTELLIGENT electorate.  We're getting smarter as voters.  I hope anyway.

[mandurahmum]

Now that is what is wrong with Politicians.  Whoever is in opposition seems to be in attack mode all the time. So instead of making intelligent answers - they go for the smart arse answer.  And that is what the deputies job seems to be.

it is a shame they cant work together to make this country stronger.

I also think they should be made to watch Question Time on the TV to see how badly they behave.  They are rude, they interrupt each other - and they show no respect towards their opposition.

We would not accept this from our children - so why should we accept it from the Adults that are running this country.  They should be trying to set an example on how to debate without the pettiness of name calling etc.

[wyzeguy60]

" I hope Abbott is stupid enough to argue interest rates because that alone will be his undoing with those of us who remember the last few years of the Coalition Govt.  Highest interest rates ever.   They couldn't keep the interest rates down then and they won't be able to now.  Just more spin. "

ummmmm - I don't think so.

Under Keating was the highest by a frigging country mile - no contest. It was Howard who bought them down and quickly.

And on political matters I don't usually comment unless it is grossly misrepresented as above

 

source here - http://www.loansense.com.au/historical-rates.html

[Rebel*1*]

LOL, really? you might ask me why I make those comments first, because I was making them in a framework of Rich vs poor (minority vs majority) at the time Johnny was voted out (and in light of the role Abbott played in that Govt.).  Funny you should mention Keating Although I respect certain of his attributes, I don't respect all.    I looked into this recently because I was interested in how the previous Govt. robbed us blind of infrastructure whilst giving Australia's 'Rich' every concession.   

According to one source, " the enrichment of the privileged began in 1983 under the Hawke-Keating Labor government and accelerated under Howard’s Liberal-National Coalition from 1996". We can go into the whys and wherefores of their similar sentiments and leanings separately if you like.  Same outcome.

However, moving into more modern times, in 2006 (after more than 10 years of Johnny favouring the elite at our expense with every concession under the sun)  the BRW (Business Review Weekly) announced a 'record' 22% increase in the Net Wealth of Australia's 200 richest people  (that's 200 out of 22 million mind you), this was given as the reason that was happening by comparison to ever increasing interest rates and cost of living expenses facing average Aussies.

2006:
Many of the super-rich have benefited from the current “commodities boom”—soaring corporate profits generated by high prices for mining exports, especially to China, and the resulting speculative investments in stocks and shares on global markets.

Highly inflated property prices, whilst preventing many low-income earners from buying and imposing rising debts onto others, have also produced spectacular returns for major property developers and investors. No less than 58 of the 200 members of the Rich List gained their wealth via property.


In 2007 when Little Johnny and his idea of an 'elite' Australia declared us never more better off, (so stop whinging), Business Review Weekly announced another record year of profit for Australia's 'richest.  As follows:

2007 June:
In what has been billed as “a golden year” by the Business Review Weekly, members of Australia’s Rich 200 have boosted their total wealth by 26.7 percent to $128.6 billion in the past 12 months. This is the largest rise in the history of the survey and follows last year’s record-breaking 22 percent increase.

Riding high on their privilege, our resources, and the misfortune of average Aussies.

Meanwhile during the same period, this was the carnage to the average Aussie, and it's not exhaustive yet.   Statistics take a while to filter down to the average mortal.

2007 - The State of the Nation for average punters:

The same week BRW announced its Rich 200 list, Australia’s housing affordability index dropped to the lowest level in 23 years, the fourth consecutive quarterly decline. The March quarter figures revealed that monthly loan repayments on a typical first-home mortgage had risen by 1.5 per cent to an average $2,387 per month across Australia, and $3,000 per month in Sydney and Perth. Repayments accounted for 30.7 percent of an average first-home buyer’s income.

In addition, according to the Reserve Bank, Australian households now owe $160 for every $100 of disposable income, up from about $50 in the early 1990s, with families paying a record 12 percent of their disposable incomes on interest payments alone.

Credit card debt has also increased—by almost $5 billion to $39.5 billion, or nearly $2,000 per person in the 12 months to March. Bank customers are paying 21 percent more in penalty fees on credit cards, and the banks have raked in more than $1 billion—up 13 percent from last year’s $899 million.


Personal bankruptcies, moreover, are accelerating at twice the rate they were last year. Insolvency and Trustee Service Australia chief Terry Gallagher told a recent Senate hearing on personal debt that bankruptcies grew 12.5 percent in the nine months to March, to about 30,000 a year. Fifteen years ago there were 13,000 a year.

The Senate was told that debt repayment agreements—with the countless parasitic finance companies offering customers the chance to pay back part of a debt rather than go bankrupt—jumped 32 percent in the nine months to March.

Figures from the Supreme courts of Victoria and NSW also indicate an increase in mortgage defaults and repossessions. NSW, for example, has experienced a 75 percent increase in repossessions in the past three years

That's not exhaustive and I'm happy to debate with you how Australian's were 'better off' under the Howard Govt, holistically speaking, anytime you wish.  We weren't.  The Rich were though.  That's now a matter of history and statistical fact.  As is the Average Aussies 'hardship' at the time. 

Nero fiddling while Rome burns?  What infrastructure ? What Aussies? Whose interests?  A Fair Go is just that.   Lest we forget.

[shyer]

Under Keating was the highest by a frigging country mile - no contest. It was Howard who bought them down and quickly And on political matters I don't usually comment unless it is grossly misrepresented as above source here - http://www.loansense.com.au/historical-rates.html

 Hi Wyze guy ,

Never argue with [what I call] a commie / closet greenie , it is [in my experience] always blah blah blah  and not a logical neurone in their body to accept the truth.

It is like argueing with an idiot , they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.

[Moderation note: attack the argument without getting personal, guys.]

[mandurahmum]

Under Keating was the highest by a frigging country mile - no contest. It was Howard who bought them down and quickly And on political matters I don't usually comment unless it is grossly misrepresented as above source here - http://www.loansense.com.au/historical-rates.html

 Hi Wyze guy ,

Never argue with a commie / closet greenie , it is always blah blah blah  and not a logical neurone in their body to accept the truth.

It is like argueing with an idiot , they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.

There is no need for name calling is there.

[wyzeguy60]

Under Keating was the highest by a frigging country mile - no contest. It was Howard who bought them down and quickly And on political matters I don't usually comment unless it is grossly misrepresented as above source here - http://www.loansense.com.au/historical-rates.html

 Hi Wyze guy ,

Never argue with a commie / closet greenie , it is always blah blah blah  and not a logical neurone in their body to accept the truth.

It is like argueing with an idiot , they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.

not arguing at all shyer - wink wink.
Cold hard facts about interest rates and a twisted socialist rhetoric as a response.
haha

" you might ask me why I make those comments first, because I was making them in a framework of Rich vs poor (minority vs majority) at the time Johnny was voted out (and in light of the role Abbott played in that Govt.) "

WTF - how does that adress 16.6 % under Keating V's 6.5% under Johnny ) BTW - I was a great fan of Johnny and many posters here were too - pity you can't see that when driving in your wooden stakes )

Anyway - no argument from me - I am a rich capitalist who doesn't part with my dough too easily - lol

 

[mandurahmum]

You may wish to grab a sick bag

I had such a huge crush on Paul Keating.  I had just started my first job with Ernst and Whinney - chartered accountants - in a tax section.  I was probably influenced by a lot of the people there because most of them thought he was one of the best treasurers we had had.  I just thought he was sexy.

Sorry if that made you sick

[wyzeguy60]

oh dear oh dear. a crush on Paul K.

Mum what were you thinking - lol

 



Then again - I had a crush on Delvine Delaney all those years ago.

[mandurahmum]

I was young and just thought men in suits were sexy.  Paul looked great in a suit - those expensive italian ones he wore.  Everyman looks hot in a well fitted suit.  I also thought he was so smart - I was always having to look up the words he used in a dictionary.  But mostly he made me want to study law and accounting as I wanted to be the first female treasurer. 

Thankfully I no longer want to be the treasurer - it would never have been a good thing for the country

[shyer]

I was sent this graph by someone tired of being abused for not holding left view points. It is on iterest rates and to any logical person shows one thing left wing goverments rasie rates. Labour elected rates go up.

There are many factors that determine rates and goverments of the day are only control some of those factors.

But the real big wide world is only interested in facts, and historically labour has spent not saved like liberals. Keating was an exeception, a Labour treaurer / PM who was fiscially responsiable.

[Rebel*1*]

Morning mum, don't worry about Shyer, he obviously can't help it.  Name calling is the last bastion of a feeble mind in any debate.  Bit like Tony Abbott really.  As for twisted socialist rhetoric, all you do Wyzeguy is show your subjectivity and prejudice in that kind of statement.   Now jump up and down accusing me of being abusive, for responding to your 'rhetoric' without abuse.  Isn't that how the game works?

Those figures I posted on the State of the Nation at the time are historical fact, not rhetoric.  The comment I made about interest rates was relative to Tony Abbott's criticism of this Govt. pushing interest rates up, and his claim that he could reverse that.   In the context of the past 15 years, interest rates were at their peak when Johnny was telling us we were never better off.  That was the point, we weren't.  The Keating Era was a different time, equally arrogant I grant you, but not relevant to this election.

Even so, it does highlight that on some issues,  there is no difference who you vote for, whether right, left or indifferent.

For instance, It might not surprise some to know that after Howard's GST dreams were thwarted in the 70's, it was Keating who put forward a consumption tax unsuccessfully, and which saw little Johnny utter the lie of all lies, that 'Australia will Never Have a GST'.  By his next term, we had a GST.   

In reality, BOTH sides of Govt wanted it, and it was therefore inevitable.   Wouldn't have mattered who we voted for.  A GST was going to happen anyway sooner or later, whether implemented by Liberal or Labour.   Has it achieved any of the amazing things it was going to achieve?  Are things cheaper?  Is the Infrastructure being rebuilt and upgraded as a result of it?  Not that I've seen.

The same can be said for the intentions of both sides of Govt when it comes to mining.  Neither intend it seems, to prosecute the case of the Australian people for sustainable & responsible mining and fair remuneration.  At least the ALP is attempting to negotiate a more reasonable return, but they're not exactly impressive with their backdown.    Only the Greens seem to be highlighting these issues, and they're the only ones criticising Abbott and Gillard on our behalf for fair remuneration.

If you care to listen to the commentary on this particular issue, Brown has pointed out that Abbott wants to scrap any increased tax whatsoever against the Mining Companies and let them continue enjoying concessions at the expense of our infrastructure.   Meanwhile, in the interim, the ALP have thrown open the flood gate and made it a mining free for all as far as access is concerned.   I don't agree with either approach, but I certainly believe that if these parasites get access they should pay the Australian people a FAIR return, and much more than a piddly dollar in seven. 

Ironically, in context with the previous criticism highlighted, the record increase in Net Wealth for the 'minority' of Rich Australians in 2006-07, was largely achieved on the back of the commodities boom, while we (The Australian People) were being short sheeted at $1.00 in $7.00?.  Does it not dawn on anyone that our infrastructure was the biggest victim in that little sweetheart deal as well?  So exactly when will 'Infrastructure funding' be addressed as an election issue in this country?  When everything stops working? 

I'd prefer not to see a return to the imbalance of 2006-07 where the Rich were never richer and the rest of us were going out backwards.  Balance is what I'm in support of.  Not extremes.

[Rebel*1*]

BTW  MUM, really good news.  I was watching Bob Brown this morning (you know, that other Bleeding Heart Leftist Loonie socialist), and he's heading for WA today to commence negotiations to declare the Waters off Margaret River a MARINE RESERVE. Hooray. 

At least one Pollie is trying to do something mate.  If it's protected as a Marine Reserve, it can't be mined quite so easily.  Smart move.    I've only just heard of it, so can't tell you much, but if I were you I'd be emailing the Greens and asking them to hold some kind of public meeting for the community over there.  Maybe even find out where he's going to be this morning and whether it's public.

I know, I know, you run the risk of being a labeled a leftist commie bleeding heart just for giving a shite about protecting your backyard from those Wonderful mining companies, but hey, you can't be everything to everyone.  I'll see what I can find out for you.  Maybe the Waussie locals can get behind that campaign instead of trying to reinvent the wheel. 

[mandurahmum]

That is good news about Bob Brown - I hope he can do it.  I have also heard from Don Randall - and he tells me the minister for Forrest is also heavily involved in trying to stop this.  Thye visited the area on July 1 to talk to the community.  He is going to send me the letter that was sent to the community down there and a couple of petitions to pass around. 

He is also going to try and find out more info about Barrow Island and the breaches that Chevron has committed  - 60 breaches in 10 months.  No wonder so many were opposed to this.  It also shows that our State Government and Federal government are not enforcing their own rules and regulations.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/chevrons-barrow-island-project-leads-to-alleged-environment-breaches/story-e6frg13u-1225874707056

This project should never have been allowed to go ahead.

[*smee*]

declaring it a marine reserve is not good for some people either , whilst it would stop the mining it would possibly upset equally as many people as it would also stop recreational fishing ...which is one reason why a lot of people have invested in the area in the first place so that they can fish ....

if they disallowed fishing at Margaret River it could have disasterous economic repurcussions, tourists go there to swim ,surf ,fish ,and do the wineries ....so I would imagine it would have some effect ....

 

[Roo]

And just on a lighter note....

A fake Julia Twitter account has a few comments worth a giggle.....

http://twitter.com/PM_JuliaGillard

Such gems as...

Getting ready for a mass debate with Tony Abbott. If only people knew we'd been mass debating together for years

OR....

Ok the gays can't marry but soon I'll stop all marriage just to be fair. If I don't want it why should anyone else

[mandurahmum]

Your right smee - there has to be a balance.  Margaret River does depend on tourism and the coast is a big part of that.  Fishing, snorkelling etc must be allowed to continue.  We have strict fishing quotas as it is,

We want everyone to be able to appreciate the natural beauty of this paradise.

[mandurahmum]

And just on a lighter note....

A fake Julia Twitter account has a few comments worth a giggle.....

http://twitter.com/PM_JuliaGillard

Such gems as...

Getting ready for a mass debate with Tony Abbott. If only people knew we'd been mass debating together for years

OR....

Ok the gays can't marry but soon I'll stop all marriage just to be fair. If I don't want it why should anyone else

lol

[Roo]

Hey Mum...I actually met Paul Keating when he was PM and attended my workplace for a function.

He was a striking man.....much more charming in person than what we saw in the media.

His then wife, Anita, was even more stunning!

I had a chat with her in the ladies loos...and she was totally gorgeous!

[wyzeguy60]

here is a little story that will hopefully make you laugh.

It was November 1991 and I was at Young and Jacksons early in the morning having half a dozen ( or 20 ) before the Melbourne Cup.

Anyways about 9.00 O'clock I went to the loo downstairs. I was Missed as a Paggett by then and was saying in my almost perfect Bob Hawke impression the following words at the top of my voice.

" by 1990 no Australian child will be living in poverty. ".

Just then a softish voice spoke out of one of the cubicles. Is, Is that you Bob ? - what are you doing here.

I said as quick as a flash in full impression voice - nah mate. I'm alright. I'm getting Pi%%ed and going to the Melbourne Cup.

I quickly left and have always wondered what that poor guy must have thought.

 

[*r3830*]

Gillard ushers in the era of farce



http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/gillard-ushers-in-the-era-of-farce/story-e6frfhqf-1225896276726

[Roo]

I like Laurie Oakes...he says it like it is.

But I really have no idea which way I should vote....because I don't really like either of the two leaders...***sigh

I think the best way to go, will be to vote for the local member that instills confidence in me and has my best interests at heart.

It won't matter who their leader is......but at least I will be able to hope that they actually come good on their promises.

[mandurahmum]

I would hate either Julia or tony being my local member - they are so focused on the top job that they seem to have forgotten that before they get that job they have to win their seat.  I would not want my mp in the top seat - I dont think they can represent their electorate properly

I actually find it funny that tony is running against Austen Tayshus from the sex party. 

[Roo]

I'd vote for Austen!..lol...at least he has a sense of humour..lol

But I'm just watching Tony and Julia, head to head, on Channel 10.

I'm leaning towards Julia at the moment....because Tony is playing up the fact he has kids and that it would make him the better PM.

That would be ok...but he kinda made you feel like he thinks she is a lesser person for not having kids?

I like Julia a bit more than Tony...she has some good ideas and isn't doing the personal insults.

[emptyheadted]

I was sent this graph by someone tired of being abused for not holding left view points. It is on iterest rates and to any logical person shows one thing left wing goverments rasie rates. Labour elected rates go up.

There are many factors that determine rates and goverments of the day are only control some of those factors.

But the real big wide world is only interested in facts, and historically labour has spent not saved like liberals. Keating was an exeception, a Labour treaurer / PM who was fiscially responsiable.

We need higher rates, low rates just increases peoples dept and not worth saving money as rates are so low, then with everyone borrowing heaps of money at a low interest  drives up housing prices and everything else then once rates start to go up housing market bubble bursts, rates need to be around 10% so people save and borrow less or our housing market will end up like america

[*r3830*]

Just one concern Roo..... as someone mentioned, behind the figureheads are the same parties and policies that were there twelve months ago. Labor says that if they get in - we cop an ETS... on awfully flimsy evidence. Julia says she wants to support families.... with an increase of 64% in electricity costs due to a flawed carbon tax? Support..... or send everyone to the wall? She says no more dirty power stations - Nuclear energy isn't on the table - so the costs will undoubtedly rise with higher needs won't they? But then - it's the same party that wants to censor the life of every Australian..... well, not immediately, but after the election, (if they win) while claiming to have a mandate from the people to go ahead with these things.

Abbott on the other hand has been very quiet. Probably the best thing the Libs could do at the moment. But, the skeptic questions just what they may have in mind for us post election.

Too early to call at the moment.... but I'll be watching closely, with interest.

[Roo]

Just one concern Roo..... as someone mentioned, behind the figureheads are the same parties and policies that were there twelve months ago. Labor says that if they get in - we cop an ETS... on awfully flimsy evidence. Julia says she wants to support families.... with an increase of 64% in electricity costs due to a flawed carbon tax? Support..... or send everyone to the wall? She says no more dirty power stations - Nuclear energy isn't on the table - so the costs will undoubtedly rise with higher needs won't they? But then - it's the same party that wants to censor the life of every Australian..... well, not immediately, but after the election, (if they win) while claiming to have a mandate from the people to go ahead with these things.

Abbott on the other hand has been very quiet. Probably the best thing the Libs could do at the moment. But, the skeptic questions just what they may have in mind for us post election.

Too early to call at the moment.... but I'll be watching closely, with interest.

There are a lot of concerns Loco...but I actually support the need for an ETS.

I was reading recently on CS on Ebay...and actually was dumbfounded at how some of the posters almost saw it as a feather in their cap as to how much power they used through the day! They refused to even entertain the fact that they needed to make changes and at least make slight lifestyle changes for the betterment of the whole Country.

ETS will affect big businesses first...and they will have to make drastic changes to the way they conduct business today.  That's not a bad thing.

And if the rest of the population follows suit....it can only be good.

I just think that we, as the people of this Country, have taken for granted how good we have had it....and maybe it's time to think ahead and make changes to the way we use our resources.

[mandurahmum]

I think we need a ets just so that those that are polluting our environment will try and lower their emmisions.

As for electricity - we also need to go greener and renewable.  Over here we get a lot of sun - but probably less than a third have solar panels - more are getting them though.  Why dont our schools have them?  A lot of businesses could have solar panels on their roofs - and we need to be encouraging that.

Wind Power - why cant we use more of this - Over here in the west - we still have plenty of big spaces over here that could be utilised.

Wave Power -they are doing this off the coast of Fremantle at the moment and at other places around the country - its still fairly new but very interesting and perfect for us.  We have an awful lot of coastline in Australia too.

I have seen some amazing things that Aussies have invented - and by the average Aussie - and especially in this field of electricity generation. 

We need to be encouraging these 'inventors' because they are the ones that are thinking of the cure and not just the problem.

The majority of people in this city have 4 wheel drives - good for towing a boat or caravan - and we have a lot of them.  And thats fine with me - but there are also a lot of them that never tow a thing - never get dirty - and quite frankly are a real pain in my butt.  I have a small sukuzi cino - and where ever I park - I get 2 next to me.  Great - I have to reverse all the way out because I cant see over them.  And they stink - I dont know much about Diesel - but in summer these town reeks of it.


I might also add that I dont think the insulation policy was a complete failure.  It created a lot of jobs whilst it was going.  A lot of us also scored free insultation - I did - My landlord got all 6 of his properties done.  I am actually using less electricity because of it.

[Liisa-Sx]

I think we need a ets just so that those that are polluting our environment will try and lower their emmisions.

Sadly most won't even try..

The larger polluting businesses will merely "buy" or "trade" their carbon credits from low users and continue to pollute as they have always done.

Emissions trading, as set out in Article 17 of the Kyoto Protocol, allows countries that have emission units to spare - emissions permitted them but not "used" - to sell this excess capacity to countries that are over their targets.

Thus, a new commodity was created in the form of emission reductions or removals. Since carbon dioxide is the principal greenhouse gas, people speak simply of trading in carbon. Carbon is now tracked and traded like any other commodity. This is known as the "carbon market."

Those that have to pay more for "credits' no doubt pass those costs onto the public while at the same time continuing to pollute as they have always done.

The main greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone.

The main player that governments like to spin with in greenhouse gas emissions is carbon dioxide, however once again the largest contributer to greenhouse gasses is Water vapour 36-72% as opposed to CO2 at 9 – 26 %, but you rarely hear the spin speak of water vapour nor methane or Ozone. (not scary sounding enough lol)

The contribution to the greenhouse effect by a gas is affected by both the characteristics of the gas and its abundance. For example, on a molecule-for-molecule basis methane is about eighty times stronger greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, but it is present in much smaller concentrations so that its total contribution is smaller. When these gases are ranked by their contribution to the greenhouse effect, the most important are:

Water Vapor    H2O     36 – 72 %  
Carbon Dioxide    CO2     9 – 26 %
Methane    CH4     4 – 9 %  
Ozone    O3     3 – 7 %  

In order, Earth's most abundant greenhouse gases are:

    * water vapor
    * carbon dioxide
    * atmospheric methane
    * nitrous oxide
    * ozone
    * chlorofluorocarbons

A lot of greenhouse gasses are naturally occuring.

I am ALL for less pollutants and finding alternatives, (which we have but "deemed" too expensive lol, but not via a seriously biased, ill informed and researched flawed tax designed predominantly to put more money in government coffers NOT out of any real political desire to reduce emissions.

[HellWest'nCrooked]

I am ALL for less pollutants and finding alternatives, (which we have but "deemed" too expensive lol, but not via a seriously biased, ill informed and researched flawed tax designed predominantly to put more money in government coffers NOT out of any real political desire to reduce emissions.


You have said it all Liisa...........

If we were to have a ETS..  it will not effect the big players one iota...as previously mentioned.

[bnwt]

Swan confirms $100m-a-day debt figure

Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan has conceded the Opposition is correct when it claims Labor is borrowing $100 million a day to pay back Government debt.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/26/2964184.htm

[shyer]

I do not think it will matters who wins it will be so tight neither will have a workable majority and will need independants in lower house and senete.

Gillard is not who you are voting for I have see all the labour leadership changes for 40 years. Gillard only has left support the labour party will dump her the second it is convient.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/despite-the-gloss-julia-gillard-is-just-another-phoney/story-fn59niix-1225896765834

What you do DO NOT vote labour for the senate usless you number all the squares . Otherwise the balance way be held by the greens . Only 10% of the misguided wants them the other 90% of us realists DO NOT and see the true green lies. Yet they may control the senate.

[Rebel*1*]

Jeese and it was getting so productive.  Shyer, do you understand the concept of all views being represented in any democracy?  I don't vote Green, but I do give my preferences to them when it comes to things like Cleaner Power/resource options, and keeping fair mining remuneration and 'free for all' access on the table.  

In all their other faults, No other party is addressing those issues, and green, yellow, purple or orange, they deserve to be put on the table.  I will therefore give the Greens consideration simply on those issues alone to keep them on the table in the senate, even after the election dust has settled.  Anyone who cares about those issues, should give the greens their second preference so the other two parties don't bury the obvious.

The Greens are a legitimate party with alternative views.  They therefore provide a balance when the other two major parties are avoiding the real issues with mining in particular.  

Before the names fly, I reiterate.  I'm not against mining, I'm for sustainable mining and FAIR remuneration to the Australian people via infrastructure upgrade at the very least.   It's a matter of give and take, not just all take.  

On an earlier issue:

if they disallowed fishing at Margaret River it could have disasterous economic repurcussions, tourists go there to swim ,surf ,fish ,and do the wineries ....so I would imagine it would have some effect ....

Yes it would Smee, (I spent quite a while there in the early 80's, magnificent place) but an oil spill would be equally disastrous.  So the balance would be to declare it protected from mining specifically, not fishing or tourism.  That's the threat after all isn't it ? to the environment and the current economy there?  Fishing and tourism has never been an issue for the Waussies in that region so far, has it MM?  How many tourists want to see an oil rig off shore?

So, Brown will no doubt be expected and amenable to consulting with stake holders.  Locals should be emailing him non stop to make sure all views are represented though, not just political ones.  

At the end of the day, if he has any influence to stop it, Waussies need to lobby him to use that influence wisely and in league with local elected officials, the community and Chamber of Commerce.

Keep lobbying your local Fed member and State member as no doubt Brown will be consulting them first, and they'll be the ones ensuring the local economy stays intact.   Get involved as much as possible is what I'm saying, and encourage other locals to do the same.  

LOCO - I agree, far too much of this 'mandate' either way is hinging on insufficient 'justification' for or against.   I'm not arguing the science.  I do believe we have a global issue, (more likely associated with a Worldwide population now more than four times that of 60-70 years ago) but is the only option to impose an ETS?  

What are the other options?  The 'Greens' don't find this question too hard.  It's  Cleaner resources !!  Here's a novel Idea.  Let's charge the mining company for all that back remuneration they owe the Australian People (Before we were remunerated less than half as much) and invest that into 'clean technology and resources.  Wind Power, Storm Water Recycling.  The return of the humble water tank (without costing us a fortune), Desalination plants, Assistance in improving Solar storage and that technology etc.  I'm sure there are many more ways to produce power and preserve resources more cleanly.    Hey, why not just charge the Mining companies more than $1.00 in $7.00 even now, and we can invest that into developing cleaner power.  ????

In fact, it just occurred to me.  If we went Clean and Green, Would that upset the mining companies and their 'black gold' deposits?  Hey, then there's coal.  Would the Mining companies suffer if we go green?  How about Uranium?  Do the mining companies have other 'unsustainable' resource options yet to foister upon on us before we go Green and Clean?  Could this procrastination be associated once again with 'overly powerful' economic interests overshadowing common sense?

Could this be the reason the decision makers don't seem to move on this option in any expedient fashion?  We haven't used up the polluting alternatives first?  I don't know, I'm asking others.

If that be the case, and it does in fact pose a threat to economy, then why are our scientists not working on making emissions of these existing exploitable pollutants (except Uranium) i.e. coal and oil cleaner? filtered? something?.  Just asking

[mandurahmum]

I have just rec'd some info that I thought I might share on the Proposed oil rig off Margaret River.

31 regions were released for exploration in May 2010 - 30 were released at the request of industry and one - the Margaret River one was not requested by industry - but was released on the recommendation of the Government body AGSO. 

We are also still waiting for the report on the Montara oil spill that happened in 2009 that occured in the timor sea.  That spill went on for over 10 weeks.

Also it looks like the drilling off Margaret River could be 2000 metres - 500 metres more than the one off the gulf of mexico that took over 3 months too plug.

Have we not learnt that if we cant guarantee that we can repair a leak at 1500 metres - then what hope do we have at 2000 metres.

[Rebel*1*]

MM, I don't think people on the East Coast can even imagine the vast difference in the West Coast by comparison unless they've actually been there for long enough to grasp that.  The Ocean there is deep, formidable and big, not many cove beaches etc.  The elements and nature alone would make any oil rig more risky.  How many have actually seen the WA coastline?  Those who haven't, it ISN'T like the east coast.  Nature rules over there and safe harbours are few and far between.   Yanchep had break walls back then, and the trees in Geraldton all leaned eastward.  LOL,   Or has it changed in 25 years?

Are the forests still there in the south mum i.e. Kauri and Jarrah?  

One big difference I noticed when I lived there.  I always hated the taste of many fish species on this coast, so never really bothered to go fishing.  But in WA, coastal areas, it's a way of life, and the Whiting off Perth, and Black Bream (yum) around Denmark is so clean and beautiful, I lived on fish for 12 months in my Southern WA travels in those days.   It's really clean tasting, not sure why that is.   

When I lived there, we would all pay into 30.00 as flatmates, to fuel the boat and pay for beer & bait, and we'd all go fishing.  We'd literally bring in a garbage tin worth of whiting, and my flatmate 'A salty WA seadog' would pull up on one of the many little islands where seals sun themselves, and he'd gut and clean the fish.  No guessing who ate the offcuts.  lol.   We then went home and crumbed/froze a freezer load of fish.  That was in the early/mid 80's.  Different lifestyle on the WA coast altogether.  You could live off one fishing excursion for a month.  Great times.  I hope that hasn't changed.  And who'd want it to.  Ah, Sunday afternoon sessions at WA pubs.  *chuckle*.  mum, you might explain what they are or were.  LOL   They were fun. Does that still exist?  Bit like declaring half time and then blowing the siren when play resumes.  lol.  On Sundays specifically.

[mandurahmum]

You are right - our coastline is very different over here than the east coast.  Apart from the fact that we have so much of it - and the majority of us live on the coast.

The forrests are still there - a little smaller but we know appreciate them much better   Tourists are now encouraged to use the tree walks to protect the forrests undergrowth - its a bit scary for me - but others have loved it.

We also have Ningaloo - Australias largest coral reef - which is still pristine and in a lot better shape than the barrier reef.

We have an abundant of sea life over here - whale sharks and other whales use some of our waters to calf, because it is safe. 

lets not forget the Kimberley coast - amazing and virtually untouched in lots of places.  Including a horizontal waterfall - you dont see that many places.

Margaret River and the surrounding area are full of some of the best surf beaches in the world - and it attracts surfers from all over the world for the Margaret River Pro and the classic.

But not only that it is also a great wine growing country and is known for its food, including delicious chocolate.  It also has some amazing caves and the towering forrests.  Its just a perfect place to visit.


I do think we appreciate what a wonderful place WA is - but I dont think others can unless they visit it.  People think Bondi is a great beach - come and see Cable Beach  - they dont compare.  Think the great barrier reef is great - come and see Ningaloo - its probably like what the great barrier reef used to look like.  WA is huge - with a huge coastline - we just want to protect it so that generations after us can enjoy the same things we do.

[Rebel*1*]

Mum, you bet, my partner is a surfer, and I just asked him,. and he thinks WA has some of the best surf breaks in the world.  Bondi vs Cable beach?  Dreamin.   He thinks also that mining would be criminal.    Margaret River and Cable beach in particular  lol.  Waxhead.  !!!  Sharkbait I call him.  I ain't getting out of a boat anywhere.  LOL.


lets not forget the Kimberley coast - amazing and virtually untouched in lots of places.  Including a horizontal waterfall - you dont see that many places.

Are we talking the same region where the wobbegongs live?    I spent two years in the Great North West, and it's breathtaking.  Again, you just have to go there to understand what I mean.  Nothing like the East Coast, though don't get me wrong.  Our turf is equally breathtaking in different ways.

[emptyheadted]

The ETS is just another tax put onto the people, does nothing for the environment .. Just robbing my money off of me once again. nothing wrong with carbon , alot of green houses add carbon as plants love it and grow faster, if you want to worry about a gas look at methane. The climate has been changing since the world started to spin, i lived in the highest town in WA and all around the place there are fossils of sea animals and shells, lets also look at the ice man and wollie manmoth that was found 50m under ice, how did they get 50m under ice mmm  maybe we are coming out of another ice age, we cant change the earth temp but we can prepare for it like stop water front development. As for nuclear power we want to keep away from that. uranium has tripled in price in the last few years and is only going to keep going up as india and china are building 50 more  nuclear power stations and people seem to forget the cost of storing the waste safely FOREVER.We need to invest in green energy like solar and wind and tidal but in the mean time nothing wrong with coal, Just we all know the climate is changing and the government is happy to give us another tax that wont do a thing as its more to do with the tilt of the earth axes , not much we can do about that.

[bnwt]

emrtyheadted


well said

the earth's climate is always changing ....... there will always be winners and losers

in fact if it wasn't for climate change we wouldn't be here

[mandurahmum]

Ted - we are so on the same wave length - I have said exactly what you said before.

We have never wanted uranium mined in WA, yet that does not make us anti-mining.

You are probably right about the ets too.  And Lisa is probably also right that the ets will not help cut pollution.  But we do need to start to try and cut down on all forms of pollution.  I would like to think an ets would help - but thats the idealistic side of me.

As a Waussie - may I ask how you feel about the proposed oil drilling off Margaret River and the Kimberley?

[mandurahmum]

Rebel - I think you mean the dugongs - they calve around shark bay area.  They are so ugly - but i suppose we need to protect all animals not just the cute only.

[bnwt]

Prime Minister Julia Gillard joins Alan to discuss the economy, the mining tax, and the pressing issues of the election campaign.


http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=6672

she says, "there are some Australians, out there who want to have their say"

correct Julia and they will say it's time for you to move forward to an early retirement

[Rebel*1*]

Rebel - I think you mean the dugongs - they calve around shark bay area.  They are so ugly - but i suppose we need to protect all animals not just the cute only.

LOL, I knew it was something like that.  They're really goofy looking creatures, and very cute I think, not ugly lol. 

As for ETS, that's what I'm asking, is that the ONLY answer?  Seems to me there are plenty more options to consider, and we're being told there's only one.  That's the bit I get skeptical and annoyed with, in addition to the predatory conduct that accompanies 'global warming' like it's an advertising slogan.

Here's an article on the 64% electricity increase in NSW alone, (due to decades of infrastructure neglect) and on merely the proposition of an ETS, or CPRS.    It hasn't even been introduced or agreed to yet and we're all getting stitched for 64% more on 'what ifs'?  As for Infrastructure costs, well, there it is again isn't it?.  And it's the same Nation Wide.  The mining Tax would assist in paying for the upgrade of the electricity Grid and other major infrastructure upgrades like Telecommunications etc, but of course, Tony doesn't want to make his mining buddies pay more than they're already paying.  So I'm guessing he expects the Australian people to foot the bill?

At the end of the day, BOTH parties need to come up with a policy for 'fair' remuneration of our resources from the mining companies, and, in the use or refinement of those resources, Electricity companies and Steel mills and the like along with other major polluters, need to develop technology to reduce their carbon emissions.   Wouldn't that be more productive and pain free for the average Aussie?

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/1028811/electricity-prices-to-rise-by-up-to-64

Electricity bills in NSW will soar by up to a total of 64 per cent over the next three years, with the federal government's proposed carbon pollution reduction scheme (CPRS) and rising network infrastructure costs largely to blame.

The outcome has sparked fears other states and territories could be similarly affected if the CPRS goes ahead in 20011/12 as planned

This sentence almost made me spit my coffee all over the screen lol.

The government would also legislate for an energy price comparison website, so consumers could get "the best deal possible for their energy", Mr Robertson said.

Won't that be illuminating when it comes to monopolistic price fixing eh? 

[*smee*]

it already is in WA , no choice there , only one electricity supplier except for mining towns owned by BHP and then BHP supply it at jacked up prices

[*smee*]

here we go with the gender thingo .....and the defacto ....and just to be on the safe side Julia has said she will consider marriage http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/special-reports/julie-bishop-brands-pm-julia-gillard-a-left-wing-feminist/story-fn5idf17-1225897222816?referrer=email&source=HS_email_nl&emcmp=HS&emchn=Newsletter&emlist=Member

Oh and this one line probably cost her Ubbies vote

"Ms Gillard said Mr Mathieson had been playing a supportive role behind the scenes and checking on her daily to see if she’s eating her vegies"

[mandurahmum]

Our electricity prices over here have also skyrocketed.   I consider myself pretty good at not wasting electricty and normally my bill is no more than 130 for 60 days.  The one I got  a fortnight ago was $266 and my usage has only gone up slightyly - the rest is because of the increases.

My grandmothers last bill also went up by $60 - she is on an old age pension - she is so stressed about how she is going to pay this.  The family of course will help - but she does not like having to do that.  My grandfather worked hard to make sure that he had enough money for them both to retire comfortably - but unfortunately he developed Altzeimers and most of that money was spent on his treatment and care.  They both fought in the war for this country - and both nearly died doing it - my grandmother was in Darwin when it was bombed and my grandfather was shot in New Guinea.

Yet neither party has mentioned how much the pension would raise under them.  Dont get me wrong the last 2 pay rates from the Labor government really helped - but then the state governments took it with the rise in electricity and other fees.

Smee is right - over here we have no choice who we get our electricity from - and with no competition are prices will continue to rise at ridiculous prices.

[mandurahmum]

OMG a Prime Ministerial wedding  - how exciting - I wonder if it will be broadcast live on all channels and then repeating ad nausem.

[*smee*]

crikey MM ...as long as they dont televise the honeymoon ..... Urrrgggggggggghhhhhhhhhh
Nasty pictures !!