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

[armpit]

The way I see it is that we have two problems.
1. Our political leaders are all dinosaurs and a younger generation needs to take over, quickly.
2. Murdoch.

Aw see we were going along nicely without the isms and now you've gone and been ageist.

 

[Cesoir]

The way I see it is that we have two problems.
1. Our political leaders are all dinosaurs and a younger generation needs to take over, quickly.
2. Murdoch.

Another problem is that the young idealists of today are the young parents of tomorrow who will have jobs and mortgages and responsibilities, so their views will often become more conservative. I watched the hippies protesting Vietnam in the 60s become the baby boomer conservatives of today. Trust me, the young idealists wagging school to protest climate change today will have different priorities in 5 - 10 years

 

[Cesoir]

Yep, we've always had extreme conditions and that's why we are more likely to get smashed first and harder than other nations when climate change comes knocking. Dorothy's poetry doesn't change that. That's #science.

It does make the lack of leadership in this country on renewable energy even more stupid.

Agree, we are way behind the curve on renewables and need to start catching up pronto.

I'm interested to see the published materials to back up your statement that we will get smashed first and harder than other nations - if it's science I have never read it. I would have thought there are many other nations in a more precarious position than us and many are so small they are virtually powerless to influence climate change.

I like reasoned debate, but people just saying it's #science as if that ends all arguments annoys me.

 

[freo1997]

Agree, we are way behind the curve on renewables and need to start catching up pronto.

I'm interested to see the published materials to back up your statement that we will get smashed first and harder than other nations - if it's science I have never read it. I would have thought there are many other nations in a more precarious position than us and many are so small they are virtually powerless to influence climate change.

I like reasoned debate, but people just saying it's #science as if that ends all arguments annoys me.

Not trolling. But isn’t it like 98.5% of scientists! That’s enough imo.

 

[Cesoir]

Not trolling. But isn’t it like 98.5% of scientists! That’s enough imo.

Understand you're not trolling, and I am not questioning climate change at all, it is fact - I am questioning the statement that it is science that Australia will be smashed first and harder than other countries. I am happy to accept science where it is backed up by evidence, but asked for evidence to back up this statement. Too often the REAL science is clouded by heresay dressed up as science.

Edit: This is not "science" but it is based on scientific predictions and states the opposite - the least developed countries will be the worst affected. That does NOT mean we should be working any less diligently to do what we can!

Climate Change Will Impact the Entire World. But These Six Places Will Face Extreme Threats

Climate change is expected to affect every country in the world, but its impact will not be felt equally across all regions. These countries and cities are among the places that will be the worst hit

time.com

 

[Bigger]

You want to do something tangible and meaningful in regard to climate change?

Quit eating meat.

Agriculture consumes more freshwater than any other human activity, and nearly a third of that water is devoted to raising livestock. One-third of the world’s arable land is used to grow feed for livestock, which are responsible for 14.5 per cent of global greenhouse-gas emissions. Razing forests to graze cattle—an area larger than South America has been cleared in the past quarter century—turns a carbon sink into a carbon spigot.

If cows were a country, their emissions would be greater than all of the E.U., and behind only China and America. The way contemporary agriculture works, every two kilos of beef you eat contributes to as much global warming as flying from New York to London.

It's pretty simple.

We have until 2035 to just ****ing kill the livestock industry and arrest climate change. While the shortsighted and greedy mess around with the evil c-words in charge of fossil fuel and dirty industry, there is something that we can actually do.

I am Gen X and will miss the real devastation and I loved me some red meat like teenage boys love hefty bazoongas, but I gave up. Because you kind of have to.

 

[Righteo]

Steadily weening ourselves off plastic products wouldn't be a bad idea either

 

[DeanS]

There’s so much backlash against Scomo..on a global scale. Australia isn’t as tough as you think, we liked to be liked on a global scale. Right now our government is not. Scomo popularity took a dive.

Either libs cave and do more for climate change or when USA elects Biden or Sanders they’ll put extreme pressure on Australia to change.

He’s lost the regional vote. Surely they aren’t dumb enough to vote national with the preference deals.

All in all I’m fairly sure Change is just around the corner,

Hate to tell you but it won't happen. If the Democrats put up either of those two they will discover what the ALP found out at our last election - some people are just unelectable no matter who they are running against.

 

[Bigger]

Don't even get me started on plastic.

You'd think we would quit thinking up new ways of creating/using plastics. This new vogue of plastic leisure/sports clothing actually messes with my melon. Each wash leeches microplastics into our waterways. Which NEVER go away.

All of the clothes my son has been provided with as part of his WAFL Futures team is ****ing plastic. Sort yourself out, WAFL.

 

[Arcassius]

Don't even get me started on plastic.

You'd think we would quit thinking up new ways of creating/using plastics. This new vogue of plastic leisure/sports clothing actually messes with my melon. Each wash leeches microplastics into our waterways. Which NEVER go away.

All of the clothes my son has been provided with as part of his WAFL Futures team is ******* plastic. Sort yourself out, WAFL.

I've gone the other way and only wear and buy natural fibres - my travel kit is 100% merino. ****ing $$$$ but goes for weeks without needing a wash. Can get away with carry on for month long trips. Whats old is new again

 

[yyou]

I once voted for the Sex Party

 

[wayToGo_]

Completely agree with other's sentiments that individuals need to do more (eg adjust diet, reuse, consume less,...) but as tax payers it would be equally devoid of responsibility to not collectively expect higher standards from our government (I personally don't care who is in, if they are doing a shit job we should be willing to call them out).

Someone in the other thread posted a graph showing we were going great in regard to climate change because we were out ahead in renewable energy production. Unfortunately they'd pulled the Australian data from a separate data source to the other countries and on top of that excluded a heap of other types of renewables (that are more common in other countries). Strange for university academics to be willing to join two very disparate data sets together like that?!? Was amateurish to the extreme and even if it were somewhat accurate, it's still misleading on how we're tracking as a country relative to the world...

There are four main parts to addressing climate change (at a govt level)...

Investing in renewables - It's hard to believe but Australia actually reduced investment in 2019 (costs of tech went down but that seems a ridiculous excuse). Our renewable energy production still only makes up something like 14% of our total electricity production. Quite a few countries are now 100% renewables or nearing it.
Energy use - We obviously use a lot (more than we should) which is why we also need to produce a lot. We are wasteful and have invested little to nothing in energy efficiency.
GHG Emissions - We've improved a bit but still way towards the bottom against world standards. Also any improvement wasn't really as a result of government measures.
Climate Policy - We have none. We are pretty much the worst country in the world at understanding the issue and putting measures in place to address it. Not really surprising when those in power actively avoid even having a conversation about it. IMO it's not that they don't believe in it - it's just they see it as an inconvenient nuisance they have to deal with (in amongst their many donors who also find it a nuisance). Any immediate effects they can blame on other things (not sure if others noticed ScoMo even tried to blame the fires on the Greens a few days back), and what happens in a few decades time won't impact their current term.

The problem I have always had with the conversation is how Climate Change has been labelled a LEFTist issue in countries like Australia where in reality it needs to be seen as a conversation in the CENTRE (like it is in Europe and more and more in Asia). The far RIGHT has managed to paint anyone who believes in and wants action on CC as some extreme Greenie. CENTRE-LEFT and CENTRE is now LEFT, and even CENTRE-RIGHT has been pushed to CENTRE or CENTRE-LEFT. Illustrated in Oz with how the Libs turfed Turnbull. Like him or loathe him I suspect Malcolm would be handling the fire crisis a heck of a lot better than Morrison has. And he also had a centred view on CC. But for some strange reason nobody is allowed to sit in the middle in Australia (even on BigFooty ha ha ha).

If I had only one wish for 2020 it would be for the Australian public to just take a breath and question/ignore everything they've been fed (by non-scientists/experts) on this topic and similar issues for years, on both sides of politics. We'd benefit a heap if we were all a lot less staunch about who we support - we should be able to criticise those we voted for, it doesn't infer we think the opposition would do a better job.

Smarter countries realise addressing climate change can be a great economic tool in both the short and long term. It really shouldn't be an either/or equation. It should be seen as an opportunity, not an inconvenience - but the govt won't do anything unless the public speak up on mass and say we need change. This is a much bigger issue than disagreeing with whichever party you support or the risk of agreeing with those you might hate.

tl;dr - I'm Eugene.

 

[Piggy Smalls]

You want to do something tangible and meaningful in regard to climate change?

Quit eating meat.

Agriculture consumes more freshwater than any other human activity, and nearly a third of that water is devoted to raising livestock. One-third of the world’s arable land is used to grow feed for livestock, which are responsible for 14.5 per cent of global greenhouse-gas emissions. Razing forests to graze cattle—an area larger than South America has been cleared in the past quarter century—turns a carbon sink into a carbon spigot.

If cows were a country, their emissions would be greater than all of the E.U., and behind only China and America. The way contemporary agriculture works, every two kilos of beef you eat contributes to as much global warming as flying from New York to London.

It's pretty simple.

We have until 2035 to just ******* kill the livestock industry and arrest climate change. While the shortsighted and greedy mess around with the evil c-words in charge of fossil fuel and dirty industry, there is something that we can actually do.

I am Gen X and will miss the real devastation and I loved me some red meat like teenage boys love hefty bazoongas, but I gave up. Because you kind of have to.

I don’t know whether I will give up meat entirely but my missus is a vegetarian and I am definitely starting to realise that there are plenty of alternatives out there. I made a lentil lasagne last night that was as good as any meat lasagne I’ve had AND it didn’t aggravate my heartburn and reflux condition anywhere near as much.

In my experience it does take a little bit more effort and planning to make decent vegetarian meals and this is a legitimate problem for a lot of time-poor people.

 

[Cesoir]

I once voted for the Sex Party

I went to a good one once.

 

[Joose]

This is an excerpt from my political manifesto:

- The Liberals are now the natural party of government in Australia. Its ok to let the children have a turn every now and then but not for too long lest they wreck Labour has abandoned the working people of Australia for the Greens and minorities. It is now the conservatives who speak for the interests of the average working man. Jobs, education, health, the economy, family and personal freedoms are the main concerns of people living in the real world - not bloody stupid gender pronouns, hysterical "the-end-of-the-world-is-nigh" doomism or outdated 70's era class warfare activism.​

- Socialism is a dud. It has never worked as a system for running a country except as a way to run the country into the ground. It does not result in equality for all. It results in misery for all except a chosen few "Party" members.​

- Yes Climate Change is a thing but its effects are being ridiculously exaggerated by the media and the chattering elites. Media types who spout the "end of the world" are being grossly irresponsible​

- The current bushfire crisis has been mainly caused by poor forest management policies regarding fuel reduction and an epidemic of arson. One may be able to say that Climate Change had a part through the prolonged drought but then again, this country has always had droughts. Blaming it all on the Climate Change policies of the current government is a shallow and disgraceful politicisation of a national tragedy.​

- There are only two genders. Male and Female. If you are born with the XY chromosomes you are a male regardless of what you think later in life or whatever cosmetic surgery you choose to have. If there are rare people who are born with mixed genitals organs or whatever then they are not another gender. They are men or women with birth abnormalities. Its life, deal with it.​

- Donald Trump , for all his foibles and faults has proven to be a very effective President, much more so than his predecessor. In his term ISIS has been defeated, the US economy is going great, unemployment is down to generational lows, grossly imbalanced trade deals that previous US administrations have foisted upon the american people have been re-negotiated. China has been put on notice that its arrogant disregard of international norms relating to intellectual property will no be tolerated. He is the first politician I can recall that has actually done or tried to do exactly what he campaigned on.​

All this despite the most hostile Congress and MSM that any president has ever faced.​

- UK should get the hell out of the EU. Globalism is a cancer that robs people of their freedoms , their identities and their heritage.​

Thats all for now. I think I will go and have a lie down now.

 

[poshman]

The way I see it is that we have two problems.
1. Our political leaders are all dinosaurs and a younger generation needs to take over, quickly.
2. Murdoch.

Said every generation...

I haven't heard many good ideas from my generation (millennial Born 83) and not much that stands up to scrutiny from anyone saying we need a younger generation voted in.

The serious questions that need answering are not answered:

- If climate change is the number one priority, what services are we willing to cut in order to make a change. Before that, we need to identify what needs to change and how much. But let's say it is the existential threat that has been proclaimed so loudly recently (although the world was ending in ten years for each of the last four decades...) and proceed on that basis.

- Would we be willing to not have cars? Plane travel? Air con? TV's?

Ban mining? All mining? And the million-plus jobs (statistically jobs upstream and downstream from mining wouldn't exist without mining, therefore a conservative percentage of those jobs has been accounted for) in resources or related to resources? What happens to them? How do we cover the tax hole created by not receiving the income from the taxpayer and the companies? You could assume an extra burden on the government due to unemployment. Put a hole in the budget the size of the action you are willing to take on climate change and then make the requisite cuts to the services provided.

Then you have to acknowledge that if we ban mining in Australia the demand for the goods will not suddenly disappear. Other countries will source the product from elsewhere. Would there be less mining if Australia stopped providing the resources? We would also face a population drain as people in those industries move for the jobs. If this was a long term situation many of those employees would become a citizen of another country for tax purposes and we would lose that income as well. Generally, the best talent will move so we will also face an intellectual/talent drain. We need our best engineers, leaders etc to be here to help solve the problem. If they haven't got work they won't be here to help. People need to earn to achieve a standard of living.

I haven't seen a very good answer yet. We have some of the best living conditions in the world. I doubt that many would be willing to forgo general comforts let alone government services to pay for the change they are demanding. It should not be lost on anyone that people in the countries with the best living conditions in the world are the ones who have the time to complain/criticise. If we can start with gratitude that recognises that fact and then look for solutions that will not put future generations in massive debt we will get somewhere.

Let's say that we stop all mining and for some reason, all demand stops internationally. No new houses, no new buildings etc nothing. Then ask the following questions honestly:

1. What would you cut from the budget to pay for the hole created by cutting out mining?

Dole?
Age pension?
Medicare?
Employment services?
Housing services?
Emergency Services?
Defense?
Government departments?
Roads?
Water?
Border?
Government rebates?
Arts grants?
Business grants?
Technology and innovation grants?

2. How would we look after all those who lost jobs? (the effect would reach almost every industry)

3. How do we maintain a standard of living without the income to pay for it?

Would love an honest, open conversation without personal attacks or wild fanaticism.

For the record - anyone with anything genuine to add - I am part of a group of business owners who are looking to fund innovation in some key areas, if you are truly serious please contribute and I will contact you directly for further conversation. Funding commitments are significant and we are aware that we do not have all the answers. If you are someone or know someone who is passionate in this area, while there is a rigorous selection process, opportunities are in the marketplace.

There are many questions I haven't asked. The problem is so deeply layered that even when we answer the above questions we have many times the amount than above before we have arrived at a conclusion.

 

[Bigger]

Woah, Joose - I didn’t realise the “Facebook Grandad” area even had a Freo section.

 

[freo1997]

Hate to tell you but it won't happen. If the Democrats put up either of those two they will discover what the ALP found out at our last election - some people are just unelectable no matter who they are running against.

I think Sanders would do ok. I think he can out debate anyone, but his policies are probably a bit too lefty.

I think Biden will fall apart on the debate stage against Trump. But he's a popular figure and will probably get the nom.

Who else do you propose? personally i like Yang's policies and the $1000 a month. I feel like YANG and possibly Gabbard could pull conservative voters as they're both kind of libertarians. The latter could run as an independent.

At the end of the day. I think who ever the Dems pick it has to be someone that will bring in Medicare for all!!

CAN YOU BELIEVE USA..FOR ALL THEIR SELF PROCLAIMED GREATNESS, DOESN'T HAVE MEDICARE FOR ALL????WTF.

 

[raffrox]

Agree, we are way behind the curve on renewables and need to start catching up pronto.

I'm interested to see the published materials to back up your statement that we will get smashed first and harder than other nations - if it's science I have never read it. I would have thought there are many other nations in a more precarious position than us and many are so small they are virtually powerless to influence climate change.

I like reasoned debate, but people just saying it's #science as if that ends all arguments annoys me.

We'll there was a warning in the thread title

I admit I was generalising a fair bit but its #science that global warming is a thing. The rest was a bit of logic on my behalf. Former Fire chiefs seeing this as a contributing factor to our fire seasons in a country by your admission has severe environmental conditions in the first place. Its logic to me that we have a pretty big vested interest in this whole situation.

The only way the logic chain can be broken is if you can deny that climate change exists.

 

[Purple_Turtle]

I think Sanders would do ok. I think he can out debate anyone, but his policies are probably a bit too lefty.

I think Biden will fall apart on the debate stage against Trump. But he's a popular figure and will probably get the nom.

Who else do you propose? personally i like Yang's policies and the $1000 a month. I feel like YANG and possibly Gabbard could pull conservative voters as they're both kind of libertarians. The latter could run as an independent.

At the end of the day. I think who ever the Dems pick it has to be someone that will bring in Medicare for all!!

CAN YOU BELIEVE USA..FOR ALL THEIR SELF PROCLAIMED GREATNESS, DOESN'T HAVE MEDICARE FOR ALL????WTF.

Medicare for All is political poison that will kill any candidate who backs it. Most Americans have private health insurance and actually like the coverage they get; driving it out of the market isn't the answer to the problem of improving the shithouse public health insurance or expanding coverage.

Also, I can believe the US doesn't have Single-Payer Healthcare because only 3 countries do. And I don't think the NHS is so good that anyone should be looking to it as a model.

 

[Purple_Turtle]

The way I see it is that we have two problems.
1. Our political leaders are all dinosaurs and a younger generation needs to take over, quickly.
2. Murdoch.

1. I can't think of any of the younger generation that would be better qualified then we currently have. There's some I happen to like (probably not who you like,) but they're not ready.

2. Blaming Murdoch is a cop-out for leftwing parties when they lose elections or can't sell their policies.

 

[freo1997]

Medicare for All is political poison that will kill any candidate who backs it. Most Americans have private health insurance and actually like the coverage they get; driving it out of the market isn't the answer to the problem of improving the shithouse public health insurance or expanding coverage.

Also, I can believe the US doesn't have Single-Payer Healthcare because only 3 countries do. And I don't think the NHS is so good that anyone should be looking to it as a model.

shit loads cant afford private health.

 

[Piggy Smalls]

I doubt we’ll see a ‘young’ PM unless the system changes.

At the moment PM is seen as the end goal of a political career in either the liberal or labor party. Everybody wants to progress to the top job in their chosen field. It’s an aspiration for many but when they get there they learn they don’t have the drive or resilience to actually do the job properly.

 

[Purple Jesus]

Medicare for All is political poison that will kill any candidate who backs it. Most Americans have private health insurance and actually like the coverage they get; driving it out of the market isn't the answer to the problem of improving the shithouse public health insurance or expanding coverage.

Also, I can believe the US doesn't have Single-Payer Healthcare because only 3 countries do. And I don't think the NHS is so good that anyone should be looking to it as a model.

I think you might find that times have changed and M4A isn't nearly the tainted thing that it used to be. People have wisened up to the fact they they shouldn't have to go into debt just to give birth.

FWIW, the NHS is bloody fantastic. Shits all over the Aussie medicare system. Have used it heavily the last 2 years with several ambulance rides, 2 complicated births and a bout of meningitis (fun) and could not praise it higher. Didn't cost me a cent out of pocket at the point of care. Obviously I pay tax here and a bonus NHS fee each year for being an immigrant. It just needs more funding to reach it's true potential. It is absolutely how healthcare should be run, as a model/philosophy.

 

[freo1997]

I doubt we’ll see a ‘young’ PM unless the system changes.

At the moment PM is seen as the end goal of a political career in either the liberal or labor party. Everybody wants to progress to the top job in their chosen field. It’s an aspiration for many but when they get there they learn they don’t have the drive or resilience to actually do the job properly.

Jim Chalmers, 41 years old. Tall, not a slob like slomo. If i can put money on who will be Labors next Pm its him.