- Mar 30, 2014
- 3,543
- 3,660
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Liverpool
Yeah that's how it works. Usually high net worth individuals tax themselves to give themselves more money
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Society/Culture The left do not represent the poor anymore
- Thread starter geelong_crazy26
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Yeah that's how it works. Usually high net worth individuals tax themselves to give themselves more money
Mofra
Moderator
- Dec 6, 2005
- 69,156
- 204,205
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Footscray, Coney Island Warriors
- Moderator
- #52
Yep - corporate corruption is just small part of it. Extreme weather events are far more likely to adversely effect agricultural-based economies than modern value-add industries.
Mofra
Moderator
- Dec 6, 2005
- 69,156
- 204,205
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Footscray, Coney Island Warriors
- Moderator
- #54
Ah, no.
http://www.who.int/heli/risks/ehindevcoun/en/
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2016/deaths-attributable-to-unhealthy-environments/en/
The right care far less about the poor than the OP pretends to represent.
Best thing to fix it is to provide cheap reticulated electricity and water
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
Mofra
Moderator
- Dec 6, 2005
- 69,156
- 204,205
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Footscray, Coney Island Warriors
- Moderator
- #56
Neoliberalism in action: South African slums have their access to water cut-off as the infrastructure was sold off to multinationals at the behest of the IMF.
Fortunately, micro-loans and aid agencies (increasingly relying on donations as foreign aid budgets are slashed) are helping to bridge some of the gap.
- Aug 2, 2012
- 34,820
- 56,393
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Depends upon the source of the electricity, with coal pollution already responsible for 1 million plus deaths per year.
- Thread starter
- #58
I have to share something I heard on Andrew Bolt about a month ago which is just about the worst bit of left wing lunacy I have ever heard .
The UN global warming models over the past 15 years have all been wrong so the scientists asking themselves why the models have been wrong came up with the conclusion that nature is racist, green house gases from china cool the world while green house gases from everyone else heat the world .
The UN global warming models over the past 15 years have all been wrong so the scientists asking themselves why the models have been wrong came up with the conclusion that nature is racist, green house gases from china cool the world while green house gases from everyone else heat the world .
- Thread starter
- #59
We can argue all day about climate change being real but another issue that needs to be addressed is the way the left obsess over people in 3rd world countries , they are the responsibility of their government. We need to focus on looking after Australians and let other governments look after their own people .
- Sep 21, 2004
- 46,694
- 53,440
- AFL Club
- GWS
You are all over the shop. It starts off as a typically uninformed, tabloid shot at the left for ignoring the poor.
Then you have just criticised the left for worrying too much about the poor, and they should be left to their own governments.
Do you realise how stupid you sound? Forget left/right, you cannot thread any logic through anything you say, because you are horrendously uninformed.
Every one of these threads you start only makes it clearer you have no idea.
- Thread starter
- #61
When did i criticize the left for caring to much about the poor?
If you're talking about the poor in other countries i don't factor them into decisions made by our government at all . I am strictly talking about this countries poor
Really ? A drop in the ocean compared to all the subsistence poor who are forced off their land so Corporations can plant eucalyptus and poison the ground.
You would probably find that carbon emission would go down as the Japanese IBUKI satellite showed clearly that these areas emit more that the developed countries.
I doubt anyone normal actually considers "the left" or "the right" when they do things. Like "oh, I might be a left therefore I should care for the poor and stuff".
I support action on climate change because there's evidence for it and also as a scientist the unscientific FUD from the other side normally doesn't pass the "check before believing" filter.
I support marriage equality because I don't believe in religion strongly enough to put pointless words before the happiness of people I know. I'm also Bi, but at this stage I have no intention of using same sex marriage so support it for others.
I dislike all political parties, so even when my views seem to match some, it doesn't mean I am campaigning for them, just arguing that something is right.
I care about the poor, and think society shouldn't really leave people to starve or die of illness. At the same time I dislike the trend of groups "rescuing" people with an agenda or to recruit them, so government having things like Medicare and Centrelink (even though it is a crap system) seems a good solution. I couldn't care less about campaigning to have a few more dollars in my pocket while being surrounded by hardship.
There's lots more, but some on here would instantly label that lefty. Still lefty says nothing about what I believe or my reasons for supporting certain things, so it is a stupid tag. It makes the discussions pointless if you start from that perspective. Similarly labelling someone right wing and then deciding that means they support certain things for certain reasons is just as pointless.
So to answer the OP, maybe people care less about the poor these days. It could be due to other issues taking the focus. It could be due to charity groups or beggars getting too scheming and annoying. But it probably has nothing to do with some group called "the left", and even if you can find some link, it's still a crap basis for discussion of the issue.
I support action on climate change because there's evidence for it and also as a scientist the unscientific FUD from the other side normally doesn't pass the "check before believing" filter.
I support marriage equality because I don't believe in religion strongly enough to put pointless words before the happiness of people I know. I'm also Bi, but at this stage I have no intention of using same sex marriage so support it for others.
I dislike all political parties, so even when my views seem to match some, it doesn't mean I am campaigning for them, just arguing that something is right.
I care about the poor, and think society shouldn't really leave people to starve or die of illness. At the same time I dislike the trend of groups "rescuing" people with an agenda or to recruit them, so government having things like Medicare and Centrelink (even though it is a crap system) seems a good solution. I couldn't care less about campaigning to have a few more dollars in my pocket while being surrounded by hardship.
There's lots more, but some on here would instantly label that lefty. Still lefty says nothing about what I believe or my reasons for supporting certain things, so it is a stupid tag. It makes the discussions pointless if you start from that perspective. Similarly labelling someone right wing and then deciding that means they support certain things for certain reasons is just as pointless.
So to answer the OP, maybe people care less about the poor these days. It could be due to other issues taking the focus. It could be due to charity groups or beggars getting too scheming and annoying. But it probably has nothing to do with some group called "the left", and even if you can find some link, it's still a crap basis for discussion of the issue.
Last edited:
- Aug 2, 2012
- 34,820
- 56,393
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Really ? A drop in the ocean compared to all the subsistence poor who are forced off their land so Corporations can plant eucalyptus and poison the ground.
You would probably find that carbon emission would go down as the Japanese IBUKI satellite showed clearly that these areas emit more that the developed countries.
We're heading into very strange territory when we describe 1 million deaths a year as a "drop in the ocean".
Out of 7Billion? Did you know the life expectancy in Australia in 1900 was 47 years for a male? It is now around 80 thanks to the industrial revolution which would not have happened if not for coal. If there was no coal there would not be a tree or a whale left.
- Aug 2, 2012
- 34,820
- 56,393
- AFL Club
- Geelong
You're a hard man, Jack.
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
I wish I was back in Aus, I would watch the Bolt show just so I can predict the next thread.
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
And the romans had running water thanks to lead pipes, which gave them a better quality of life, til the poisoning started killing them. It's all about starting and developing. Look at surgery techniques etc. They are crude at first and slowly develop. Just because something worked at first, does not mean we cannot get better at it. Your love for coal is as disturbing as Scott Morrisons.
- Thread starter
- #69
The Australian Energy Market Operator has warned Victorians to prepare for blackout's this summer due insufficient capability in the system .
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...x/news-story/b7152488f193ab066a95705115287e87
This is a total joke that in a country so rich in natural resources our electricity costs have doubled in the past 10 years and we face a supply shortage .
The left have given us an absolute energy crisis , the Andrews government must go .
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...x/news-story/b7152488f193ab066a95705115287e87
This is a total joke that in a country so rich in natural resources our electricity costs have doubled in the past 10 years and we face a supply shortage .
The left have given us an absolute energy crisis , the Andrews government must go .
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
lol. So when the Liberal government was in charge, what were they doing? Sleeping at the wheel?
How about the fact that Matt Canavan is now criticising a privately owned company for caring about profits. Aren't you all for people making profits for themselves? AGL is the one closing it because they can make more money not running it.
You flip flop more than a ****ing gymnast.
- Thread starter
- #71
The liberals must launch a full on attack against the labour/greens energy policy like they did with the carb
Why is coal no longer profitable ? because the left are Anti-coal just like they are anti gas and nuclear .
No company will invest in coal because its a long term investment and they know at some point labour will get in power and introduce ideological climate change policies that make coal unprofitable .
The left just want our energy costs to go up and up and up .
Why is coal no longer profitable ? because the left are Anti-coal just like they are anti gas and nuclear .
No company will invest in coal because its a long term investment and they know at some point labour will get in power and introduce ideological climate change policies that make coal unprofitable .
The left just want our energy costs to go up and up and up .
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
Because coal fired power stations are old and require tremendous capital injections to upgrade to current standards and that's just to give them another 5 or so years.
They are also anti-gas because guess what. CH4 + 2O2 = CO2 + 2H2O. AKA it produces Carbon dioxide when burning. Something which they are against. The reasons for being anti-nuclear is related to the safety of it, especially post Fukushima. I don't agree with their reasonings behind it. The other is the storage of nuclear waste which has a large half life.
No company is investing in anything at the moment because since 2013 the Liberal government has been unable to develop an energy policy and give direction. Since there is no direction, companies are on hold whether to build more gas plants or go for Wind/Solar. This is why the state governments are filling the gap.
Coal is just not economically viable anymore, the power plants are too expensive to build for what they produce, gas is the way forward for now before more reliable renewable sources become available.
What I want to know is are you for profits or for the common people? Seriously, you flip flop every 5 seconds. You bitch that the left don't care for people, that only the right do, but the right are for big business who aren't for people. You literally have no clue what you are talking about, it's embarrassing.
- Thread starter
- #73
Hold on why is coal in this country not economically viable ? what standard is required ? the only standard should be to provide a safe working environment for staff and cheap power , none of this low emissions rubbish .
You are right they do require tremendous capital investments and to make a profit of that capital they need to operate for a long time which means they need to be able to survive under both labour and liberal governments . Labour needs to offer its support to coal fire power stations and stop this RET nonsense .
You say the liberals have been unable to develop a policy which is wrong , they want coal fire power stations and gas fracking .
Understand this renewables are simply not reliable or cheap and no policy will change that .
Profits are not generally speaking bad for the common person , profits are the reason why companies exist and provide goods/services to consumers and jobs for employees . Profits are good not bad in most cases .
Woa thre it's the coalition who are obsessed with ssm
And housing affordability is the main brake on our economy. Inb4 you attribut that to the 'left'
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
Only answering this part, but this proves you have absolutely no Knowledge of any topic you post. Once and for all, go read a book instead of watching the dumbest journalist in Australia.
Similar threads
