Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Looks like the federal liberals don't ever want to be re-elected

Discussion in 'The Pub' started by smee, Dec 1, 2009.

  1. I was just thinking that...
  2. How's Joe Hockey feeling?
  3. Probably relieved.
  4. When JH was elected leader of the Liberal party, knowing a little of his past, I said "Australian's will never trust this guy".

    I like to think Australians will never vote for someone as right wing as Abbott, but it scares the shit out of me.
  5. My guess is Hockey feels like he dodged a bullet: it would have been suicide for him to have taken the lead now, under the kind of cloud he'd have been under. Abbott will lead the Libs to decimation (in the current sense of the term, not the original sense), whether the election is soon (double dissolution) or late, and there Big Joe will be, waiting in the wings...

    But yeah, Abbott as PM is a terrifying thought. I think, though, that the right-wingers have committed their usual logical error of believing that everyone thinks like them, and anyone who doesn't, doesn't count anyway. They think an election fought on the ETS would be a Coalition landslide, despite the polls showing massive support for climate change action on the part of the Australian people.
  6. There's support for CC action, but is there for the ETS??

    How does taxing the hell out of carbon producers, thereby increasing costs to everyone artificially (IF THE BUSINESS REMAINS VIABLE), get support from the masses?

    Can anyone summarise in 50words or less how the ETS achieves CC action?
  7. This is the only logic I can see in it too. They were never going to win the next election and Abbott was clearly undermining Turnbull at every opportunity. Who knows what he was doing behind closed doors. Let him loose and then quit or move to the back bench, then they can decide on whether to give it to Hockey or give Turnbull another go.

    It's risky however as they may demage the party even further in the process.

    One thing they did make clear today is they are not a Liberal Party. Their rejection of Hockey's conscious vote makes that clear.
  8. you can see the future...

    I am not betting on a double dissolution even if the bill does not pass

    Labour will gain bugger all extra seats and the greens will probably gain the balance of power making it pointless for labour
  9. Exactly my thoughts. I never thought little Johnny Howard had a chance of becoming PM, yet somehow (admittedly with a lot of luck) he managed it for 3 terms.

    Frankly I think Turnbull is the best option for an effective opposition.

  10. I think people are so relieved to see the govt doing something about climate change action that any action will do. And when the alternative is deny the problem exists, what can you do but go with the lesser of two evils? I'm just hoping it's the first step of many to come, (holds breath....)

    I'm still gobsmacked, Tony Abbot???? And by one vote, talk about a divided party.
  11. The ETS is not a perfect solution, by any means: which is part of why the Greens oppose it. And, IMO, we should also be looking at nuclear (which the Greens would hate) as part of a mixed approach to climate change.

    But the ETS is intended to make it more expensive to use fossil fuels than other energy sources: at the moment we artificially make fossil fuels cheap by ignoring the dumping costs. It is an incentive to business to move away from polluting forms of energy and toward less-polluting or non-polluting forms. And trading creates flexibility so that those with the most room to move get more benefits... evolution of a new economy, if you will.

    Tax money, of course, isn't lost to the economy, just recirculated. Australia had been in a 'race to the bottom' on taxes, cutting tax but also services. Yes, the ETS would increase the overall tax burden, but subsidies for the disadvantaged would see that the pain was spread around, and the revenue would pay off debt and build infrastructure, including energy infrastructure.

    And, of course, if a double dissolution election was called, it *would* largely be fought on this issue (although Abbott has also, hilariously, suicidally, immediately reanimated the corpse of Workchoices to 'entice' us with as well...) which would allow some much-needed education about the costs and benefits of the ETS to be done by all parties.

    As I say, I reckon an election in the near future would see the Libs move to near-irrelevance on the Australian political scene.
  12. +1 to this....the only way i can see the ETS working is if the government froze the prices coal/power companies could charge the general population, then they would start losing money because they couldn't pass the costs of the ETS onto the general public and thus make it worthwhile for them to look into cleaner fuels, and once they start to build new plants/convert old ones allow prices to be adjusted to support new infrastructure.

    but without making the business lose money it doesn't do jack, or until there is a second option up and running it will do nothing....i know the idea is for companies to look at other fuel sources etc but any price rise that is passed onto them (from the ETS/government) they simply pass down the line, and as the masses with no other option you are stuck and have to pay or return the the dark ages....

    Why would business likes the power/coal etc need to change when the very few other options out for green free power (if there is such a thing) there really aren't viable for 99.9% of the population.

    Anyway back on topic, i just hope anybody in government vote against this and i am glad the lib's will now, or atleast delay it until after the summit next weekish.
  13. Pfft, they can have Adolph Bloody Hitler leading the libs at the moment, the ETS will dragged out the back of the senate and put down.

    Whoever leads the libs to the next election will get booted. Hockey will get up after. It's just not his time yet.
  14. They'll probably even loose a couple of seats in the lower house, but because of the half senate election system the Liberals are only holding the balance of power because of the previous election, not the one where Rudd won.

    So given the opinion poles and the trend at the last election they should get couple of extra upper house seat. And remember 2 they gain is usually 2 the liberals loose.

    So the greens would have to do really really well to hold the balance of power.

    Even if they do they will rarely vote with the Liberal. The certainly won't be voting with a Tony Abbott Liberal party.

  15. Totally pucked?
  16. Currently polluting CO2 is free. Attaching a price to it brings it into line with other pollutants that businesses are forced to clean up (often at great expense). Just like other pollution, if it costs them money, businesses do it less.

    (how's that for 50 words or less?)

    Amazing that the politicians are happy to vote in this ****tard as leader rather than start dealing with the problem. Morons. I mean sure, it'll cost money: but the point is it should have always cost money given the massive pollution involved. Just like in the old days you used to be able to dump lead, mercury, asbestos anywhere you liked: then it started costing money to dispose of.
    I'll bet KRudd is sipping Champaign at the moment because the public (I ****ing hope anyhow) will never want this tool in the PM's seat.
  17. he's a douchebag of the highest order. i will particularly enjoy voting against him now as my local member....
  18. Not a lot of luck, he was an effective politician. And for much of his time in office, very popular too.
  19. fark em all i say, bunch of criminals