Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

[redandblack]

st, accusing posters of telling lies isn't in the spirit of this forum.

As for Mr Abbott making the PM look stupid in the debate, you're engaging in a terminological inexactitude

[Psyber]

Guys, ST is a bit of a soft target, so why drag it on. Be humane.
His not catching on, and coming back for more of the same each time must be getting boring by now.
He didn't appear to know enough to not ask for the figures for the last 50 years was, thus giving you a gift.
Most of us know the last mini-Ice age ended in the late 19th century, so, of course, the figures were going to show the rises regardless of human contribution - which I now accept is a factor.

[straight talker]

you dont say?? plenty of people dont believe in this stuff and i guess there would be plenty who do! i just dont believe the science is clear cut as there is scientists who believe and some who dont! wouldnt you say thats correct?

[Psyber]

you dont say?? plenty of people dont believe in this stuff and i guess there would be plenty who do! i just dont believe the science is clear cut as there is scientists who believe and some who dont! wouldnt you say thats correct?

ST see my sympathetic post in another thread about your comments there.
I'm a Liberal Party man, and I started out as a sceptic on climate change - not sceptical that the climate was changing, but that the human actions were the cause.

I still think most of the recent changes are driven by the Milankovitch cycles, but I am now convinced that the human contribution is a significant, if not the prime, cause of the current state.
That change was achieved to some extent by information "fish" provided here, but more so by more detailed information I got from staff at the Environment Institute at the University of Adelaide. I talked to them and asked questions. That stuff is on this forum now - I've posted it .

[straight talker]

yes thats fine i have no dought the world is warming but the reasons i dont think are clear cut as a matter of fact i think it is far from it. I and most Australians dont believe we have to undertake the measures we are as i and others believe it will cost jobs close companies/business and the common household costs will rise dramatically especially when the price rises above $23 a tonne which we do know for sure thats going to happen.

[redandblack]

st, You're best served taking note of the wise advice given to you by Psyber.

In the spirit in which it was given, I'll also try to take his advice.

Given that, would it be possible to keep your posts to rational discussion instead of asserting that your opinion of future events is factual?

Deal?

[straight talker]

yep deal! I wish everyone would be carefull of saying whats going to happen in the future hey! mmm Interesting????

[fish]

...but I am now convinced that the human contribution is a significant, if not the prime, cause of the current state. That change was achieved to some extent by information "fish" provided here, but more so by more detailed information I got from staff at the Environment Institute at the University of Adelaide. I talked to them and asked questions. That stuff is on this forum now - I've posted it .

Cheers Psyber I have enjoyed our "discussions" on climate change - I find your posts on this subject interesting and well thought out and researched - unlike some others on this forum whos posts are ridiculous and hardly warrant a reply...

[straight talker]

yes fish and you only have one eye for the believers isnt that correct?? so you follow your cult and me mine!!

[Q.]

yes fish and you only have one eye for the believers isnt that correct?? so you follow your cult and me mine!!

Your dismissal of science is astounding.

Or just profoundly dumb.

[Psyber]

yes fish and you only have one eye for the believers isnt that correct?? so you follow your cult and me mine!!

It is not that simplistic ST.
Of course people tend to favour those who agree with them, but to reach a resolution rational debate has to happen.
Opinions have to have some basis in fact to be valid, even if we dispute over interpretation of the data.
"Fish" and I had some rather heavy confrontations, but at least we did have them based on available data, and its interpretation, not just raw emotion.
We still don't agree on everything but we do try to be civil and factual - most of the time anyway.

I don't think the Carbon Tax is the best solution and favour direct active change, and the adoption of modern safe nuclear technology.*
I am concerned we are so preoccupied with CO2 that we will overlook doing anything about other forms of pollution.
[*Look up Thorium Fission in wikipedia for example.]

[straight talker]

i agree totally, my argument is i dont think this tax is the answer especially when they are going to hand out credits and still allow big polluters to do so. Why would you allow them to do that and then turn around and say your making the environment cleaner?

[dedja]

So st, you've made numerous posts about the state of Australian shares ... are you comfortable that the coalition are talking down, even trashing the Australian economy for political means?

Wasn't that long ago that all sides of the political spectrum played a very tight bi-partisan approach to matters like this.

Are the coalition so desperate for power that they're prepared to inflict unnecessary pain on ordinary Australians but telling porkies about the state of the economy?

Are you able to answer without reference to the carbon tax which has nothing to do with this?

Cheers ...

[straight talker]

what you honestly think the economies fine do you??

[redandblack]

Yes.

So does the International Monetary Fund in its latest report, which is glowing in its praise of the economy and the Government.

It depends on whether you believe all the figures, or believe Andrew Bolt and Tony Abbott.

[Interceptor]

Robert Gottliebsen doesn't think everything's rosie
Is he correct? He seems confident, but only time will tell.

[redandblack]

I don't know if he's correct or not, but I do know it's one of the most self-praising articles I've read

[once_were_warriors]

Robert Gottliebsen doesn't think everything's rosie
Is he correct? He seems confident, but only time will tell.

"Finally I want to praise all those who, with me, alerted the community to the depth of this downturn, including Westpac’s Bill Evans. Together we played a role in preventing the Reserve Bank from making a horrible mistake"

He should win an award for self praise, blowing his own entire brass section.

Economists : The Kings of hindsight.

[straight talker]

ummmm very interesting maybe what i was posting earlier may be coming to fruition?? Loss of jobs etc:

[Q.]

http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2011/080111.htm

The economic outlook is favorable. After a temporary setback in the first quarter due to natural disasters, activity is expected to bounce back in the second quarter. We project real GDP growth of 2 percent for calendar year 2011 and 3½ percent in 2012 on the back of strong demand for commodities and private investment in mining and liquefied natural gas. We expect employment to grow at a slower pace than in recent years but the unemployment rate should remain below 5 percent in 2011 and 2012. With the labor market approaching capacity, underlying inflation is likely to rise gradually. The external current account deficit is expected to narrow to 1 percent of GDP in 2011—due to the jump in the terms of trade—before progressively widening to about 6½ percent of GDP in the medium term, assuming the real effective exchange rate remains at its current level.