Topher did the brilliant “Forbidden History” video, which has hit 50,000 views and he wants to make two more to remind people of the importance of free speech.
There are only hours to help him to reach the tally. Pledges are only processed if the total hits $35k and I hear that there is a big donor as yet unlisted, and the remaining gap is small, so those last promises today might make all the difference.
The post here last month on The Forbidden History of Unpopular People garnered a very enthusiastic response.
“It’s about arrogance, it’s about powerful people here in Australia who believe that they are smarter than you, that their opinion is worth more than your opinion, and that their thinking is better than your thinking, and if you think they’re wrong, you should just shut up.”
Help stop the News Media Gestapo
I’m sorry I wasn’t onto this earlier in the piece…
Topher also writes that he discovered that the wholesale price of electricity has doubled in the first week of July compared to the average in June… he made a 5 minute video blog about it here: http://youtu.be/MuQICvDXQSk [This link doesn’t seem to work, but we can get you to Tophers other videos on youtube, or you can search Topher’s own site.]
He’s worth supporting. I reckon we will be hearing a lot more from this guy in the future.
00
Jo, the link in the last para isn’t working, for me at least..
pointman
00
Hmmm. Me Neither :-(. So I found a couple of other links to other videos instead, and I’ll update that one tomorrow…
00
I lost him when he mentioned “no more welfare”. He seems to be a young, hale and hearty man. But a lot of folk, young, old, infirm, disabled, mentally ill, etc, are dependant on government for food and shelter.
Philanthropy alone does not, nor ever has, provided for those who need what is called welfare. Should we abolish public hospitals and be like USA just because taxes provide these items?
Taxes are needed for very many items we all take for granted. Even Americans like the idea of government schools. Main highways have to be built even if they don’t serve each person in a nation.
I agree big, centralised government is not good per se, but some form of it is a ‘necessary evil’, so to speak. Mitt Romney is the example of a plutocracy that pays extremely little or even no tax which is not a good thing. And the CO2 tax is a burden for all of us which is also not a good thing.
However, there has to be a ‘middle ground’ where taxes are necessary preferably paid mostly by the wealthy and less by the poor if any at all. Growling about the poor receiving help does no good at all.
00
Hi Elva
Please don’t take that outburst above as being directed at you, only the first line .
You make a fair point but if I could summarise ; Most people do not begrudge giving “help’ to those in need.
That isn’t the issue.
The problem arises when politicians see a good vote-getter and upgrade the “help’ to a ‘lifestyle” and it just gets out of hand.
This country was not built by the people advocating excessive welfare which must be paid for by people who are often not much better off than the welfare recipients.
KK
00
You make the mistake or omission which is to assume that the government is the only organisation capable of welfare. This patently isn’t the case. State supplied welfare is a tiny blip in human history – for most of human history welfare has come from family, friends, community, churches and other organisations. This is still the case in the majority of the world’s population, where government welfare is unheard of.
Now, you might think that lack of government welfare is the reason why other countries appear to be ‘poor’ but this cannot be so : a poor country is by nature one which cannot produce enough things to exchange with others. You can’t welfare your way to prosperity, as there must be someone to generate the wealth to redistribute in the first place.
Too many people have been trained to think ‘we have a problem…. the government must help’. It’s this reflexive thinking that gives politicians too much power over our lives, and stunts our own creativity and resourcefulness. The simple truth is that being killed by your own government was the leading cause of unnatural death in the 20th century.
I’m not saying that governments shouldn’t provide any welfare or safety-net. I happen to be a believer in maintaining the essential safety net as it currently stands in Australia, simply because it’s part of the social fabric. But I am a firm believer of collectively waking people up and saying : stop putting your faith in the government. Just stop..
Stop gladly giving politicians and bureaucrats and policemen more power over your life for nothing in return. These positions of power are just people, and they have no idea about you and your local community. They only care about their own goals, and chances are those goals are not in alignment with yours. A central planner cannot possibly know your circumstances, needs, aspirations and plans. Only you can know these and plan these best for your life.
00
You say
But these days families, churches and ‘other’ organisations are not able to help or are unable to cope. This was the case in the 1800s which is WHY government welfare began to be envisaged. It is also WHY the dole was created during the Great Depression of the 1930s when nearly 30% of Australians were unemployed. To get the payment swagmen had to travel several kms a day to different place.
It may be great to never rely on government help but if you were run over by a bus and had no huge savings and a mortgage and debts and family to provide for I am sure you would want more than a handout from the Salvation Army, etc.
Sure, you could have a life insurance policy but that would be chicken feed c.f. your real needs especially if the accident was your fault and you were not of an age to benefit from a decent superannuation.
BTW, other poor countries are often without welfare because the leaders are so corrupt they make ours look like saints.
00
Elva
In terms of corruption I think our politicians are doing very nicely.
As for the “dole’, in the 1930s I really don’t think it was ever comparable to the excesses we have had for the last 40 years.
In the fifties wasn’t the “dole” your refund of bus fares to and from job interviews?
For all the “free money” spread around by Governments grabbing votes Australians aren’t necessarily all that happy.
My wife took a group of locals, from here, on a tour of a nearby asian neighbour for a tour operator who was looking at possibilities there. The Australians tourists were full of “compassion” for the poor Asians and handed out biros and pencils to the young children.
After several days of listening to the comments about how poor and underprivileged these people were I eventually had to say something .
I asked a few of the group who were most concerned by what they saw to check out something else. I suggested that they look at the faces of the kids and adults.
The next day they summed it all up and said “they are happy”.
They had picked up what I was seeing’ that people were if not hilariously happy, at least they appeared content and at peace in
a way that the Aussie tourists were not.
There are no stragglers in Asia, everybody has something to do; even people with no arms can sell lottery tickets to tourists.
The culture of Envy encouraged by politicians can eat you up and leave you in a very unhappy place.
Time we got the pollies to get back to work at providing opportunities and good basic government for all.
KK
00
Your example of Mitt Romney is wrong. His released tax record showed he paid over 3 million in taxes. But looking in others pockets is a demonstration of envy or convetting. He and others like him were successful so what and more power to them.
00
Mitt Romney’s tax releases had to be pried from him like a dentist pulling a molar out of a mouth. He didn’t want to reveal these at first.
A lot of wealthy folk are just a too bit shy and coy about their tax payments. I had an uncle who avoided paying taxes on cartons of whisky by putting them down on his returns as weed poison costs. Romney also has some questionable havens. It is not envious or covetous to seek truth.
I point out the recent revelation that a prominent bank (British I think) has revealed to a USA Senate inquiry that it laundered money for terrorists including the Taliban even before 9/11. The bank is embarrassed and the top echelon have resigned in shame.
On ‘4 Corners’ it was shown that he Taliban wrung $20 000 from poor farmers if they didn’t grow poppies. They suffered if the government destroyed the crops. The money was clearly not stashed in socks but in western institutions described above.
1920s prohibition produced Al Capone and extreme violence. It is not good to envy rich people, certainly, but not all rich people are always paragons of virtue.
00
Elva, you need to make an intellectual leap here. Being “rich” is not a moral (or lack thereof) state of being. Don’t fall for that left wing shibboleth. There are good and bad just as there are amongst the not so rich. “Rich” is a product of enterprise, be it moral or amoral. In wealthy societies like ours it’s that enterprise that allows us to afford the welfare state. Unfortunately politicians of the amoral kind use that welfare system in the same way that the mafia uses a protection racket, demeaning our democracies and perverting the original intent (as I understand it) of that welfare state. Welfare payments and state assistance have now become grubby little bribes. The state needs more, hence you have ghastly ideas like a carbon tax and Hollande’s top tax rate which are nothing more than extortion. Some states are virtually bankrupt because they’ve played this game to it’s logical conclusion.
00
I would like to reiterate what I first wrote. I stated,
A lot of others could be added to this ‘list’ Such people can not just stroll down the street and find ‘work’ as most would imagine employment to be. Special arrangements often have to be made for the disabled. Just because some legless person is virtually carried to the the top of Mt. Everest by porters to prove disabled folk are capable of anything is a stupid in my opinion.
Philanthropy does NOT work. It failed in Charles Dickens’ time and is the reason the original Liberal Party was formed in Britain late in the 19th century. It was based on the idea of individualism and business, sure, but it also was the first to advocate more than merely poor houses or debtors’ prisons for the poor. It submitted the idea of governmental help. So welfare is not some socialist,communist or left wing ideal though I agree it has been used and abused by such.
But, I did work for my superannuation. However, over time I and my wife have needed the pension to sustain some ‘life’. We don’t go on cruises and dinner every night like some who have inherited great wealth. I know several people like that who boast about having worked hard for their riches.
It is true that Menzies did apply a 3% tax to pay for old age pensions. This has ‘disappeared’ among all other taxes. I had better say here that I am not a Green, nor a Labor supporter whatsoever. Also, I am blind or so close to it that it doesn’t matter. I can’t drive anymore or enjoy what I used to take for granted. Should I just crawl under a rock and die merely to please those who think taxes are a burden?
Tell me when there was a time taxes were nix. Even Romans exacted taxes and Jesus said to pay them. One of his disciples was a tax collector. In Australia about the time of Federation there were no taxes because it was a rare time of prosperity under the umbrella of Britain.
00
Hi Elva
Boy, this thread has really exposed some raw nerves.
You made an earlier comment;
“there has to be a ‘middle ground’ where taxes are necessary preferably paid mostly by the wealthy and less by the poor if any at all.”
Just as correctly there needs to be “middle ground” in what is Taken from the tax-pool as well. If this is not monitored then others will lose more money in taxes paid.
Government help for the categories of welfare recipients you mention would almost certainly receive universal public support.
On the other hand there is one very prominent issue that has caused great division between taxpayers and beneficiaries.
That is where males have fathered children and run off to leave the taxpayer to look after not only their own family but part of someone elses as well.
When politicians decide to create a new benefit you will find that the number of “needy” increases to max out their income.
As MV says, Federal Pensions are effectively self funded superannuation schemes administers by the government; this is because all those receiving them now are of an age where pretty much everybody worked because work was made available to them.
We are entering a new phase now where many pension recipients will never have worked a day in their lives and are the long term social security beneficiaries. The unfairness wrankles.
There is no easy way of putting a stop to the escalation of unearned or Extreme Welfare.
This is because politicians can use the hard work of the taxpayers to entice a larger group who aspire to more social security for less work.
There is a significant parallel between the Welfare expansion and the Carbon tax and that is in the area of political indifference towards taxpayers..
They can always be “snowed’ into being “compassionate” until they are sometimes worse off than the people they are helping.
00
I agree that too much money is paid for rather ‘silly’ causes such as your reference for fathers who have run away from their responsibilities. But also I see no need for the ‘baby bonus’ and maternal long leave.
Public hospitals, IMO, should have means testing where those who can afford treatment pay for it or are sent to private hospitals. They used to be means tested in QLD in the 1950s but when that was stopped so many people came from NSW an agreement had to be made to have NSW have free hospitals. I reject your saying,
Don’t forget that every person, that’s EVERY person, pays GST which, strangely enough, is a tax. I am in a good position insofar as I was able to work for long enough to receive a very sizable, greater than normal superannuation with all my debts paid. It was my blindness that caused me to retire. I have been grateful to have a DSP otherwise my super’ would diminish at a faster rate and then I would be a real burden on society.
IF I had gone blind at say, 20, I doubt I could be in a decent position. I think some on here would prefer to have seen me sleeping on park benches in the cold and rain just to make them feel justified in saving a few $$$ in taxes. Sorry, but I won’t accept that.
00
Elva when you say that about “other people” and “sleeping on benches” you are adding material to the conversation which I never said
and your focus is still on “entitlement” rather than where I am coming from.
I would like to see social security that is fair to both recipients and taxpayers and , if I can use this much abused word,
sustainable.
The trouble with making every thing “free” to welfare people is that there is a big incentive for more and more and more people to
stop working and take it easy.
Australia, outside of the mining boom, is overpaying itself in world terms and is about to start paying for the last 40 years of government failure to innovate and lead.
While I agree that John Howards baby Bonus was intensely stupid it appears that we will not have much in common on this topic?
I also have had some desperate medical issues but thankfully those are in the past. What I had was just nature and the luck of the draw, I don’t think government had much input there .
KK
00
Not taking sides here but these quotes below seem fair to me.
So while I fully support a strong wefare system, I don’ support a wefare free for all. At this time in history I feel our Australian federal government are far too free giving away borrowed money, present and future generations of tax payers will have to pay off, while those same generous politions, long retired, will be touring the world on indexed superanuation.
10
Hi Elva
Good point but.
Maybe he would be happy to do away with Extreme welfare.
This welfare mania has had only one group of beneficiaries: The F@@ck@@g Politicians.
Coming from a poor background does not mean you should be automatically entitled to sponge off others hard work.
That is a form of slavery by decree.
Coming from poverty should mean you have guaranteed access to the following:
1. A government subsidised job doing something useful for the community you are asking for a handout.
2. Very basic health care – no $50,000 hip replacements.
3. Free education to year 10 high school – subject to good behaviour.
4. Should you be incapable of good behaviour then free residence in a Government Work camp should be provided.
5. No cash should be given as “DOLE” food vouchers are great.
At present the working population is shrinking because people are encouraged to go on the dole.
You would be surprised at how much of MY taxes end up either in Gambling or Alcohol purchases.
Social security is NOT compassion, it is a form of genocide of marginalised groups in our community.
Any Government which fails to provide some sort of meaningful work to everyone in the community is a Lazy, Abusive Government regardless of what sort of spin you want to give the idea.
As Topher says “it’s been 40 years”.
We’ve had 40 years of brainwashing that the dole wont harm you and even the huge quantities of alcohol imbibed by Australians can’t take away the pain of having become less than you could have been.
Young people have been brainwashed by vote gatherers.
Baby boomers are regularly ridiculed by the trendy JJJ type media as having had an easy ride.
Ha ha.
Yes we were given good basic education, there was NO DOLE, we were subject to extreme discipline in our behaviour that young people today could not accept.
We were also given lots of work, few holidays and sick days were available if you were dying.
Social commentary is a bit like the weather.
If you have the right media outlets you can change the perception of anything and maybe even profit from it.
Who is profiting from social security and the CAGW scam?
KK 🙂
00
.
KK, ELVA, BRC,
Just to clear up something. In Australia, Age, Invalid, Disability, Blind, bona-fide Widow’s, and Orphans pensions are NOT welfare. They are a RIGHT bought and paid for by a compulsory 9% levy on the wages and salaries of EVERY working Australian, taken out with their tax and forwarded to the Taxation Department.
Up until 1971 the yearly Income Tax Return Form actually was titled something like “Annual Income Tax and Compulsory Superannuation Return Form”, in much the same way as today’s form include mention of the Medicare Levy.
Monies collected were disbursed to a “State Housing Commission” (SHC) in each state, which developed residential land which was then made available to couples to buy at 3% interest. Profits from the interest were used both to provide further loans to build houses, and to finance the superannuation payouts. Most of the generation that gave birth to the baby boomers financed their homes this way.
By the mid 1960’s the scheme was so successful there was talk of dropping the interest rate on borrowings to 2%. Instead, the politicians of the day transferred the funds into General Revenue, and pork-barreled their way to a couple more election wins. One (of many) of Whitlam’s unfulfilled election promises was to reinstate the scheme.
From then until today, while the title of the Income Tax Return form has been changed, the legislation for the 9% levy WAS NEVER RESCINDED. You are STILL paying it today.
Most Australians today are blissfully unaware that they pay TWO 9% compulsory levies for superannuation; one to the government via their taxes, and one via foregone wage rises to fund the compulsory private schemes employers are required to fund.
Instead they make stupid, ill-informed comments on blog sites about these superannuated pensions being some form of “welfare”.
00
Hi MV
I hope you are not having a shot at me because nowhere in my comments have I mentioned the above entitlements you have brought to our attention.
In fact I did make that quite clear when I described what I was addressing as EXTREME WELFARE used by politicians to encourage young healthy people to begin a life of taxpayer funded aimlessness.
My comments were further clarified and focused by the statement that the rot began about 40 years ago.
The Welfare which you so rightly point to as having been earned is vastly different from the Extreme Welfare which I describe and which I believe should be largely done away with and a good “program” substituted to give people dignity.
I am aware that my mother received a War Widows supplement to her pension up until her recent passing.
Her mother received a small stipend from the Australian Government in memory of her 16 year old son who was on the torpedoed Iron Crown which went down off Jervis bay during WW11.
My father contracted tinnea, a horrible skin disease of his hands and feet, during his war service in New Guinea during WW11.
For his trouble he was rewarded by a grateful Australian Government with a large jar of zinc oxide ointment for his wounds.
Yes MV, I am aware of the deservedness of some of the support given by the Government and the things you mention.
The problem is that much of today’s “welfare” has been unearned and tragically is not necessary.
Long term social security tragics who have the capacity to spend money on alcohol and gambling are not being helped by their ‘benefactors”.
Maybe I misread your comment? Were you actually shooting at politicians?
KK
00
Hello KK,
Wait a sec… what is welfare then? I’m not going to trust Leftopedia’s definition on this topic.
In reality there are no guarantees in life. How much anybody expects to be guaranteed is therefore a cultural norm. Somewhere between anarchism and totalitarian communism there are differing beliefs about what rights a person has and what ought to be guaranteed to everyone. The more guarantees there are the more committed everyone is to the shared ideal and the less resources are available to individual circumstance. The tradeoff between certainty and flexibility is quite fundamental. I don’t think any country has ever “gotten it right” for more than a decade, partly because people keep changing their minds about the ideal in occasional bouts of sentimentality, partly because technical advances and economic improvement continually sublimate luxurious dreams into necessary practicalities, and partly because of political pork barrelling.
What’s that got to do with “Welfare”? Well for a start, things that used to be affordable by only the rich are now affordable on welfare. 🙂
But the goalposts shift and the question then is why people who “deserve” their payments get no more in “welfare” than people who “don’t deserve” to be paid as much. Surely one person incapable of working is the same as another person incapable of working. If this incapacity is assessed by anything other than functional testing, are we then not back to basing “welfare” on someone’s opinion? What category does Mental Health fall into when by all tests the person has all their senses and appendages, but is unable to work? Again, it is moral judgement creeping into it rather than an objective definition of where the money comes from and how it is distributed. That’s why I say all these schemes and pensions are welfare, “deserved” or otherwise.
I figure welfare is anything given to you by the government that you didn’t personally pay for into an account with your name on it. If you can withdraw more than you paid, it’s definitely welfare. Under this broad definition Insurance is privatised welfare in a much smaller club. Basically everything that comes from the government is welfare. It’s redistribution in effect if not by intent. Some would say this is simply a centralised manifestation of universal human goodwill to all mankind. Others would say they’d prefer to decide who gets their goodwill. 🙂
When MV fires up, any moving target in range is fair game. (Just watch this comment, heheh)
As long as J.P.Morgan doesn’t run the food stamps program, sure.
I was going to disagree with 5, but then realised the reason I had for disagreeing was actually a reason to agree. Planning, thriftiness, and discipline should bring rewards. The person doesn’t learn this lesson if they don’t have the freedom to make mistakes, so perhaps food stamps aren’t the best way. On the other hand, if they have money and lose it through a lack of the foregoing virtues, they will want to get back to having personal choice quite eagerly. Plus with food stamps there is no drop in the efficiency of welfare via frivolous procurement.
Of course you will never see that under a Labor government who, if their school allowance scheme is any indicator, simply can’t stand the thought of handouts being used only by those who actually need them. Sad but true.
00
Hi Andrew
Yes I have used the term Welfare very loosely and you have certainly expanded the boundaries of our consciousness.
Just what any discussion on welfare or taking from the common pool can resolve I’m not sure.
Elva seems to be very firm about things. Everyone has their own view.
Just imagine getting Consensus’ on welfare in the wider community.
Politicians just LOVE this sort of indecision – they can milk it for votes ad nauseum.
KK 🙂
00
saw about five seconds at the start of this on Sky News, and wondered how come the audience didn’t reflect public opinion which the polls say shows approx two thirds are against the CO2 tax. knew how this would end, so turned it off immediately, only to find i was right:
17 July: West Australian: Carbon tax ‘here to stay’
Gary Adshead, State Political Editor, The West Australian
Before debate began, 30 per cent of the 220 people present supported the tax, 38 per cent opposed it and 32 per cent were undecided.
After the hour-long question-and-answer session, which was televised live, 49 per cent said they were in favour of the carbon tax…
***In response to a question, Ms Gillard said anyone worried about power price rises because of the carbon tax in WA should be asking why electricity had already risen 57 per cent without the tax…
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/wa/14247981/carbon-tax-here-to-stay/
***couldn’t be partly due to the Govt’s CAGW renewable energy targets, could it?
00
Despite the often quoted, upgrading of the grid which had been neglected by successive governments, my take is the bulk of all previous rises was to pay green feed in tariffs and any upgrading of the grid was so it would accept that overpriced solar crap the governments
bribedsubsidised the populus to install. All because the Rudd, Gillard governments imposed minimum levels of green energy that states had meet.So in a perverse way Julia you are responsable for that 57% prices have already risen in WA. Any catch up on neglected maintenance is only a small portion of previous price rises.
Tony no doubt can let me know how close to the mark I am.
00
Hi Bob
from what I read somewhere the Electricity suppliers have a new legislative structure which enables them to play catch up – and even throw forward as far as infrastructure is concerned.
They are able to slug us like crazy and do 30 years of back maintenance and slug us again for the next 30 years of infrastructure build.
When all this is done in a few years and we are licking our wounds guess what.
The smart business people who bought the Power business from the State government are going to have and asset that is worth what they paid for PLUS ALL OF THE MONEY THEY RIPPED OUT OF US TO BUILD A BIGGER ASSET.
Q1. Do you think they might have been grateful to the pollies who sold/transferred to them those state asset?
Q2. Can you estimate the profit they will make or would you run out of computer space adding it all up?
Voters are Suckers.
KK
00
Bob Malloy,
you are indeed close to the mark, and in fact, this guy tells you just how close.
Tony.
00
That close, hey! then again an inch is as good as a mile.
00
While my original answer may have seemed a little flippant, consider this.
Electricity prices have risen dramatically in the last number of years. Why is that?
Poles and wires will always get the blame, because now that most State Governments have ditched Labor Governments, it’s an easy thing for Gilard, Combet, et al, to blame it on poles and wires, because that’s a State responsibility. Successive State Governments in every State (all of them under years and years of Labor) have not upgraded poles and wires, and not constructed the infrastructure that is really needed, large scale reliable and constant power from plants that can actually supply that, so now, poles and wires will always get the blame.
But, is that all of it?
What has happened in the last ten years to electricity that has driven the price up so much?
When coal fired power can supply its power for the cheapest rate there is, others can not compete, ever, no matter what they do to drive up the price of coal fired power.
Wind power supplies power to the grid at around 7 times the price of coal fired power, while Solar power is around ten times the cost. Now while there are only some of those renewable plants, they add to the increase in the overall mix of the cost of power. Except where wind is supplying a large proportion of power to the grids, like in SA where the cost of electricity is (sharply) higher than other States.
The cost of gas fired power is also more than for coal fired power, and while those plants are only used for Peaking Power periods, that increased cost adds also to the overall cost mix.
The same applies for that most iniquitous thing of all, those huge subsidies to rooftop solar power, most in the vicinity of 15 to 20 times the cost of coal fired power. I mean, why would any entity purchase something at wholesale that they can only sell retail for a half or a third of the cost, hence that legislation. Retailers, forced by Government legislation to purchase that power at those ridiculous subsidies then add that cost onto the overall mix, again raising the cost of electricity.
Think this is a furphy.
Go back to the 70’s and 80’s when power was less than half the unit cost it is now, where it stands at around 25 cents per kwh. In those times, the cost of electricity was under 10 cents per KWH.
All of those coal fired plants are that old in the main, and most of them older. That was the only electricity there was available at those times. Thirty years later, those plants are still humming along, supplying their power to the grids at virtually the same price they were then.
What difference is there now, and here you don’t need me to tell you that.
Some States, notably SA, and wow, aren’t they still Labor have already introduced differing charge structures where they charge extra for peak power periods. Those peak power periods they would like to tell you may only be a few times a year, but they are in fact every day, from 4PM till around midnight.
Sound familiar? You know, when the kids get home from school, their parents get home from work. They turn on the heating. When it gets dark they turn on the lights. They have their evening meal. Because both parents work, the clothes need washing, and drying. You turn on TV’s, entertainment, computers, etc etc.
They tell you (in all sincerity) that you can make things cheaper by consuming most of your power in off peak times, and they make it seem so simple, when in reality, it effectively means you have to completely change your whole lifestyle.
The Bligh Government here in Queensland was going to do the same thing if re-elected, so thank heavens that didn’t happen.
Even those who have rooftop solar or were sucked into getting it prior to the withdrawal in Queensland of the 44 cents per KWH FIT (all other consumers pay for that) are even advised to change their lifestyle to maximise returns during daylight hours and use the bulk of their power after the Suns sets.
Then the State Governments chuck in up to hundreds of millions into new renewable plants. Those costs are aslo passed on to power consumers, all of them.
Add to that the imposition of the Carbon Tax (sic) of around 2.4 to 3.2 cents, also across the board for all consumers as new pricing structures come out for Commerce and Industry as well.
So, while poles and wires virtually get the whole blame sheeted home to them, they are but a small part of that overall total.
Renewable power drives up the cost of electricity, and in fact puts it into overdrive. When the full impact starts to kick in, just you wait and see what gets the blame.
Hint, It starts with P and W.
Tony.
00
“While my original answer may have seemed a little flippant”
Not at all Tony, enjoyed the humor.
Energy Australia moved me onto such a scheme earlier this year, (they did offer me the option of going back to a two tiered scheme, cost A for the first scheduled limit of kwh, with a higher cost for all additional kwh.
On the three tiered scheme I am now on, I actually reduced my bill by 30% compared to the previous bill, daily consumption was the same.
00
Tony,
I am still waiting for my electricty bill (here in Adelaide) but after speaking to others who already have theres my off peak rate will go from 11 cents a KWH to 17, thats over 30% not the 18 Gillard promised..oh but wait its all due to P&W.
And that is only the off peak the on peak etc will go up by even more once again due to P&W and i get little or no compensation.
00
posted a piece successfully 5 minutes ago yet and making a fifth attempt to post what i believe is so important, it needs to go viral. somehow we have to stop Super Funds being wasted for the sake of the CAGW scam:
5 July: San Diego Union Tribune: Bill Gunderson: Green energy bad idea for pension funds
(Gunderson is president of Gunderson Capital Management Inc. in San Diego. He is also the host of the “Best Stocks Now” radio show, and the creator of the Best Stocks Now app.)
State pension fund managers you can relax now: Al Gore is here.
Gore wants to put your retirement savings in green energy. He does not want to tell us what companies or how much.
Just last month it was revealed that Al Gore’s investment company has been managing assets for New York state and city pension funds for three years. Pension fund officials say Al is doing a great job.
But they refuse to tell us where Gore is putting the money.
The news of Gore’s involvement in state pension funds comes the same week several research reports surfaced that said state public employee pension funds are in crisis and underfunded by $1 trillion to $4 trillion.
Not to worry, says Gore. Now that his Nobel Peace Prize for his theory about global warming is gathering a bit of dust, Gore has another theory. He calls this one sustainable capitalism.
“We invest in private equity, restricted public equity and unrestricted public equity. This strategy is focused exclusively on deploying capital into companies that are part of the transition from a high-carbon to a low-carbon economy.”
That’s what it says at his website: indecipherable graduate-student seminar talk. What isn’t there is any mention of what these great companies might be…
I’m sorry if I am as skeptical of Gore’s financial acumen as I am of his meteorological expertise. But green investments are terrible performers.
More than a year ago I told my clients and readers to “sell everything under the sun.” I shorted First Solar, America’s largest solar manufacturer.
The stock was at $120. Today is at $14.
Line ’em up: The green-energy cars, green battery companies, green solar, green wind, green you name it: They are toxic to a portfolio. Unless of course you short them.
Four years ago, the Solar Index – TAN – was $307 a share. Today it is $19.
The Wind Index was $31 a share. Today it is $6.
Vestas Wind was $25 in 2009. Today it is $1.70.
The list of lousy green stocks is just about the closest thing we have to an infinite renewable resource.
Curious how almost all of the investments in green energy that Gore would make for public employees require public subsidies and regulatory relief from the same people who are investing in the technology…
These are also the people who issue the numbers on green job growth. If you drive a bus, you have a green job. If you push a broom at the bus station, you have a green job. If you type a memo to the bus driver, you have a green job.
Remember that the next time some green broker tells you about the growth in the hundreds of thousands of green jobs in this country.
Months before President Obama made his now infamous visit to Solyndra, I wrote about how Solyndra was “not a going concern” in several papers throughout the country.
A lot of people in the investment business knew it. If any reporters did, they did not see fit to share it with us. Maybe they were in it for the long term…
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/jul/05/green-energy-bad-idea-for-pension-funds/
send to everyone u know. when will the Unions stand up with the public so that successful protests can take place? pity that is what is required.
[Was caught in spam filter along with all the other attempts. Don’t know why either.] ED
00
sixth attempt here to post this VERY IMPORTANT article which needs to go viral. another post went thru okay, so can’t understand the problem. it is two pages long, and it posted ok in the comments on WUWT thread, so i shall link to it there:
Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup
(see excerpts in comments)5 July: San Diego Union Tribune: Bill Gunderson: Green energy bad idea for pension funds
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/15/weekly-climate-and-energy-news-roundup-55/
Gunderson is president of Gunderson Capital Management Inc. in San Diego. He is also the host of the “Best Stocks Now” radio show, and the creator of the Best Stocks Now app.
jo, i would love it if you do a thread quoting his prices for renewables.
00
I know this is completely off topic but i feel it needs to be highlighted, as you all know our say http://www.oursay.org/hangout-with-the-prime-minister is running a comp to see what 3 questions we get to ask Gillard the top 3 so far are
#1 By how much, measured in thousandths of degrees Celsius, will the Earth’s temperature be reduced through the carbon tax?” After one week it has 6599 votes
#2 “You said that you wouldn’t impose a price on CO2 until you had a deep and lasting consensus from the Australian people – When did you receive that consensus? and where is that consensus at now?” After one week it has 4958 votes
#3 “Dear Prime Minister, as the first female, atheist, unmarried Prime Minister of Australia, and leader of a self-described socially progressive party, how do you explain your opposition to same-sex marriage and “deeply held” belief that same-sex couples should continue to be discriminated against by a piece of legislation (the Marriage Act)? Why are heterosexual relationships more valued than same-sex relationships?” After two weeks it has 4585 votes
However i smell a rat and firmly beleive plans are afoot with getup to usurp democracy once again, here are the stats of some very, very fast moving (in fact quite oddly fast moving) questions.
“Suicide ranks the leading cause of death for men aged 15-44 (ABS 2012). Only 13% of men receive care for their mental illness and current top 3 MBS services only attract less than a third of men. For men, the perception of mental health conditions is still largely stigmatised, hence the failure of current mental health services for men. Furthermore, the mental health strategies and policies in the country for each state & federally don’t complement. What are your plans to tackle this problem considering we continue to lose at least 5 mates, brothers, fathers, husbands and uncles everyday?” After 4 days only it has 3616 votes and………
“Dear Prime Minister, the Stronger Futures legislation was recently passed in the Senate, subjecting Aboriginal people in the NT to 10 more years of Interventionist policy. This is despite overwhelming opposition expressed from Aboriginal leaders, national organisations, the general public and even condemnation from the United Nations. How can we call ourselves a country of the ‘fair go’ if the Government is now refusing to allow a human rights test of the legislation by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, as called for by the National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples? ” Has 2712 votes after only one day
Now dont get me wrong i feel these questions are very good questions however Gillard has presented us with another golden opportunity to make her look foolish on national TV and i think we should take every opportunity which presents itself in order to pressure here Komrades in teh Labor party to remove her from office.
SO IF YOU HAVE NOT VOTED THEN GET ON THE WEBSITE AND GET VOTING, EXCERISE YOU DEMOCRATIC RIGHT WHILE THEY STILL LET YOU.
00
I watched the first video in this proposed series and liked some aspects of it.
However, he does need to pay attention to important details like getting names right. It is Wilberforce not “Wilburforce” and John (Stuart) Mill, not “John Mills”.
00
Sorry Tony, but you’re arguing for your own facts on this one.
Between 2007 and 2010, 68% of the increase in electricity costs at the retail level were due to poles and wires:
http://www.garnautreview.org.au/update-2011/garnaut-review-2011/chapter11.html
And to blame the cost increases all on Labor is just laughable. It was the Liberal government in S.A. that privatised the entire electricity system from generation to retail. They promised this would hold power prices down, but they are now something like 500% higher now than they were just before privatisation.
And what about W.A.? The Barnett Coalition government has allowed increases of 57% in just the last 3 years! Why doesn’t that come in for some criticism?
You do seem to know quite a lot about electricity generation, but it is funny that you seem completely out of step with people who write reports on the issue. For example this from the Garnaut review
Simply blaming Labor state governments is simplistic nonsense when there are numerous factors at play.
And saying that it has nothing to do with infrastructure spending on poles and wires means your views are way outside of the mainstream on this issue.
00
Well blaming Privitisation isn’t just to blame either. For as long as I and my parents, and their parents have lived. The price of Utilities has ALWAYS gone up. But Labor in general is to blame over recent years for extravagant rises in Utility prices. Take a look at the graph through the link.
http://www.galileomovement.com.au/images/Changes-in-utility-prices-Mar11.png
00
What on earth do federal government periods have to do with utility prices? Utilities are state responsibilities. How does it make sense analysing the data based on federal government periods!?
00
The comparison is an indication of the relative economic stability under the two Governments.
00
@Elva
Romney made a total of $42.6 million for 2010 AND 2011.
He paid $6.2 million in taxes, for and average RATE of 14.6%.
Romney also gave $7 million to charity.
Obama would have Romney pay $12 million in taxes, or a 30% rate, rather than have Romney give it to charity.
Just how much in tax do you want Romney to pay? I know, all of it…
00
[…] Topher is doing another Forbidden History video — just hours to go…. JoAnn Nova […]
00
Nice work Tony, but you didn’t mention the plethora of “compliance” lumped on the electrical generator by this government. I.e. the cost of preparing NGERS report, having them audited, etc. It all adds up to costs.
00
re Topher comment 12
The article about forced conversions to Islam in Gaza by Sheik-Yer-Mami is a telling insight into the Islamic religion.
Sheik-Yer-Mami’s cousin Sheik-Yer-Doodle also writes for Aljazeera from the Pakistan office and says that there are no forced conversions there.
00
DayHa, I don’t know where you obtained your figures re’ Romney’s tax payments. They do seem somewhat inflated to what even the most conservative media claim. No presidential candidate has ever baulked as much as he has in revealing such a simple matter as taxes.
Meantime, I am with Buffet who pointed out that as a multi billionaire he pays less % tax than his secretary. Being wealthy should not be an excuse for paying less percentage tax than the average person. I saw where the Wal (Walmart) family has more wealth than 40% of the rest of Americans yet, wait for it, they want their meagre taxes reduced. I tire of those who claim welfare is only given to the poor.
There is a great deal of money used as ‘corporate welfare’ where my taxes are used to prop up industries such as car manufacturers. In USA farmers are heavily subsidised. The Banks received mind boggling sums of ‘free’ money to carry on and still resist any regulation.
There is ‘middle class’ welfare such as the money given for families with children at school. I notice no one said nay to that or sent the money to charity. It would have been alright if the families had been given vouchers to spend only on school items. After all, some would want to see dole receivers only have vouchers for food.
I despise the watermelon Greens and extreme left wing Labor as well as the biggest con exercise via AGW. But I will not use that as an avenue to despise the poor and needy as some on here do. I take such attacks as personal whether you intend that or not.
I know too many people who have ‘made it’ in life via rich parents or inheritances rather than so called hard work. Yet they boast to others of the latter to gain kudos and a chance to seek themselves to be seen as ‘superior’. I recall Jesus saying, “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars…” to some one hoping to escape taxes.
00
Hi Elva
Please don’t include me in any of your comments about the poor and the needy.
Those of us who have been poor financially but been fortunate to have had loving parents and enough to eat feel well satisfied.
I also am familiar with the parables so please don’t lecture me in the name of Jesus. I find that unpleasant.
Everything I have, and it’s not much, has been slowly accumulated as a result of almost 50 years of grinding application to work, study, paying taxes and generally carrying the load.
In light of this I view your insinuation that my contribution through taxes has been inadequate as insulting and lacking balance.
When you write comments such as the following it has such a wide spray that it is hard to know what you think the world should rightly owe you: This;
” But I will not use that as an avenue to despise the poor and needy as some on here do. I take such attacks as personal whether you intend that or not”.
I personally don’t feel envious or that I have missed out on something because my parents were not rich, or that I did not inherit a good start in life financially.
I am very grateful that the government after WW11 had almost full employment and that I had a chance to work and save something.
Your spray starts with ultra rich people in America and finished , I suspect with me, as if to say that I have unearned wealth and can afford to give much more in taxes to support the dole lifestyle of the last 40 years.
Well no. My energy and good will are exhausted.
What little I have will be going to see me through my last years.
Your envy is targeted at the wrong point.
Are you aware that the federal labor Government has blown about $140 or so billion on rubbish and paying back labor unions who put them into government, and left the nation with NEW DEBT amounting to about $7,000 per man, woman and child?
Global Warming only exists in the political arena because it provides a smokescreen to cover the transfer of tax money to “friends and accomplices”.
Similarly much of the social security budget is targeted , not at welfare, but at vote buying.
This is amoral and an ugly aspect of government that needs change.
I refuse to be seen as one of the bad guys in all this and do not accept your unjustified criticism.
KK
00
KinkyKeith,
You should read more carefully. I was replying directly to the item by DayHa. If you thought it was directed at you then that is your problem. It was DayHa who made specific comments about Romney’s income tax c.f. my comments.
If you had read earlier items of mine you would have seen that I too had worked my way up from poor circumstances. Through dint of applying myself to study- while working- I gained a top notch tertiary education and career. It was interrupted by a short stint in compulsory National Service of which many of my peers were excluded. I worked long enough until I was forced on DSP because of blindness.
Luckily, I had accumulated a large superannuation. Everything was already paid off. Remember the 18% rates on housing loans? Well, I managed to pay my mortgage through all that.
So don’t lecture me on rags to riches stories. I am not in riches but not in rags either. I’ll say again, I perceive in comments like yours from you and others a ‘downward envy’ insofar as looking down the nose at people who get help as never being deserving.
Being against Greens, AGW, extremes left and Communists doesn’t mean I should be ultra right wing as to be further to the right than Gheghis Khan. It doesn’t mean I have to join in with the ‘teabag’ party side of the Republicans.
I am intrigued by your statement,
Good for you. Does this mean you are paying, as I do, into a full health insurance or are you going to rely on the public system when things up ahead don’t work out? In either case, you might find yourself being dependent on the pool of money from either the fund or the government or both. Please be appreciative of other folk’s money if this occurs.
BTW, I am sure you know another saying from Jesus. “It is the LOVE of money which is the ROOT of ALL evil.” In short, he was saying to follow the money trail if you want to see where bad things start, but he wasn’t saying live poorly or in poverty to be virtuous.
00
Elva
You seem to have a lot of envy of others like Romney who you claim do not pay enough tax.
I don’t want to get involved in envy of other people’s wealth, however earned.
Making the most of my life is my main focus.
I want to contribute to this society and have done so.
I am self sufficient, just.
I do not look down on poor people, and despite your unfounded insinuations have never done so.
I do not feel at all guilty about saying that politicians bribe voters with excessive dole/welfare/ handouts and further that I should not be obligated to add more of my life’s savings to those Government handouts.
I agree with your comment :
“There is a great deal of money used as ‘corporate welfare’ where my taxes are used to prop up industries such as car manufacturers. In USA farmers are heavily subsidised. The Banks received mind boggling sums of ‘free’ money to carry on and still resist any regulation”.
If you feel strongly about this then DO SOMETHING USEFUL to change it.
I fail to see what point there is in getting angry at people like me because I have paid my taxes and feel that the Government has more than enough cash to deal with all the genuine Welfare” needs of this country.
Why should I pay more to make up for the waste.
The use of biblical references is not useful.
I think we are all aware of the person who decided to seek guidance from the bible and opened it at two random locations and stuck a pin in the page.
The first spot said ” And Judas went and hanged himself.”
The second location said: “Go thou and do likewise.”
You keep implying things that aren’t there. Human effort and taxes are NOT inexhaustible. Have a think about that.
We must all live within our means; even politicians.
00
KinkyKeith
I totally agree.
Now allow me to advise you again by your own words…
Cheers.
00
As a side issue on power and politics we are paying into NIB , a hangover from my days in the local steel industry.
The takeover of that organisation by politically connected spongers is another example of why we must come to understand the workings of the media, money and politics.
Given understanding, we may be able to then make useful changes.
KK
00
Hi Elva
It seems that we had a few wires crossed.
That’s all?
KK 🙂
00