Michael McLaren, 2GB
Thanks to Joe V in comments for finding the links to my interview on the “Carbon Free Market”
Michael McLaren speaks with Joanne Nova, author of The Skeptic’s Handbook, who speaks about the stupidity of aligning ourselves with Europe’s ETS.
Listen
http://www.2gb.com/article/ets-more-black-market-green-economy#
or
Download
——————————————————
PS: Are you having trouble logging in to the site?
I have had to add a CAPTCHA to registration for this site to stop spam registrations. Do give me feedback on the CAPTCHA if you try to sign up. It’s not perfect yet. Some currently registered people are having trouble logging in, and if you are one, please add a note to the comments or email me at joanne AT this sites domain. I need to add your name to the approved list.
——————————————————-
PPS: For commenters, please keep the language polite.
Emotions are running high in Australia. One anonymous commenter has posted over 400 comments here, if he repeats himself, either ignore it, or explain why he’s wrong. Links are appreciated in comments but not ones that don’t even have one line of explanation (eg youtube). We welcome all honest debate from all comers.
Hi Jo,
I have just tried to log in and error comes back as “ERROR: Invalid registration status.”
Many thanks,
—
Popeye I tried to put you in the whitelist but it doesn’t seem to work. 🙁 I’ll send you an email. – Jo
10
Thanks Jo – will respond to day.
Cheers,
10
Jo,
I received your email and tried to reply BUT your spam filter bounced my reply as per below.
The following recipient(s) cannot be reached:
‘joanneATjoannenovaDOTcomDOTau’ on 6/08/2013 7:32 AM
551 5.7.6 Message rejected as spam (CM)
Cheers,
00
Popeye mate, Blutos got it in for you is what it is. Layoff Olive for a while and hell get over it.
10
I listened to the interview earlier today.
The fact that there’s no free market in emissions certificates is hard to get through to the general public. Even though the certificates are intangible and traded ephemerally.
There is little understanding of the role of energy in modern civilzation. Educators have failed, deliberately or through incompetence, to imbue an intrinsic understanding of how much energy is needed to get things done; how things are made and the relative merit of using a machine not powered by muscles to do the hard work.
There is no sense of proportion. Just a wishy-washy hand-waving of motives and good intentions.
And it’s not helped when Dick’s Myth appears on the ABC on an airborne guilt trip and waves around a tablet showing that e.g. an airconditioner (that’s just been switched on) is consuming electricity at a rate of $2400 a year. Let me tell you; his DC transformer adverts were much more convincing, perchance because he knew that they were a joke for April Fools’. At least he admitted the capital cost (if not total cost of ownership) of “100%” renewable via PV.
Joining the dots isn’t something for which to many people have time between renovation and cooking shows on TV. It’s so much easier having others draw the “right” picture; one that doesn’t join the dots.
280
Talking of “airborne guilt”, Virgin Australia – Australia’s other airline – today confirmed that the pre-tax costs of Australia’s Carbon Dioxide tax for the 2013 financial year on its operation are estimated to be between $45 million to $50 million and were unable to be recovered due to weak economic conditions and the competitive environment.
As a result, Virgin Australia expects a statutory Loss After Tax in the range of $95 million to $110 million.
This is what the left’s anti-competitive, destructive policies have delivered for just one Australian company in just one year.
Roll on 7 September.
60
How much more can they be sued, for attributing that to the Carbon Tax ?
10
Josh joins the dots:
00
Meh, just click this:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/join_the_dots_scr.jpg
10
I had a listen earlier with Joe V.’s link, once again well done Jo Nova.
I also asked about your possible appearance on The Bolt Report, am I being pushy? bloody oath I am! 🙂
201
That’s a good idea!
30
Hi Jo, great article thanks so much for pressing on.
PS my login has also betrayed me. Would appreciate whatever you can do 🙂
———————————
Done – Jo
70
‘Links are appreciated in comments but not ones that don’t even have one line of explanation (eg youtube).’ I assume this is aimed at me? My posts are accompanied, usually, with a relevant title! The object of posting links is so that they can be viewed and thus the point is made. This is surely better than just stating something out of thin air, which a lot of posts seem to be! If people can be bothered, which they should realise, there should be a link to the original, which is fully sourced with time codes. Therefore I am justified in using this method. Plus it can be seen that the evidence is being presented out of the mouths of the experts and Monckton, therefore leaving people in no doubt! ‘We welcome all honest debate’, I wonder if this is true, because that would mean you would have to accept AGW is true, because
AGU, global warming and co2, with Richard Alley.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNPLjx5JSUI
250
I thought Jo was trying to stop spammers.
You obviously have comprehension issues. The topic is carbon credits. I guess you know that though and are still spamming with your YouTube videos to increase your view count.
230
No-one here is going to bother with this twerp’s childish little videos.
He is wasting his time.. just ignore him.
222
Hey Heywood,
When you are in the pay of “big youtube’ of course you will seek to increase your youtube count.
That’s their new way of making a fraudulent dollar.
He’s tosser. He’s looking to buy a waterside mansion along side the Flim-Flam scam man.
150
‘PPS: For commenters, please keep the language polite.
Emotions are running high in Australia. One anonymous commenter has posted over 400 comments here, if he repeats himself, either ignore it, or explain why he’s wrong. Links are appreciated in comments but not ones that don’t even have one line of explanation (eg youtube). We welcome all honest debate from all comers.’
Well seen as this is on the opening page and I assume it’s direct at me, I feel I must respond!
133
Aahhh what arrogance.
Guess what champ, this isn’t you. ..
130
And I quote ‘(eg youtube)’,
So bish, bash, bosh!
121
You are a legend in your own mind…..
120
‘You are a legend in your own mind….’ no way! My own dinner time, perhaps!
02
And I quote…
So Jo was referring to Michael with the 400 comments, not you.
Still having comprehension problems eh BA4? Or is it just your inflated ego that chooses to believe that anyone actually gives a crap what you’re boyfriend on YouTube has to say?
140
I think it’s the same Michael that got kicked off Steve Goddard’s site. His diatribe sounds the same.
Excellent work on getting word out there Jo. Every little fact against these frauds helps.
80
Blackadderthe 4th,
Have you really posted 400 times on this blog topic? If true ,that is amazing and says a lot for your state of mind. Any wayn I presume that you are making a piont about Free speech this time.
100
‘Have you really posted 400 times’, no idea, but doubt it! Anyhow I see the same old names time after time and it seem it OK for them to spread disinformation!
‘you are making a point about Free speech this time’ well sort of! Seen as I’m offering a truthful alternative, which must be so, because nobody challenges the science behind the links I supply! Ok I get loads of abuse, like you Nazi, etc, but that is like water of a ducks back, I’m not complaining!
023
Blackadder has posted almost 200 comments under that pseudonym. (Michael has notched 400 since early June).
A few people do the one-line-link-argument not just BA.
110
I do think Jo that by using his adopted Moniker “&&&&adder” without blanking the “&&&&” bit you endorse his insult and defamation of everything thats black.
100
Please add approximately 190 thumbs down to his comments retrospectively.
It is amazing that the less someone knows about a subject, the more dogmatic they get.
111
I hereby propose that ALL of Bladder’s posts are TOTALLY IGNORED for the tripe that they are.
No matter how moronic or insulting to the intelligence.
Do not follow any link.
Do not respond to him in any way.
111
‘posts are TOTALLY IGNORED for the tripe that they are’ methinks you do protest too loudly, to try and swamp the truth!
01
I challenged you to hit me with your best shot and you refused, so don’t harp on that nobody challenges.
100
And I challenged you to go and find one, so you can’t accuse me of cherry picking, so there is the gauntlet, 1 gets you 20, you will not pick it up!
123
And my daddy can beat your daddy just with his pinky…. *sigh*
50
Well it is you that doubts the accuracy of the science in my links and I am just asking you provide evidence? So what’s the problem?
01
I can see that this is a problem for you; that nobody will look at a youtube video; hmmm?
Perhaps what you need, is a bit of explanation about the subject matter of the video, something to peak peoples interest, something that makes them want to find out more, because that way, they will feel compelled to to look at it.
I mean, a feature film called, “A film by Joe Blogs”, can hardly be expected to pack a cinema, especially if nobody has heard of Joe Blogs. But a catchy title, and exciting pictures on the hoardings, and a good trailer that shows all of the exciting bits … that will bring them in.
I think your problem, is not so much in the content of the videos, as in the marketing. You have got to sell your message. There are loads of competing messages out there, some of which use videos as well, you need to differentiate yourself, make yourself stand out, be different from the crowd, let your genius shine through.
A one or two paragraph summary of the plot, and the underlying ideas, will probably go a long way to attracting a bigger, and more dedicated, audience. Quietly give them your best shot, and they will still come back for more. That was how Peter Jackson did it (I know this because he told me personally – well me and the rest of the audience), but you could be just as well known and as well respected. What do you think?
80
Heres a good example the link itself tells the reader very little about the matter discussed
http://www.spaceandscience.net/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/ssrcpressrelease62013globalsealevelriseisendingnewsconference.pdf
So i need to sex it up a bit to sell the message, bullshit a bit to make it sound interesting but not too much as i dont want to be seen as a bullshitter. On the other hand your message needs to be concise and not too wordy so as to bore the reader about the story you are trying to sell, however not enough words may not draw them in.
Obviously you are now all intrigued about what is at the other end of this link so i will stop typing and let you all have a look.
Cheers
PS i hope this helps you incontinentbladderthe444th.
60
‘I can see that this is a problem for you; that nobody will look at a youtube video; hmmm?’ no it isn’t really! I would expect people to be curious to the evidence that debunks their
convictions. Now if I’m to believe the statements, ‘I don’t watch them’, which I have had on other sites, when I check YT, views are being logged from that site. I can only suspect somebody is! So it bothers me not.
‘other hand your message needs to be concise’, which I usually do with a title or reference where the evidence is coming from. You can lead the ignorant to the truth, but you can’t make them think!
05
Why don’t you and your useless You Tube videos take a powder and see if anyone misses you.
90
Your interview was easy to listen to Jo..well done. As to Dick Smiths doco. I thought he did a very good job of explaining to a audience that Nuke energy was Austs. only long term option if we wanted cheap clean energy. The internal combustion engine is still being improved ,power and fuel consumption wise and as safety laws improve cars will soon have more plastic doors, boot lids , bonnet & engine parts to cut down weight and improve consumption more so. The Dick Smith doco. didn’t mention that theres more oil reserves now than all the oil we’ve used to date and mentioning ‘peak oil’,did seem silly with todays known oil drilling technology .But all in all he did show we cant live without good old fossil fuels to brighten our lives and our export coffers.
120
Do you really think ABC would have let Dick run his doco unless he fitted their left-leaning programming guidelines?
100
Perth Trader, Ive not glimmed you upon these whereabouts before, how come your avatar looks so much like mine? You are even trying to pull the same exprssion as fixed itself upon my fave the first time I came here (but you didnt get the tongue quite right). Are you trying to imposterise upon me or are you a student of impressions and mime?
PS, you have my permission and upon my advice ought ignore that tripe Ive just written !!!
00
blackadderthe4th says:
That is proof that you did not even listen to the radio interview this is about. You have no idea what you are saying.
Go on click on the link and listen. Then you would not be such an obvious hypocrite.
210
‘that is proof that you did not even listen to the radio interview’, because the link wouldn’t work!
020
And it still doesn’t!
022
That’s convenient. I did a copy/paste in 12 seconds.
110
‘That’s convenient’, well sorted now! Because flashblocker was holding it off and I had to disable it, although it didn’t look as though it was.
1st point to pick up on, quote, ‘it’s not a free market, the only people who want this are the people that don’t want a free market’, well what did that free market do to the financial market a few years ago. Oh yes wrecked the system, by selling mortgages to people who had no chance of paying for them, that’s why they were called Sub Prime! Where we are still in dire straits and recovery is still a bit of a dream! Not to mention The South Sea Bubble, The Black Tulip market in Holland, The Bronze Age Axe Head collapse, and the Panama ‘shortcut'{I forget the name}, which lead to Scotland having to joining up with England, etc, etc. Also, Delingpole gets a mention, but
Delingpole floored by Sir Paul Nurse,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuQLvK6kxeU
I’ll have to listen to it few times and see if I can get a clip out of it for youtube. But there’s not a lot to work on.
125
Oh! Hide the decline.
Perhaps you should re-post that one?
90
So why does he do a U turn on here? Stay with it now, no cheating and skipping the end!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3H9QKhIy29c
018
What U-turn? I think its a case of you simply not comprehending what people are saying and projecting your own preferred interpretation.
This is proved by the fact that Berkeley still links to the video I posted.
70
‘What U-turn?’ hahahaha……..!
Quote by Dr Muller ‘that 1,2 degree rise is what we call global warming, their work is excellent‘………… ‘the Berkley Earth project strives to build on it’………..’our results are very similar…..about 0.7 degrees Celsius since 1957’.
Considering he was investigating them to overturn their results, it’s some U turn! And it must not have pleased A Watts, because he said he would abide by the results, I don’t think he did actually, hoist by his own petard or what?
018
And here is Dr Muller doing some more U turns and sticking the knife into Watts UHI theory!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ledD81ofy0
Thanks for tip, ‘This is proved by the fact that Berkeley still links to the video I posted’ but it would appear you haven’t watched them all! Ah, well live and learn!
017
You really are a pathetic little cretin.
You seem to believe that skeptics do not accept the REAL numbers for global warming. You are mistaken, we do.
It is perfectly clear that Professor Muller stands by his condemnation of “hide the decline”. The FALSE numbers. If he didn’t, they would take down that video.
You are also of the mistaken belief that all skeptics agree with each other on absolutely everything. We do not.
So, the fact remains that a very highly respected professor has very roundly condemned “hide the decline”. Now, run back to mommy and have a good cry about it.
111
And what does ‘hide the decline’ mean? Now think about it, before you answer, if you dare!
‘run back to mommy and have a good cry about it’, hardly she’s dead!
118
Its so sad you are unable to comprehend the video…. so, so sad.
And you do not even have respect for your own mother…. may she rest in peace.
130
‘And what does ‘hide the decline’ mean?
Its so sad you are unable to comprehend the video…. so, so sad’
No,I know what hide the decline means, I want to know what you THINK it means? I suspect you don’t actually!
07
Get your facts straight, BA4. The South Sea Bubble and the Dutch Tulipmania were all caused by government meddling in the market. The Tulip bubble in particular was exacerbated by the Dutch government’s peculiar monetary policy. No sign of a free market in those two examples, but keep polishing your bronze head and see how far it gets you.
As for your Nurse vs Delingpole video, it is refreshing to see you taking a break from referencing peer reviewed science so that you can instead wilfully misinterpret one person’s emotional response on one day as clear unimpeachable objective proof that mankind is burning up the earth with a trace gas. Refreshing for its entertainment value rather than educational value, obviously.
120
‘objective proof that mankind is burning up the earth with a trace gas’ , so how do explain this then?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wv3-de8ArCk
‘The South Sea Bubble’ was created when people thought it was a get rich quick scheme, that was worth nothing. They sound like a load of bankers to me, jumping on a Sub Prime Market!
‘your bronze head’, So you’re saying there was an overall authority in the bronze age! Keeping the price of bronze high, hahahahaha……………! In fear of the next new metal, iron, coming along and making bronze redundant? Well that particular scheme failed, I blame Boudica myself!
015
Well, that’s another subject that Blackadder the 4TH rate doesn’t know much about.
If the South Sea Bubble didn’t have any government involvement it seems strange that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was clapt into the Tower of London, 4 members of Parliament were ejected from the house and a number of Ministers were tried and heavily fined* for their actions after the bubble burst. It was fortunate for a number of Ministers and MPs that for political reasons Robert Walpole covered up, and saved them. He was known as The Screen Master thereafter.
* so were all the Directors of the South Sea Company. One lost 98.5% of his net worth and several lucrative positions.
120
%%%%addledcamefoourth…
“The South Sea Bubble’ was created when people thought it was a get rich quick scheme, that was worth nothing. They sound like a load of bankers to me, jumping on a Sub Prime Market!”
No he really doesnt undrstand the way it happnned. The bankers gave loans to sub-ptrime clients knowing they would profit from th ones that didnt dfault and if too many defaultd they would b bailed out by the govt. Which is exactly what happennd. It was always a cross between a gamble and blackmail. A completly rational dcision in the context of the situation, namely that they knew they could rip off absolutely veryone bcause of the dread fear of a run on the banks.
They are doing it again. EG, offering me money I might nebver b able to pay back, for which I hav no collatoral and have not askd for.
I thinks its probably going to happen again because of this. Nothings changd. Its not irrational behaviour on theitr p-art. Its what anyone would do in their situation. But whether next time or later…evntually they wont be bailed out and, yes, the entire fecking system is going to collapse.
Evn with that prospect, for the individual bankers it remains a totally rational bhaviour. They individually make a fortune and invst it in non-cash commoditis. They cannot lose.
A frind of mine is an antique daler. ALL her most expensiv items have COMPLETELY sold out in the midst of whats happnning. Hr shop is totally sold out of a great inventory of VERY expensive objects.
Th people buying this gear know whats happenning, whats likly to happen and…are probably among thos CAUSING it to happn.
Abnd Im sorry, Im not filling in the e’s in th abov.
90
BA4, your reply at 7.1.1.1.1 is so inane as to be not worth more than these nineteen words in reply.
60
‘your reply at 7.1.1.1.1 is so inane’ so how would you explain the contradiction?
Is co2 important or not?
The amount of co2 in the atmosphere is so small, it can’t have any effect on the climate THEY say, but THEY also say all life depends on it! Because it is ‘plant food’, so what is the correct answer?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wv3-de8ArCk
03
blackadderthe4th
August 6, 2013 at 2:49 am
Delingpole floored by Sir Paul Nurse
I think you betray your ignorance very badly, as indeed does Sir P. Nurse, who attempts to draw a valid corollary between the ‘consensus’ agreement around a nameless treatment for a nameless cancer of which he suggests Delingpole is a hypothetical sufferer.
Nurse idiotically suggests there is a ‘consensus’ approach to the prescription of treatment. Utter and abject claptrap. The treatment is mounted on evidence based best practice that changes often, with drug and treatment regimes following.
The ‘consensus’ in climate science is purely one of weak associational belief, that is, one based on belief in a experimental hypothesis so shot full of holes it is a hummock for the gullible.
161
What experiments??? I have only ever seen a hypothesis.
80
@Manfred
‘ between the ‘consensus’. so are you saying, if he was in hospital there could be no collaboration between doctors and them coming up with a plan of action? And then Delingpole, saying ‘No’, I’ve got a better idea? I think even he would happily take their advice! Which will no doubt be a consensual conclusion, be it with other doctors or science in general! Put one thing is true, your advice is worthless, do I bet black or red on the roulette table?
017
Backslider, flippantly, you are the hapless subject of one of the greatest socio-political-pseudoscientific experiments of all time – I thought you got that. The term ‘experimental hypothesis’ – human emissions and CO2 in particular lead to a rise in GMT. The alternative expression and possibly more correct – the null hypothesis – would probably cause more confusion here.
blackadderthe4th
August 6, 2013 at 8:29 am
@Manfred
Useful were you to study the definition of ‘evidence based practice’ and go on to interpret the meaning of consensus in this context. There exists a gulf of difference between a consensus of this nature and the so called climate consensus to which you hopefully belong.
I assure you that the difference between these consensuses is as obvious as the falsified hockey schtick or the dramatic failure of concordance between observed and modeled temperature data seen in draft AR5.
And all this in the face of rising CO2, together with the 17+ yr. absence of statistically significant global warming leaves your babbling consensus exactly where?
100
‘obvious as the falsified hockey schtick’ oh no it wasn’t, because several other hockey sticks by various teams using different methods get the same results!!
The truth behind Mann’s hockey stick!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9jtVZ3RUCU
‘other researchers were doing their own science…and using different methods to work out past temperatures……would they back up M Mann….what these lines all agree on there is no evidence of any period in the past 1000 year as warm than present…the warming in the second part of the 20th centaury is unprecedented….once again sceptical science has made the science stronger’
‘And all this in the face of rising CO2, together with the 17+ yr. absence of statistically significant’
Only if you are a climate zombie!
AGU, Richard Alley and climate zombies!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5sxBSa6Tck
06
blackadderthe4th
August 6, 2013 at 7:33 pm
You do have a penchant for YouTube citations don’t you?
Hoist your petard on this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RG0ochx16Dg
40
‘Hoist your petard on this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RG0ochx16Dg‘
A bit pathetic do you not think?
03
Wnats the gamble in betting %%%%addled doesnt even know what a petard is, where the expression came from and what it literally means?
Can he tell us without looking it up?
Can he resist my subliminal induction to snip-crass off to Google with it?
10
‘doesnt even know what a petard is’ oh yes I do! It was a very early explosive device, that was used against castles, etc! Put they were unstable and a peasant, the petard maker was too valuable, could be blown up by his own petard when placing it! Hence ‘hoist by your own petard’, but one of Shakespeare’s plays made good use of the phrase! However the WWII tank, the Churchill, was equipped with a petard, a giant mortar {nicknamed ‘the flying dustbin’} to blast pill boxes on ‘D’ day! And that was from memory without the aid of Professor Google!
01
blackadderthe4th says:
“I wonder if this is true, because that would mean you would have to accept AGW is true”
Siliggy says:
“That is proof that you did not even listen to the radio interview this is about. You have no idea what you are saying.”
blackadderthe4th says:
“because the link wouldn’t work!”
So you just went on and assumed what you thought Jo’s opinion was then began to argue with your own imagination. Who won the argument you or your imagination?
160
I also would like to congratulate Jo on a well-presented and informative report. Would they be any possibility on having you do weekly appearances on 2gb? I’m sure that you’d be given a warm reception as they have been very vocal on the farce of carbon Credits.
140
.
John Singleton declared his move completely over to the Dark Side, when he replaced Brian Wilshire with Steve Price. Now, 2GB is little more than another voice for the Dark Empire – like the ALPBC.
You might as well campaign for Jo to have a regular spot on “The Project”, or “The 7.30 Report”.
31
.
When I read Jo’s comments re spammers, I immediately thought of “Michael”. Dribble Bladder wasn’t even on my radar. Funny how he immediately assumed he was the centre of attention.
But then, I don’t have Dribble Bladder’s gigantic ego to stand atop, from which to view the world. Little wonder that he is a devoted fan of The KRudd – the only ego worthy of his adulation – other than his own.
112
MemoryVault. I refer you to this post in the topic “Australian Election called for Spet 7,number 8.2.1.1.7 which states that
I changed my name slightly to differentiate between us,as the other Michael spouts BS,which I don’t do,or I try not to.
151
.
Yes, I now know the difference, thanks to Jo’s previous intervention, and I apologise for the error of my ways on that occasion.
Just one of the shortcomings of posting after the sixth glass of Shiraz Cabernet.
71
Nothen like being on the second bottle 😛
40
.
Two litre cask. Banrock Station. Drunk 50-50 with soda water.
Yeah, I know it sounds terrible, but damage from the previous heart attack/stroke rules out all standard pain medications – both over the counter and prescription.
So I sit and grit my teeth all day as my vertebrae get on with the job of abandoning individualism in favour of solidarity. Then at 5.00pm I start with my self-prescribed medication.
By 7.00pm the pain is still there, but I just don’t seem to care so much, for some reason. That’s when we have dinner and put on a movie.
40
Tried a bit of pot MV?
11
Moi?
A law abiding citizen, indulging in a prohibited substance?
Never!!!
.
Besides, for some reason it doesn’t do anything for me. Same with opiates.
Really pissed off the doctors and nurses in Intensive Care that they couldn’t knock me out with the stuff, regardless of dosage.
10
Mate de coca. Legal here where I am but most likely not where you are. This stuff keeps people werkin’ all day high up in the Andes.
00
Well you did inspire me to do more research on the “Three Sigma” comment that I posted ,which I’m finding very informative and realizing that I have a lot to learn so I guess it worked for the best..
40
.
Well, I’m no statistician, and I’m well past that sixth glass, but as I understand it, “Three Sigma” is a polite way of saying “not much more than random”.
30
Three sigma doesn’t cut it to be a Briffa tree ring … need at least six 🙂
40
Hi
Ive an idea for JO.
This problem of repeat trolls is really a problem. As she points out on last thread, people get fed up of repeating the answrs and start shortening it to “You snip-crass are a snip-crass snip-crassing Troll…etc”
On the other hand, if those trolls are blocked….thn everyone on the other sites gallavant about saying the discussion is censored. Although we know the only sites that generally are cnsored are ultra-left ones like Guardian newspapers laughably titled “Comment Is Free”.
My suggestion is this. Create a permanent side page for each of a number of temperate, explicit but standardised responss to the Troll’s standard messages, with a simple URL we can simply insert as a response to each troll message. So when &&&&adderthesnip-crass comes on and says ANYTHING (as its all so formulaic and predictable) he gets about fifty of us simply responding by pasting the relevant URL to the relevant pro-forma response.
That way, honest visitors not privvy to the ins and outs of the site will see every troll gibber rsponded to resoundingly and thoroughly, the trolls cannot claim theyve been cenmsored and the rest of us can get on with our pleasant conversation.
30
.
I agree with your sentiments Ace, but not your solution, since it still clogs up the thread with meaningless drivel – even if it is only Jo supporters posting links to the relevant information.
Instead, how about treating the comments with the disdain they deserve. Where a troll posts something that has been refuted so many times it’s boring (or links to such), leave in the poster’s details, but replace the content with a message along the lines “this already recycled crap has been relegated once again to the recycle bin”.
The statement includes a link to the post in the Recycle Bin, so Jo is not accused of censorship. Volunteers (and I would be happy to be involved) post standard replies to the comment in the Recycle Bin.
That way the actual threads remain open to genuine comment from BOTH sides, Jo cannot be accused of censorship, and any fence sitter wanting to explore deeper can access everything – even the oft-repeated crap by the likes of “Michael” and the Dribbling Bladder.
70
That’s a very good solution MV – I have seen other blogs use exactly this technique.
30
MV oh yeah…fecker me stupid, I forgot what Ive said in the past about our air-conditioner baskard, “ignore it”. Sorry, I go carried away with my far falutin empire of web and it really is simple. Just , as you say, treat them with disdain…dont respond to them at all.
But there are hazards in that too.
Nothings perfect.
30
My very first Comment, elevated to a Posting on JoNova.
I am honoured 🙂
110
It’s a pity that our once-trusted banking institutions are now nothing more than smoke and mirror market gamblers, claiming their money when they win and taxpayer’s bailout money when they lose. I went and joined the wrong industry – dammit. We actually make and sell real things at an agreed market price between buyer and seller for a modest profit.
20
Banks… eh! I am overseas and when accessing my Australian bank account from an auto teller I can only withdraw around the equivalent of $240AUD max with each transaction, even though my withdrawal limit is much higher. They say this is for “security reasons”, however clearly its because they rake in $13+ for each transaction.
40
Backslider, You highj rollin bar steward you. Only 240 at a time!
30
Eh! How is one supposed to have a night out?
20
Backslidr…why you cheeky opposite of a beggar you!
10
We decided bank profits were the reason for a low withdrawal limit. We used to be able to draw out much larger sums pd in previous years but now the limit is ridiculously low. It’s another scam and the banks get away with it by making the semi-plausible excuse of security. For our travel this year we arranged to take cash with us in the necessary denomination and divided it between us and only to use the hole-in-the-wall if we ran out. For just a week’s holiday we didn’t.
60
The problem with trolls is that they adore the attention, if several people reply to a troll then the troll is unlikely to troll-off. And I would just snip all trolling, it’s the kindest cut – it might help them get over themselves.
110
Nobody gets over thmselves. Its the existential horror. Rmmember Kurz.
40
Congratulations Jo on an excellent interview on 2GB exposing the corruption that comprises the EU Carbon (Dioxide) market and the Labor Parties complicity in that corruption.
This is my favourite bit:
at 1:41.
Fortunately, now that we are in the caretaker period the Liberals have today released a copy of the letter Tony Abbott sent to Ian Watt (Secretary, Department of the Prime Minister & Cabinet) and to Jillian Broadbent (Chair, CEFC) telling them to put a plug in the $10 billions of waste, and get the legislation prepared to repeal the Labor Party’s Carbon Dioxide tax and its ETS and associated nonsense.
Copies here:
http://static.liberal.org.au.s3.amazonaws.com/13-08-05%20Signed%20Carbon%20Tax%20Letters%20-%20TA.pdf?utm_source=Liberal+Party+E-news&utm_campaign=542b17500f-Our+plan+to+abolish+the+carbon+tax&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_51af948dc8-542b17500f-57597957
Hopefully sanity will finally win through.
60
Oops. One’s quite enough of that lot.
…..Labor Party’s complicity in that corruption.
30
Regarding Bernd’s comment #2…
Were there meant to be links on those words in bold?
Totally agreed on popular ignorance of the scale of energy necessary for our built environment. I have previously referred to our society as The Techno-Industrial Wonderland, because of the sheer amount of magic that occurs every day without us even thinking about it. The energy needed to make it all happen is staggering. Equally staggering is the thought of how many weekly activities become difficult or impossible without all this cheap energy.
(Despite recent alarmism Australia is partly buffered against the effects of a Middle East war since the majority of our crude oil imports come from Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, and PNG, with only 5% coming from the Middle East.)
The powerplants of China, Germany, and USA and the oil fields of Indonesia have to work 24/7 just to be able to build one coal powerplant for Australia, let alone operate it. To build the Rolls Royce of nuclear reactors in Finland required the power plants in Japan. The supply chain runs deep and no country can stand isolated. We’re all in this spaceship together.
30
No links on the bold. Bold for emphasis. links come up in whatever colour you choose; usually red by default.
The tablet bit was supposed to invoke the image of Moses descending from the Mount, brandishing truths carved into a tablet.
10
Thank you for doing this, Ms Nova, I can’t understand why ordinary people are so passive about this scam (this organised crime, really).
The greenies and the loudmouths such as those all too frequently making nonsensical noise on this blog are a tiny minority of people; ordinary people have nothing in this argument, excepting to trust the Government to do the right thing on behalf the Public.
Too many bureaucrats with too little education and too much zealotry have had too much sway for too long. The question is how to reign them in.
80
Hi Jo,
I’m also getting the login error. Thanks!
Wendy
—-
Sigh. Wendy, I’ve tried to add you to the whitelist, but it doesn’t seem to work? – Jo
00
Try this one
Flattering introduction to Ms Nova and her work by the interviewer by the way; the interviewer seemed unfamiliar with Ms Nova’s efforts prior to his opportunity for this interview
20
ERROR – that was an older one sorry
01
That 2011 broadcast is another Classic of the new enlightenment that followed the small 20th century warming.
JoNova on 2GB 1 Aug 2011.
50
Anyway, congrats to Jo on more frontline communication work.
30
Ermm. Frontline isn’t a word I’d use lightly in Australian media. 🙂
And if you’re talking about a battlefront, it’s Tim Flannery who usually goes over the top, along with Robyn (100 metres) Williams.
10
Funny I was jess thinking of Robyn Williams when addressing Popeye. Its a far cry from Nashville!
00
A wise man once told me that it is VERY easy to define a free market.
If you are willingly trading something that you have
For something that you want
That someone else has produced
And that producer is willing to accept what you are freely trading…
Then you have a free market.
The “carbon credit market” fails on nearly every level of this. No one produced it, no one wants it, no one is WILLINGLY trading anything for it.
150
But in this part of the world, free markets are thriving. As the government grabs and wastes people’s money, the barter systems is coming back into its own.
The interesting projections from such a development is that goods are being bartered locally, in country areas, so less is going to market to serve the urban dwellers, which forces the prices up, so the growers are not seeing decreasing revenues. But the local communities are very happy, thank you. Also, if it hasn’t been to market, the pumpkin probably doesn’t exist, so nobody can know that it was exchanged for a leg of home-killed lamb, from an animal that might never have been born, so no tax is payable.
The system worked for the peasant farmers in Soviet Russia, and it could equally work for peasant farmers in Soviet Australia.
50
RW,
Under the mentoring and guidance given by the greens i would have thought Stalinist (facists) would be a more appropriate term than soviet(communist)?
50
Yes, well, if I had been that pedantic, nobody would have understood it apart from you. 🙂
30
I recall Rereke that the last time I went to my local farmer for a sheep for our BBQ it cost me all of $20. Compare that with what you pay at the butcher shop, especially in Oz.
30
Yes, most of the cost is in the commercial supply chain, getting it from the farm to the plate. As a consumer, if you can get around that by going directly to the grower, you can actually pay him or her more than they would normally get, and still be saving your own money.
If you cut money out of the equation, by bartering, then the transaction can become tax neutral, depending on the local tax laws, and who knows about it. Caution your mileage may vary.
10
I listened to the interview earlier today. I had no trouble getting it here using the link supplied by Joe V on the previous thread somewhere.
It was an excellent interview…I was very impressed. Well done Jo.
100
Well.. the atmospheric temperature still refuses to follow the AGW script
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/05/uah-july-global-temperature-significantly-down/
As is obvious, apart for the El Nino step-up in 1998, there has been basically NO ATMOSPHERIC WARMING since 1979.
Level from 1979 -1996, step up, then level from 2000-2013.
The energy from the heavy solar cycles through 1960-2000 should be just about out of the system, and unfortunately, its cooling rather than warming from here on.
41
.
Excellent, concise article on the link between cooling, sunspot activity, solar cycle length and imlications for future temps, over at No Tricks Zone.
Link here.
40
Thing is, the Earth is basically one big puddle with some big patches of land.
And that puddle has a massive, and not properly understood, dampening effect on incoming energy.
I suspect that we will continue to see patches of warm here and there in the puddle (north Pacific at the moment)as the Earth sheds energy, but that these patches will gradually decline.
I worry that we are in for an extended period of somewhat cooler climate that will put considerable stress on agriculture, and really cause havoc with energy supply systems that have been allowed to degenerate way to far to inefficient unreliable sources.
10
So am I. Solar panels do not work if they are covered in snow, and windmills cannot be used if there is ice on the blades because the bearings are not designed to carry the weight.
It is about time that we brought out those 1970’s documentary programmes about “The coming Ice Age“, a three-part documentary, narrated by Leonard Nimoy, with a guest appearance (in the third and final segment), by a rather young, Dr. Stephen Schnieder.
30
@Jo Nova
Your op-ed in the Aus and the 2GB interview certainly pushes into the space of the unaware demographic
Very positive moves
90
A rather astute choice of words, by which I imagine you mean the empty headspace of the idiots being discussed earlier.
20
Jo,
I know that this is off topic, but I would like to draw this to your attention. Last week, on the weather reports for the last day of July, all the weather reporters read from the same chorus sheet that July’s average temperature for Melbourne was the highest on record. Now, it is true that there were a couple of days over 20degC, but there have been a lot of cold days too, and bitterly cold and frosty mornings. Over all, it has seemed an average sort of July: some warm days (after a morning frost); some wet days (when the temp was about 15-17 deg); and some very cold days – about 12-13 deg.
So whence all this hype about “the warmest July on record”? Has the UHI effect been allowed for? Are we dealing with fudged figures, in the interests of keeping the scare alive, when skepticism is growing? If the latter is the case, is this what to expect from the Melbourne Met Office and the CSIRO?
Do you have some thoughts; or better still, some information?
40
In reply to your last two questions: Yes.
The BOM regularly fudges the numbers up… nothen like nice round numbers.
I was watching something in particular in regard to temperatures in Canberra and was astonished to see the upped numbers at the end of the month (this is how we got “The Angry Summer”).
40
My understanding is that they try to follow HadCrud and Giss in the “data manipulation” stakes.
Its sort of a contest. !
Although I suspect a good deal of cross pollination, given that half the guys playing with the BOM data are from the Phil Jones CRU stable.
20
Meandering somewhat off-topic … I never do that >.> Here’s an excellent piece on Rudd’s fiscal ‘sobriety’ by Henry Ergas at The Oz:
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/henryergas/index.php/theaustralian/comments/julia_gillard_speaks_to_god/
Yes, it is pay-walled, but not if one Google seaches the title and clicks the link as per usual. What has Kevin Rudd cost Australians? Something of the order of a couple hundred billion dollars of increased indebtedness. This is money borrowed from future generations who will have to pay it back (or default, in the worst case scenario).
Think we can afford three more years of this profligacy? It’s easy to pretend the economy is OK when you prop it up continuously with printed paper, but the real shock comes when someone sensible takes over and stops the rave party.
It’s time for a reality check Australia. Want to keep pretending the party can go on forever and let your grandchildren pay the damages? or maybe, just maybe, it is time to rein things in a bit and live within our means.
50
In a similar vein, here’s Ken Henry arguing for a higher tax take:
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/both-parties-peddle-a-fiscal-fairytale-20130805-2ra2l.html
Pretty hard to argue against this. The problem is finding efficient taxes, not disasters like the CO2 tax and MRRT (which is raising next to nothing, especially after the administration costs and corporate tax discount are factored in).
Don’t expect any adjustment in income tax brackets any time soon if you are the primary breadwinner in your household. Bracket creep is one of the major drivers pushing tax levels back to where they should be.
30
Well let me give it a go.
When I was young lad, still at school and working part time, the political solution to every problem was to throw more money at it. Today, over a half century later, we have all the same problems, only they are all much bigger. Plus we have all the accumulated “unintended consequences” problems associated with throwing money at those problems. It’s almost as if money is a fertiliser for political problems.
So how about, just for once, we try the opposite and start spending LESS on our political problems? Cut off the fertiliser supply, so to speak. It is precisely what they did in NZ when the GFC hit (lower personal and company taxes, reduced govt spending), and now they are in budget surplus, despite the crippling earthquake and not having a mineral boom.
A few years ago I did an interesting exercise, where I took my income and worked out what I spent it on, and then worked how much of each expenditure eventually found its way back to Local, State and Federal grubbermints, in the form of taxes, levies, duties, fees, excises and the like.
The answer, a staggering 78 cents out of every dollar gross I earned, went back to the grubbermint, one way or another. Since I am a drinker and smoker, that might work out closer to 70 cents in the dollar for someone else. Either way, the REAL economy is trying to run on less than 30 cents in the dollar.
And that, folks, is simply unsustainable.
.
When the Budget was delivered back in May, and everybody was stating (yet again) how much better things would be under Abbott, I pointed out that, even with Treasury’s rubbery figures, there was an annual structural deficit of an additional $20 billion over and above the claimed “budget” deficit of $18 billion, making a total for just this year of $38 billion.
Well, as of this week’s Economic Statement we’re up to an admitted deficit of $33 billion, just $5 billion short of my estimate, and we are only five weeks into the current financial year. And the ES figures are just as rubbery as the ones used for the Budget. I also stated at the time, that given the magnitude of the problem, Abbott’s promise to spend a whole one (1) (single) billion less than Labor was going to make SFA difference. I scored a lot of “thumbs down” for that.
.
So, let’s have no more talk about “raising taxes”. It has never worked before, and it certainly isn’t going to work now we have reached saturation point. From this point on, any increase in tax revenue will be more than offset by an “unintended consequence”. Example abound:
Increase Mining Tax = miners move investment to Africa and SE Asia = less tax.
Increase Income Tax = People have less to spend = Harvey Norman’s profits go down = less tax.
Harvey Norman loses profits = layoffs = less tax.
Increase Company Tax = see above for Harvey Norman = less tax = layoffs = less tax.
Increase taxes on booze and smokes = people drink and smoke less = less tax.
Howard and Costello got around the conundrum by selling everything of value that wasn’t bolted down, and a lot that was. That isn’t an option this time around, regardless of who wins the election.
As a nation we either start cutting taxes which means cutting government expenditure, or we continue to go broke. There are no other choices.
80
Agreed … Ken Henry has demonstrated that he is a puppet, that he really knows SFA.
20
He was a puppet when made to dance for Labor (and probably the Libs … I don’t remember that far back) … having to say the things he did about the MRRT was quite embarrassing. Clearly he was quite frustrated with his political masters.
There would have been a lot of useful stuff in the Henry Review, but sadly Labor took little heed of the recommendations, simply cherry-picking the RSPT (morphed to MRRT under Gillard) and ignored the other multitude of tax improvements suggested. Not only that, the MRRT became such a distortion from that which was originally proposed that it was clear to anyone with a working brain that very little would be raised by the tax. Working as intended, as far as the mining companies were concerned.
I skirt around the fact that the federal Government shouldn’t be charging royalty-like taxes in any case, as royaties are Constitutionally the domain of the states. The whole premise of “Australians seeing a fair return from the mining industry” was a flawed argument to start with – they see these monies in state royalties already, which are then redistributed via the GST redistrution mechanism controlled by the CGC. That’s how Victoria end up getting more of WA’s royalties than WA does, and so on… don’t get me started on how broken that is. Ergas did a good piece on the GST redistribution some months ago.
But I digress…
10
I would have to both agree and disagree with you MV. Much Government spending is wasteful (I see it first hand every day), but there is also the issue of increased longevity and the associated health costs with a public system. The latter is Henry’s argument, and solidly based on facts. So either:
1) We radically change the way health care is delievred – e.g. privatise so it is no longer a government expense and people get what they can afford – not working so great in the US, but admittedly the Obamacare “fix” is also rife with problems of its own.
2) We go the Henry route and raise taxes and funnel the extra monies into the necessary health care services in the future.
I am open to other suggestions, but to ignore increased longevity and the associated health costs for society at large, as well as the fact that baby boomers are retiring (at least we don’t have China’s one-child boomer bulge problem) and hence the associated increased costs and decreased income tax revenue, is to be obtuse to the facts.
I won’t debate your = equations, because we both know they don’t hold water. For example, taxing demand price inelastic goods, such as smokes and alcohol will increase revenues. We know this from basic economic theory and past empirical evidence.
TL:DNR There is massive government waste in some areas which could be redirected to health, but clearly health care will require additional funding to maintain the current (let alone improved) levels of care over the next few decades with an aging population. The demographics can’t be ignored.
10
Or, (3) We realise there is massive waste in some parts of health care, we identify them, and we eliminate them. I was fortunate to have had my heart attack/stroke in WA, and only returned to QLD once I had the all-clear two months later. I can tell you that the system in WA is much cheaper, and much better than the bloated bureaucracy we returned to here in QLD.
Just as one “for instance”. In WA they have a “hospital in the home” service. I was able to leave the hospital – but not “officially” discharged and go to a relative’s home. A nurse came by each day and checked me out. Ditto for physiotherapy and speech therapy. The therapists came around twice a week. I wasn’t officially “discharged” from hospital until five weeks later, when all the medico’s gave me the “all clear”.
Compare that to spending that five weeks in a hospital bed (as I would have done here in QLD), the savings must have been monumental.
.
(4) We recognise some our sacred cows of expenditure are just that – cows. Let’s start with education. When I went to primary school class sizes were 50+ and every kid left with basic literacy, numeracy, history, geography and science skills.
Today, after decades of falling standards accompanied by claims that the answer lay in “smaller class sizes”, and “specialist teachers”, and “more years at school” (most kids left at the end of ten years in my day – “Junior Certificate”), and after decades of throwing ever more billions at these aims, our primary and secondary system is largely turning out brain-washed functional illiterates.
How about instead of another $15 billion a year down the Gonski rabbit hole we instead cut high school back to three years (the increase accomplished SFA except to artificially reduce dole numbers for two years – its REAL purpose), increase class sizes to 40 (the decreases never made one whit of difference to standards), re-introduce standards testing at the end of each year (proper exams with a mark out of 100), halve teachers’ basic rate of pay and instead offer them a big, fat, end of year bonus based on their class aggregate results at testing?
I wonder how much those changes would make to the bottom line?
No BD. “Basic economic theory” dictates that the more expensive you make something, the more incentive you provide for people to seek out an alternative. Unknown to most non-smokers is the fact that a “smoking revolution” has been occurring for the last couple of years. Smokers in their droves are swapping over to “vaping” nicotine, instead of burning tobacco (Google it).
Last time the grubbermint whacked smoking (2010) the effect ended up “revenue neutral”. Idiot politicians and their mandarin treasury officials think it was because large numbers of people gave up. In the main they didn’t – we started vaping instead.
This latest whack is even more massive than the last and will probably kill “smoking” off almost entirely. Another $7 billion a year hole in the budget bottom line. Right now I’m the process of getting the vaping wherewithal together for six of my friends, and the price rise hasn’t even hit yet.
The only “empirical evidence” you have is that the last tobacco rise ended up revenue neutral. The assumption is a lot of people gave up. We didn’t. We applied “basic economic theory” and sourced out a cheaper alternative. Same thing will happen this time.
20
Not seeing any decline here – pretty level between 2011 and 2012:
http://www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au/chapter-13-taxation/13-6-revenue-from-tobacco-taxes-in-australia
The slug in 2010 was at the end of April:
http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/BudgetReview201011/HealthTobaccoExcise
So unless the argument is it took 1 year for people to react? Eyeballing the data the increase in excise revenue between 2010 and 2011 was the biggest increase for many years. Not seeing a massive shift away from smoking, which is what you are suggesting.
20
PS> But as I said before – I agree that there is massive waste in various areas of government (probably worst in the administrative areas).
20
.
Bull, I have way too much respect for your opinions generally to want to get into a number-crunching nit-pick dispute with you, but . . .
From your first link, in the only comparable two years available, revenue went up $29 million. On top of $6.4 BILLION, I would say that was pretty much “revenue neutral”.
More to the point, in your second link it is disclosed that that the grubbermint reckoned (at the time) that the increase would add $5.5 billion over the period of the forward estimates (~$1.6 billion per year increase).
Accordingly, the figure next to the 2011 date in your first link was “meant” to be something like $7.3 billion. They got $6.4 billion. The figure next to the 2012 date was “meant” to be around $8.9 billion, instead they got, lo and behold, another $6.4 billion.
When it becomes available, the figure for 2013 is “supposed” to be (based on those forward estimates) around $8.9 billion. What odds would you like that it’s far closer to $6.4 billion? And the following year (year ending 30/6/2015) it was supposed to be around $10.5 billion, but I’ll bet a testicle it will be much closer to $6.4 billion.
Now THAT year (year ending 30/6/2015) is the first full comparable year under the new tax rates, and the “estimate” is $7.2 billion, which is a long way short of their “estimate” of $10.5 billion only three years ago, and therefore an admission that their figures are total BS.
As I said, it has already become “revenue neutral”. The latest increase will only make the matter worse.
00
And I would totally agree with you that if Rudd gets in and puts durries (is that the spelling?) aka coffin nails up to $20 a pack we would be the most expensive in the world (currently we appear to be second only to Norway at around US$15 a pack):
http://tobaccoatlas.org/costs/cig_prices/prices/
At that point I would expect a lot of substitution. I think you may have a point in that substitution is low at lower taxes, but at $20 a pack smokes get prohibitive for a lot of people. Revenue may well go down 🙂 I certainly doubt they would get the $5.3 billion boost as advertised by Labor.
Of course then Labor will trumpet it as a major health win! Slippery don’t begin to describe it…
31
BTW I enjoy a healthy debate … I saw this TED talk this morning, and this guy is wise:
http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_h_cohen_for_argument_s_sake.html
Not the best talker by any means, but he has an excellent point or two to make.
00
Balldust. I can get Cuban cigars for less than 5 Euros.
But at least you can count yourself lucky if you are still allowed to actually smoke at a bar.
Are you?
In the UK you are actually forbidden to smoke IN YOUR OWN HOME in the event of a visit by a public employee (such as a nurse).
10
Oops wrong link in first article 🙂
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/the-250bn-cost-of-kevin-rudd-a-tale-of-waste-and-spending/story-fn59niix-1226690463570
This is what was supposed to have been linked (though the other one is amusing).
30
Most of Henry Ergas’ stuff is amusing, but also very informative. I think Jo should use the fact that treasury has made a prediction, undoubtably based on models, that the European carbon permit price will more than quadruple in value over the next 4 years, giving a return of over 41% per annum. If the treasury and its personel really believe this twaddle, the Australian public should insist that all treasury staff should have their superannuation immediately invested in European carbon trading permits. For their own benefit, of course.
70
Brilliant!
30
Ergas is certainly one of the few heavyweight commentators out there, though he does lean slightly to the conservative side.
Bolt has brought that point up as well, about the treasury forecasts of Euro carbon credit prices. The hypocrasy of Rudd claiming to ease pressure on household costs by cutting to a market price early and at the same time relying on increasing Euro CC prices to assist the budget in the out years is deplorable. You can’t have it both ways, but too many commentators and interviewers are too ignorant to realise this. They just merrily post the superficial garbage (from either major party) without any due diligence.
50
That is because, like the teachers, the journalists nowadays couldn’t pull the skin off the custard of inquiring discourse.
30
The coming election will be an IQ test of the Australian population. If I’m right, it’s an ALP win indicative of an average of 80. I do hope I’m wrong.
00
I didn’t know Henry Ergas was a comedian. I had a great chuckle 🙂
00
We are not talking about bureaucrats- administrators with tightly defined rules rather some government administrator with vague external structure. There is probably not one bureaucrat in the entire world- it requires an enormous effort to set up a bureaucracy.
04
Another Michael, I think. This one isn’t trying to lick his own nose. (your avatar, I mean)
Please use an initial or something to differentiate yourself from the z-class troll that lives in the mould under the bridge.
21
Clearly you have never heard of the IPCC, the UN, The Australian Public Service……etc.
40
There’s a lot of power in one Watt.
Is Ian up to it?
10
I beg to differ.
All it needs is a fixed hierarchy, with each level of management being held totally accountable for the performance of the people under them, and a set of objectives and targets that each manager must meet, on a monthly basis, in order to get paid.
In truth, the sanction of withholding payment proves to be unnecessary. People will adopt a command type management style without the financial risk component.
10
4 Aug: Forbes: James Conca: Who’s Gonna Pay For Global Warming?
But how do we finance this change? The new mix would require significant up-front construction costs on the renewables and nuclear, and only in the later years would it become extremely cost-effective because there is so much less fuel costs. Again, we need to decide to invest in the future. Whenever we do, good things happen…
It is the huge increase in renewable and nuclear construction that will be difficult to finance in the ordinary way, without an associated increase in government loan guarantees. Such loans are always lucrative to the public, but only sound bad in this anti-government phase we’re going through…
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/08/04/whos-going-to-pay-for-global-warming/
(Forbes profile: James Conca: “I cover the underlying drivers of energy, technology and society.”)
LinkedIn: James Conca
Director of Nuclear Science
Richland/Kennewick/Pasco, Washington Area
Industry
Renewables & Environment
Contributor at Forbes
Prior to joining RJLee Group, Conca was Director of the NMSU Carlsbad Environmental Monitoring and Research Center, the independent monitoring facility for the DOE WIPP nuclear repository. He came to NMSU from Los Alamos National Laboratory where he was Project Leader for Radionuclide Geochemistry…
Groups & Associations
American Nuclear Society
Los Alamos National Laboratory Alumni
Networking for Nuclear Engineers & Nuclear Professionals
Nuclear & Social Media
Nuclear Science and Technology Professional Network etc
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jim-conca/7/103/2a5
10
Another wonk, I knew him a long time ago.
Fuel costs are a fraction of the overall operating expenses of a fossil fuel operation. Government owns all nuclear fuel, that cost to the operator is zero, the operator has to pay to store spent fuel on site, however.
40
Has anyone mentioned the global temp update for July was a measly +0.17C?
http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
At some it has to warm dont you think?
41
No.
30
Yes. Crakar mentioned it several hours ago, do try to keep up.
20
5 Aug: Reuters: Exclusive: Japan nuclear body says radioactive water at Fukushima an ’emergency’
by Antoni Slodkowski and Mari Saito
Additional reporting by Kentaro Hamada; Editing by Edmund Klamann and Raju Gopalakrishnan
This contaminated groundwater has breached an underground barrier, is rising toward the surface and is exceeding legal limits of radioactive discharge, Shinji Kinjo, head of a Nuclear Regulatory Authority (NRA) task force, told Reuters.
Countermeasures planned by Tokyo Electric Power Co are only a temporary solution, he said.
Tepco’s “sense of crisis is weak,” Kinjo said. “This is why you can’t just leave it up to Tepco alone” to grapple with the ongoing disaster.
“Right now, we have an emergency,” he said…
The admission on the long-term tritium leaks, as well as renewed criticism from the regulator, show the precarious state of the ***$11 billion cleanup and Tepco’s challenge to fix a fundamental problem: How to prevent water, tainted with radioactive elements like cesium, from flowing into the ocean.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-japan-fukushima-panel-idUSBRE97408V20130805
5 Aug: Asahi Shimbun Japan: 9,640 Fukushima plant workers reach radiation level for leukemia compensation
Only four people who worked at the stricken Fukushima No. 1 plant have applied for compensation for cancer. Their requests are currently under review.
“The government does not appear to be serious about protecting workers,” said Saburo Murata, deputy director of Hannan Chuo Hospital, who is well-versed in radiation dose management. “It should provide medical checkups on its own responsibility as a way to steadily carry out decommissioning.”
The health ministry acknowledged it has no system to inform all workers of the standards for workers’ compensation. It said it is considering distributing leaflets…
The number of workers reaching the 5-millisievert threshold for possible leukemia compensation is expected to further increase because TEPCO is planning measures that could expose them to high radiation levels. One immediate project at the Fukushima plant is dealing with the radioactive water accumulating at the site that is leaking into the ocean.
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201308050104
of course, anyone who visits ene news regularly would know a helluva lot more than MSM’s audience about the Fukushima Disaster…
http://enenews.com/
10
Pat, after all the catastrophist announcements about the Fukushima disaster,-[where no one was killed or are likely to be killed by nuclear radiation, but where about 11,000 were killed by the tsunami], I am waiting for UNSCEAR’s final report, due September 2013. No point in listening to discredited journalists banging their drums. I have read their preliminary report- have you? . UNSCEAR is probably the only truly independent group of quality scientists within the UN.
21
OT I know but I am sitting on a veranda near Auckland the sun is shining and I am warm a cloud appears and it is way to cool for this Central Queensland bloke. Question why isn’t the CO2 keeping me warm while the sun is behind a cloud? Michael perhaps?
30
Yeah.. One has to wonder if those saying that the Sun does not heat things up, have EVER left their padded basement cells.
40
That’s right O2. I wonder if Michael or Bladder can explain why you fry in a desert at 50C during the day, but freeze at night. What part of CO2 is “overheating” the planet? None at all actually, the reason for this large temp shift in a desert is lack of water vapour.
Go ahead Michael, Bladder – prove us wrong.
60
will Branson now change his CAGW stance?
5 Aug: Age: Matt O’Sullivan: Virgin singles out carbon tax in profit warning
Carbon tax hit
Virgin estimates the carbon tax will cost it between $45 million and $50 million for the year – a cost Virgin said it could not recover due to the weak economy and tough competition.
Virgin chief executive John Borghetti singled out the carbon tax as a major reason for the slump in earnings, and he said he wanted to see it abolished.
‘‘If it continues, it will obviously impact our results if the market remains soft,’’ he said. ‘‘We have said all along, right from the beginning, that this carbon tax is not recoverable in a weak economic environment. It is purely a cost on the business.’’…
http://www.theage.com.au/business/aviation/virgin-singles-out-carbon-tax-in-profit-warning-20130805-2r8id.html
40
I doubt it Pat another Company which said nothing to the Government before it introduced this ludicrous tax.
They deserve what they get and I wouldn’t give Branson my money or time.
But it could be they are honing their skills to get Kevni07 to cough up more cash like he did for the Auto industry.
20
well this is really confusing the NSA had enough information for the police to kick down the door of a family that Googled “backpack” and “pressure cooker”, but for what we are told is the biggest terror threat since 9-11, all they can manage is, “Someone in Al Qaeda (nudge nudge wink wink say no more) but we don’t know exactly who, is going to do something, but we don’t know exactly what, somewhere in the Middle East, only we don’t know exactly where, sometime before the end of the month, only we don’t know just when.”
In the mean time we give weapons and money to these guys and Syria and now this
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/08/03/its-official-us-funding-al-qaeda-and-taliban/
Tony Capaccio of Bloomberg News cites a quarterly report to Congress by Special Inspector for Afghan Reconstruction John Sopko.The report reveals Sopko asked the US Army Suspension and Disbarment office to cancel 43 contracts to known Al Qaeda and Taliban supporters. They refused. The reason? The Suspension and Disbarment Office claims it would violate Al Qaeda and Taliban “due process rights.”
Can i make this situation any clearer or are some of you still unconvinced?
50
So are you saying that the threat is carbon credits?
04
Obviously you fall into the unconvinced category however i do believe i may have erred by not including a third group titled “the too dumb to understand”.
Let me hit the high points GA and then you can go back to giving me red thumbs.
1, We declare war on a tactic
2, We give it a name (terrorist)
3, We bomb (insert never heard of before country here) to get rid of terrorist
4, Once terrorist gone (not that it was ever really there to begin with) we instal a central bank, printing pressers come on line
5, Borrow shit tins of money from bank
6, Pay terrorists to rebuild country we destroyed
7, Refuse to recind building contracts given to terrorists because of due process rights
8, Everyones a winner
9, well not everyone but all the important rich ones are winners.
Notice there was no mention of carbon credits in the story and what i have written above? Would you like to change groups now or do you have more stupid questions to ask?
40
Well, that about sums it up Crakar.
I also understand there was a plan to carpet bomb the Bordeaux region of France because of the war on terrôir. 🙂
10
Groan!
00
You have an alternative theory RW i would be interested in hearing it
Cheers
00
Egyptians express their love for Obummer
10
Great interview Jo, I wish more journalist would dig a bit further below the Labor party press releases so the public could get to the truth.
For instance I can’t believe Rudd and his team are getting away with scolding Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey for saying the RBA’s reduction in interest rates is not a vote of confidence for the economy. It was totally unchallenged by journalists. What Abbott said is entirely true. The Reserve Bank would be reducing interest rates in an attempt to stimulate an insipid economy trying to get individuals and businesses to borrow and spend. It is economics 101. But when you have little confidence in the future, and the security of your job, it doesn’t matter how low interest rates go, you aren’t going to take on more debt.
The lower interest rates are a kick in the stomach for self funded retirees trying to live off their savings. Job losses and job insecurity created by Labor’s disastrous 6 years are a kick in the guts to Australian families and young people who may not be able to meet mortgage payments no matter how low interest rates are if they have no work, or who can’t get a mortgage because they haven’t got a permanent job.
Rudd is an economic moron!
70
There. Fixed it for you.
60
Remembering I am more anti-Labor right now than anti-Lib, let’s not forget the Libs bragging that interest rates would always be lower inder a Lib government.
Maybe that should be interpretted as: “Libs will always have to practice austerity to clean up Labor’s spending largesse, resulting in the RBA lowering interest rates to stimulate the economy due to a reduction in government spending…”
Both parties are guilty of talking economic nonsense at times. Difference is that Labor has put it into practice for the last 6 years, and there is always a chance the Libs could handle things better, but we know Labor won’t. Heck Rudd already chucked another billion at the electorate and it is only day 2…
41
I am sure you know Bulldust hat context is important.
When the Coalition said that interest rates will always be lower under their administration, it was said in the context of an expanding economy. During a time of economic boom, when you have a big spending government going out into the market place to borrow money, that will force interest rates up. They compete with business and private individuals for the limited supply of funds. So a more fiscally responsible Government will achieve lower interest rates than this big spending Labor Government under normal economic conditions..
Naturally, if you have a declining economy where there is very little confidence in the future because of 6 years of maladministration which has scared business and major resource projects away, you will have much fewer businesses and individuals prepared to go into debt. So interest rates are automatically low anyway because no one wants to borrow money. The Reserve Bank will attempt to increase borrowing by reducing interest rates even further in the hope it will tempt businesses and individuals to borrow and spend.
I believe if we had a better government over the last 6 years which had built a surpluses instead of a massive debt, we would have totally different circumstances than we find ourselves in today:
– Some overseas resource projects which have been postponed or cancelled because of this governments environmental policies, mining tax, carbon tax, industrial relations policies and the highest wages in the world, would still be proceeding.
– General business and consumer confidence would be higher so the RBA would not have the need to ‘stimulate’
– The Government would have a war-chest of surpluses built up during a period of record government revenues, and without wasteful cash splashes, during the mining boom which could now be applied to major infrastructure projects to maintain good employment levels and a stronger economy.
Under these circumstances, yes, interest rates would be higher but no one would be complaining. There are many countries around the world in dire economic circumstances with official interest rates a fraction of a percent. If Labor want to point to them as what they are targeting, then I reckon they are on track!
41
They seem to be making your points in the Oz as we speak:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/election-2013/coalition-drops-lower-rates-pledge/story-fn9qr68y-1226692017564
I agree with your arguments, of course, but it doesn’t detract from the fact that Hockey and Abbott don’t know how to deflect the debate about the point. But then we are in election mode right now so it is all about sound bites, never mind the reality…
30
Exactly what’s happened in the UK during 13 disasterous years of Labour and continued by our wet Coalition.
20
.
Given today is almost done and the last day has a media blackout, he has 30 clear days left.
Half a billion $ a day = 15 billion $ in 30 days.
What do you reckon, Bull, think he can make it?
.
I wouldn’t put it past him.
30
Kevin has surprised me already … I mean missing the St Petersberg trip, who’da thunk his ego could deal with that?
I have no doubt he can make many more billions in promises, and I also believe many millions of voters are silly enough to think the money can keep pouring in. Love to have a Keatingesque recession we have to have right now. Voters are largely far too complacent.
50
Yes, that surprised me at first but a bit of digging supplied the answer
On the Saturday, the Sun King was talking big as usual about the need to attend the G20 (not as caretaker, of course) and attending to “other” matters. Leaks out of Caucus, from the many ex-Ministers who hate his guts, kept mischievously suggesting he would see the GG on the Sunday … this was deliberate, as it put him the position of appearing a coward if he didn’t call the election
In short, a considerable section of Caucus thought he was out of control again and everything risked going seriously pear-shaped
He hates being in caretaker mode. He can’t sign Treaties, spend our money with his usual careless profligacy, send troops – or any of the stuff that makes him feel soooo important
50
Where are Rudd’s promises of money coming from..
The money is coming from YOU !!!
30
Incidentally, I’ve just been emailing a mate of mine who lives in PNG and has contacts close to the Government in Port Moresby, and will therefore go unnamed.
He tells me that the PNG Government is unlikely to sign a formal agreement to permanently resettle refugees from Australia in PNG. The reason is that they have realise their own people will not accept having a different class of people living among them who have a guaranteed right to education, health and welfare which they do not. But the PNG Government has been asked to hold off on the announcement until after the election. Which is why Rudd has rushed to an election and decided to miss the G20 meeting in St Petersburg. Meanwhile PNG still get the economic benefit of the expansion of the refugee centres as well as the promised increases in untied aid made by Rudd.
If Australians discovered this before the election, they would realise that Rudd’s boat people fix is all smoke and mirrors.
No-one is talking about the over 25,000 asylum seekers who have arrived in Australia since August last year who have not even started the process of refugee assessment. Why have Labor stopped processing? Where will the resources come from to do background checks on all these people? Or will they just quietly give all these people residency status?
60
If only we had a real investigative media /sigh
50
I have the same information Jaymez, and presumably from an independent source.
10
It’s really no different to Gillards failed Malaysia solution.
Just bullshit to try and get votes, fuck the people it affects.
10
Seems we are drifting off carbon credits and back to economic matters pertaining to the puppet show known as Da Uhlection. (Dereliction?) yeah, I’ll go with that flow…
It’s one of those bizarre co-incidences.
I was earlier assessing the state of my superannuation account (a very rare event for me) and desired to know the average Rate of Return for the large super funds. Due mainly to the losses of the GFC they have made just 0.5% in the last year and averaged over ten years it has been a woeful 4.4%pa. (Yes that surprised me too.) Of course super is no good if… the banksters are going to just steal it all before you ever see it.
Logically, I decided to check Zero Hedge for all the latest bankster shenanigans. One guest post on their front page is exactly the kind of doom pr0n that us collapsologists love to hear from ZH. In particular this
allegationhypothesis stood out:Wait a second, what was the breakdown of those superannuation returns again?
The government client managers earned nearly twice the earnings of the Industry super funds! Gosh those public sector managers are great at picking good investment opportunities, aren’t they?
I did say it was *just* a coincidence. Nothing to see here. Move along. Keep that consumer confidence level high, citizen!
40
.
Anybody under 60 who actually believes they will ever see a cent of their “private” superannuation money, is probably living in dreamland. Anybody under 55 who believes it is DEFINITELY living in dreamland.
When the time comes the whole lot (currently $1.4 trillion) will be funneled into some kind of grubbermint-controlled “Future Fund”, aka “General Revenue”. Just like the previous government-mandated “compulsory superannuation scheme” was.
Oh, you didn’t know there was a previous government-mandated compulsory superannuation scheme that started as a completely separate fund and got “incorporated” into General Revenue in the 1960’s?
In that case you are probably unaware that YOU are STILL paying 9% of your gross earnings into that that original fund, by way of your annual PAYG income tax, and all you can expect in return is the pittance of the Old Age Pension.
See how easy it was to diddle you out of your retirement money without you even noticing?
.
And now they are going to do it to you all over again.
40
Will listen to that tonight. Always love hearing Jo speak (in a non-creepy way).
On a side-note, Blackadder has been at this for years, he’s a well-known troll with an inexplicable penchant for YouTube videos with the reading comprehension of a cabbage. He doesn’t understand what science is. He thinks posting reference-free YouTube videos constitutes a valid argument. Blackadder, when you have embraced the scientific method then we will be able to discuss the science. But until you have done that, please stop spamming Jo’s lovely site with your ridiculous, off-topic videos. It’s unnecessary and hugely disrespectful. You’re lucky Jo’s very tolerant. Any other site you would have been blocked a long time ago.
“I wonder if this is true, because that would mean you would have to accept AGW is true”
It is scurrilous and dishonest of you to keep smearing us with this baseless charge without producing a scrap of evidence to support it. The reality of a human contribution to the greenhouse effect is not what the dispute around AGW is about. The central question at issue is that of its size.
40
…its size and why we should give a snip-crass.
00
Great interview Jo. What do you think is the size of the audience reached?
I liked hearing the comment about funding research on both sides. However, I also wonder if that would work because of the tendency for all sides to become addicted to the money?
How about instead, we convince the funders to pool and set aside the money and have researchers “win” funds out of the pool after they show their research results. Peer review would have to be jury-like and as neutral as possible but much like a court, award the funds as a prize.
40
If the Govt. funded the skeptics they’d become tarnished by the same brush. While that would may be fair & equitable it may deprive skeptics of some of that independence and freedom of they that they currently enjoy & sets them apart.
50
Black adder etc are here on purpose to try to destroy your site. They tried it elsewhere goddard etc. I would bin them into another site
00
Jo, I have been trying to log in but I am getting “Invalid Registration”..Help from Sunray
00
I am in England. I got conned into buying VER credits as an investment. I was told that there were secured exits. Then the sales firm went bust and another firm picked up the client list. They then offered another type of carbon credit to make a profit to get the original money back. I didn’t buy into it. Others did and are still not out of the market, a recovery scam basically.
Watch out for slick talking salespeople who have city addresses. They drop in industry buzz words and turn up the pressure once you express a slight interest. Then a more senior salesperson continues to work on you until you cave in. Then they become hard to contact and then finally disappear leaving you on your own. These credits are only worth what someone else wants to pay.
I think the European carbon credit sales people may be moving to Australia soon.
A good website to visit is redd-monitor.org where scams are discussed. The police and others are already investigating these scams.
Industrial CO2 contribute a tiny amount compared to other contributors. Roughly speaking it is like three grains of rice in a cupful.
10