Chat Forum
It is currently Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:30 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23900 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 589, 590, 591, 592, 593, 594, 595 ... 598  Next

Whos Going to Lead the Labor Rabble
Albo 44%  44%  [ 4 ]
Plibbers 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Bowen 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Chalmers 33%  33%  [ 3 ]
Uncle Tony 11%  11%  [ 1 ]
Clive Palmer 11%  11%  [ 1 ]
George Smith 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 9
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 1:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15617
Image

Some fuckwit has torched a One Nation bus in Hobart.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 4:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18082
guy smiley wrote:
This is not about 'retards not understanding'... if it was, then 'the Left' is the retard. Antagonising your voting base through some sort of moral superiority is a one way ticket to fail town.

Indeed. It brings to mind an Australian political quote:

    "Do you know why I have credibility? Because I don't exude morality."

guy smiley wrote:
The task now for the progressive side of politics is learning how to win the ugly punch up with your opponent first up to gain attention, then actually sell the policy they're carrying... not just present it. They need to play dirty just as their opponents are... but abusing the base isn't going to do that.

Not sure I agree about that. But they do need to sell their policy, and it has to be a saleable one.

    "... no-one is more conscious than I of our tendency to conservatism as a people, and of the need, therefore, for those who would advocate change to temper their fervour with a sense of gradualism. This constraint sits happily with me..."

    – R. J. Hawke

The earlier quote is also his. Not that this bloke was the Messiah, but he knew a thing or two about achieving reforms.

ALP really should've won this cycle. Much of the platform was okay but it ended up being a scattergun grab bag. Too many self-imposed hurdles to get over and they failed to sell these measures. Not only in Queensland, but WA and even NSW. Didn't end up gaining seats in Melbourne.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 10:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21281
mdaclarke wrote:
Ali's Choice wrote:
mdaclarke wrote:
Ali's Choice wrote:
mdaclarke wrote:
Also nobody wins votes by saying they are going to tax people more. All most people care about is how much money is in their pocket. They care about climate change, the developing world and other worthy things, but not enough to lower their standard of living. When push comes to shove what they really care about is their bank balance.


That's clear. But more people would have had a tax cut under the ALP than the Coalition. So how does that balance with your comment?

Anyway, the electorate has decided and we all now need to move on with life. As I said in a previous comment, I can now negatively gear another investment property which will be nice.


I don't live in Australia so I don't know about the campaign,


Then shut the f**k up.


I just find it interesting how it works the same in every Anglosphere country. This is a repeat of the Brexit vote, the Trump vote etc. The progressives keep making the same mistakes. They never learn.



I much agree about this. And I have some of the strongest progressive views on this forum. I'm disappointed that another, potentially forward thinking party lost another major election to a low tax support corporates government, but then, from what I've heard, I'm even more frustrated that supposed progressives just don't "get it". Across the anglosphere there is just this terrible culture of sniffing your own farts and demonising the masses who think wrong and eating their own if they aren't the purest of woke BS and intersectional PC politics instead of worrying about how the everyday person feels their needs are and their vision of the country.

I genuinely believe a pro-environmental, leaning towards social democracy, anti-corporatisation dominance, invets in education and health, left of centre government can win all these elections, if they where willing to drop say pro-immigration policies and rhetoric accepting a reduction is desirable, drop demonising anyone who doesn't fit the woke narrative and playing the offence Olympics.

Even if these are not the policies or manifesto of the election, but they are the narrative of left/liberal politics today. I guess stuff like twitter lefty activists and the mainstream left leaning media are equally, perhaps more responsible for that problem than any left or centre politic leader. It is what they are saying the voters. The world needs some sensible governments, why can't we get any?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 10:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31525
Location: in transit
eldanielfire wrote:
I much agree about this. And I have some of the strongest progressive views on this forum. I'm disappointed that another, potentially forward thinking party lost another major election to a low tax support corporates government, but then, from what I've heard, I'm even more frustrated that supposed progressives just don't "get it". Across the anglosphere there is just this terrible culture of sniffing your own farts and demonising the masses who think wrong and eating their own if they aren't the purest of woke BS and intersectional PC politics instead of worrying about how the everyday person feels their needs are and their vision of the country.


You really don't understand the Australian political scene, like a few others here posting from outside... or Queensland. What you have posted there just doesn't apply.

Intersectional PC politics wasn't a factor. The Labor party offered greater tax cuts than the victors to a larger proportion of the electorate. Woke BS is what I see when I read most of your posts.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 11:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:02 am
Posts: 3532
What an arrogant poop you are, Guy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 11:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15940
Location: STRAYA PLUM
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
Admirable for Farva to stick up for his line of work. Much like the Turnbull's supported Alex's renewables business. I find it very hard to believe that there is a place that has 100% sustainable renewables efficiency over tradition power sources to supply energy to their people. Moving to renewables cost money particularly with having to own a property to put a solar panel on and having to rely on base. Australia has the resources internally to support nuclear energy. The French went nuclear in the 70s and are still doing well off that. They export the power that they don't use and make coin out of it.

Im not advocating for rooftop.
Nuclear is not economically viable. This is a fact.
Renewables at 100% are fine when supported by storage such as pumped storage. This creates that baseload.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 11:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14814
Location: STRAYA!
I spent a good chunk of Saturday night and yesterday trawling through some serious anti-QLD vibes on social media. The vast majority of spiteful musings were from left leaning types in Sydney and Melbourne who were aghast that people would vote differently to them. I'm going out on a limb here when I say many of these people have never been to regional Australia and never will.

I'm in a safe Labor seat which had a large-ish swing to the Greens. I also live in Brisbane. But the issue in regional areas (not just QLD) becomes pretty apparent when you dig in. No jobs, no future and lots of scared people. If the ALP hadn't sat on the fence, then they may have done better. What these people wanted to hear was "we know you're hurting, we'll look after you" They didn't hear that from Shorten. They sure as hell heard that from the LNP.

Bob Brown's Caravan Tour didn't help. The one thing that pisses people off in regional areas is someone waltzing into their town, telling them everything they've known is wrong, offering no solutions and then going onto the next town. I must admit, I would have hated to have been Shorten trying to get his message across while some farkwit with a STOP ADANI sign tries to muscle him off the stage.

In 3 year's time I hope the ALP have learned from this mistake. Get a strong leader (a QLDer would help) and march him north with a united message. It worked for Rudd.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 11:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31525
Location: in transit
wamberal99 wrote:
What an arrogant poop you are, Guy.


I've been having the odd disagreement with EDF on exactly these lines for ages. What I see from him repeatedly is diving into a discussion and presenting an opinion that doesn't fit the scenario.

I've already suggested where I think the 'left' if you like needs to change here. They're not connecting with the wider electorate and there's more than a trace of moral superiority at the root of that. After reading some FB posts from aghast acquaintances since the result, I'd go further and suggest it's snobbery on the part of many. Thomas' point about the fears of working people is bang on. Knowing that things won't get better under the winners isn't cause to scorn those who voted for them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 11:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14814
Location: STRAYA!
guy smiley wrote:
wamberal99 wrote:
What an arrogant poop you are, Guy.


I've been having the odd disagreement with EDF on exactly these lines for ages. What I see from him repeatedly is diving into a discussion and presenting an opinion that doesn't fit the scenario.

I've already suggested where I think the 'left' if you like needs to change here. They're not connecting with the wider electorate and there's more than a trace of moral superiority at the root of that. After reading some FB posts from aghast acquaintances since the result, I'd go further and suggest it's snobbery on the part of many. Thomas' point about the fears of working people is bang on. Knowing that things won't get better under the winners isn't cause to scorn those who voted for them.


The phrase "better the devil you know" applies here.

The ALP didn't have a strong message. They were wishy washy on Adani and coal mining and saying "we'll weight it up if we win" doesn't cut it with a scared electorate.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 11:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:02 am
Posts: 3532
A fair bit of soul-searching is called for by progressive voters and the parties which claim to represent them.

A good place to start is to recognise that the Australian electoral map is incredibly complicated these days. Whether we like it or not, simple messages cut through, particularly when they are directed at potential swinging voters in risky seats, and when a fair chunk of the electorate is not fluent in English.


Scummo's campaign was brilliant in its simplicity, highly disciplined, and perfectly executed. And it was supported by a fair bit of skullduggery. "Mediscare" payback.


The ALP is going to have to take some tough decisions, and bring some new talent into the House. People who actually have some real life working experience, not just more party hacks.


Last edited by wamberal99 on Sun May 19, 2019 11:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 11:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:53 pm
Posts: 1376
eldanielfire wrote:
mdaclarke wrote:
I just find it interesting how it works the same in every Anglosphere country. This is a repeat of the Brexit vote, the Trump vote etc. The progressives keep making the same mistakes. They never learn.



I much agree about this. And I have some of the strongest progressive views on this forum. I'm disappointed that another, potentially forward thinking party lost another major election to a low tax support corporates government, but then, from what I've heard, I'm even more frustrated that supposed progressives just don't "get it". Across the anglosphere there is just this terrible culture of sniffing your own farts and demonising the masses who think wrong and eating their own if they aren't the purest of woke BS and intersectional PC politics instead of worrying about how the everyday person feels their needs are and their vision of the country.

I genuinely believe a pro-environmental, leaning towards social democracy, anti-corporatisation dominance, invets in education and health, left of centre government can win all these elections, if they where willing to drop say pro-immigration policies and rhetoric accepting a reduction is desirable, drop demonising anyone who doesn't fit the woke narrative and playing the offence Olympics.

Even if these are not the policies or manifesto of the election, but they are the narrative of left/liberal politics today. I guess stuff like twitter lefty activists and the mainstream left leaning media are equally, perhaps more responsible for that problem than any left or centre politic leader. It is what they are saying the voters. The world needs some sensible governments, why can't we get any?


You put it much better than I could have. The worst thing for progressives is because they shame people who don't agree with their world view into silence rather than debating them and trying to engage with them, they (the progressives) think they are winning the arguments when actually they are losing them. Hence the opinion polls not being reflective of the actual results. Again this is a problem in the anglosphere with left wing parties thinking they are doing better than they actually are, until the penny drops at election time. It happens time and time again.

You are also right about the politics. I actually consider myself quite a green person but I have right of centre politics. The Green party seems to think that Green = Socialist. It is a real shame there isn't a right of centre Green party. I would add a strong military to your winning policy wishlist as most voters are patriotic and like to see a strong military.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 11:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31525
Location: in transit
Thomas wrote:

The phrase "better the devil you know" applies here.

The ALP didn't have a strong message. They were wishy washy on Adani and coal mining and saying "we'll weight it up if we win" doesn't cut it with a scared electorate.


Absolutely. They screwed up there and there were plenty criticising them over that particularly.

My reference to Qld earlier, I should explain... I was directing that at someone called Welsh Exile I think it is, who was busy telling us he voted Libs because the unions were going to take everyone's jobs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 11:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 2:54 am
Posts: 174
Location: wheelabarrowback
Thomas wrote:
I spent a good chunk of Saturday night and yesterday trawling through some serious anti-QLD vibes on social media. The vast majority of spiteful musings were from left leaning types in Sydney and Melbourne who were aghast that people would vote differently to them. I'm going out on a limb here when I say many of these people have never been to regional Australia and never will.

I'm in a safe Labor seat which had a large-ish swing to the Greens. I also live in Brisbane. But the issue in regional areas (not just QLD) becomes pretty apparent when you dig in. No jobs, no future and lots of scared people. If the ALP hadn't sat on the fence, then they may have done better. What these people wanted to hear was "we know you're hurting, we'll look after you" They didn't hear that from Shorten. They sure as hell heard that from the LNP.

Bob Brown's Caravan Tour didn't help. The one thing that pisses people off in regional areas is someone waltzing into their town, telling them everything they've known is wrong, offering no solutions and then going onto the next town. I must admit, I would have hated to have been Shorten trying to get his message across while some farkwit with a STOP ADANI sign tries to muscle him off the stage.

In 3 year's time I hope the ALP have learned from this mistake. Get a strong leader (a QLDer would help) and march him north with a united message. It worked for Rudd.


Thanks Thomas.
I have been trying to understand why QLD voted the way they did, so the insight is really appreciated

We are seeing an interesting realignment in Aus politics with working people voting for the Libs.
The old divisions of blue collar v white collar don’t really apply that much any more and it probably explains why the pollsters got it so wrong


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 11:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:02 am
Posts: 3532
The Bob Brown "Caravan of Righteousness" could have been a good thing, if all those activists had travelled north to engage with the locals and have a reasoned and respectful debate about the issues.


We all might all have learned something. Now that would be a big step forward, eh?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 11:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31525
Location: in transit
wamberal99 wrote:
The Bob Brown "Caravan of Righteousness" could have been a good thing, if all those activists had travelled north to engage with the locals and have a reasoned and respectful debate about the issues.


We all might all have learned something. Now that would be a big step forward, eh?


Yeah. That's the sort of thing I was driving at earlier... the earnest motivations for the caravan are all well and good, informed people know we're facing what looks more and more like a severe climate induced environmental breakdown... but trooping into coal country and telling the locals they can't have the promised jobs is just stupid.

The fact those job promises are inflated is lost in the shitstorm.

The idea we could engage a national shift to a healthier energy industry with the promise of jobs attached would have been a good one to throw out there, you reckon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2019 11:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14814
Location: STRAYA!
wamberal99 wrote:
The Bob Brown "Caravan of Righteousness" could have been a good thing, if all those activists had travelled north to engage with the locals and have a reasoned and respectful debate about the issues.


We all might all have learned something. Now that would be a big step forward, eh?


The thing is, there is no one in this country more in touch with the environment than someone who lives off the land. As the LNP MP for Rockhampton said "I've never seen farmers and miners more united"

You can't just go into a place and tell people they are wrong, that everything they know is wrong and that they have to change without offering viable solutions.

"LOL. Just retrain yourselves..."

What kind of advice is that?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 12:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2830
guy smiley wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
I much agree about this. And I have some of the strongest progressive views on this forum. I'm disappointed that another, potentially forward thinking party lost another major election to a low tax support corporates government, but then, from what I've heard, I'm even more frustrated that supposed progressives just don't "get it". Across the anglosphere there is just this terrible culture of sniffing your own farts and demonising the masses who think wrong and eating their own if they aren't the purest of woke BS and intersectional PC politics instead of worrying about how the everyday person feels their needs are and their vision of the country.


You really don't understand the Australian political scene, like a few others here posting from outside... or Queensland. What you have posted there just doesn't apply.

Intersectional PC politics wasn't a factor. The Labor party offered greater tax cuts than the victors to a larger proportion of the electorate. Woke BS is what I see when I read most of your posts.




I think you dismiss his analysis too quickly. The ALP offered greater tax cuts to more people and still lost. So it wasn't anything to do with tax cuts now was it?
I have lost count of the number of times Bill Shorten appeared in photos that just had women in it. All to prove some BS PC moral stance. "Look at us, we are the moral choice" because some or other PC nonsense. Pandering rather than substance. The ALP has climbed so high up the moral mountain that it is out of touch with what mainstream Australians deal with day to day. For a party that claims to represent the working man/woman this moral smug self righteousness is right out of touch. So much so that even the offer of greater tax cuts was not attractive enough to get the everyday Australian voter to vote for them. In the privacy of the polling booth the mainstream conservative Australian was free from scrutiny. And they didn't vote for greater tax cuts.


On a more personal level I am actually quite disappointed that Labor lost. It is time for change. We are now going to enter a third term of Coalition government, and what is even more frightening, is that Labor may not win the next election. Healthy government requires change in order for the swings and balances to be effective. I say disappointed but probably more annoyed that they lost the un-loseable election.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 12:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4426
I listened to Alan Jones on the way to work this morning.
It was interesting.

He was going to do a special piece on Tony - which i missed. I'm glad about that.

----

More broadly:
- before the election there was a view that Barnaby J could be back - is this dead in the water with the big win to Libs & Nats?
- has anyone read / posted any links on why the polls were so far out? I've heard and read commentary but nothing backed up...
- by mentioning Cormann on Saturday night i felt ScoMo was accepting him back into the team after supporting Dutton.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 12:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4426
Clogs wrote:
guy smiley wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
I much agree about this. And I have some of the strongest progressive views on this forum. I'm disappointed that another, potentially forward thinking party lost another major election to a low tax support corporates government, but then, from what I've heard, I'm even more frustrated that supposed progressives just don't "get it". Across the anglosphere there is just this terrible culture of sniffing your own farts and demonising the masses who think wrong and eating their own if they aren't the purest of woke BS and intersectional PC politics instead of worrying about how the everyday person feels their needs are and their vision of the country.


You really don't understand the Australian political scene, like a few others here posting from outside... or Queensland. What you have posted there just doesn't apply.

Intersectional PC politics wasn't a factor. The Labor party offered greater tax cuts than the victors to a larger proportion of the electorate. Woke BS is what I see when I read most of your posts.




I think you dismiss his analysis too quickly. The ALP offered greater tax cuts to more people and still lost. So it wasn't anything to do with tax cuts now was it?
I have lost count of the number of times Bill Shorten appeared in photos that just had women in it. All to prove some BS PC moral stance. "Look at us, we are the moral choice" because some or other PC nonsense. Pandering rather than substance. The ALP has climbed so high up the moral mountain that it is out of touch with what mainstream Australians deal with day to day. For a party that claims to represent the working man/woman this moral smug self righteousness is right out of touch. So much so that even the offer of greater tax cuts was not attractive enough to get the everyday Australian voter to vote for them. In the privacy of the polling booth the mainstream conservative Australian was free from scrutiny. And they didn't vote for greater tax cuts.


On a more personal level I am actually quite disappointed that Labor lost. It is time for change. We are now going to enter a third term of Coalition government, and what is even more frightening, is that Labor may not win the next election. Healthy government requires change in order for the swings and balances to be effective. I say disappointed but probably more annoyed that they lost the un-loseable election.


There's a lot out their that they lost their way on being the party for the worker, or the progressive inner city etc etc (blah blah) - the next of that is that they likely do need to re-think their positioning.

To Thomas's point above do Labor have a good QLD candidate for leader?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 12:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 12:39 pm
Posts: 1543
guy smiley wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
I much agree about this. And I have some of the strongest progressive views on this forum. I'm disappointed that another, potentially forward thinking party lost another major election to a low tax support corporates government, but then, from what I've heard, I'm even more frustrated that supposed progressives just don't "get it". Across the anglosphere there is just this terrible culture of sniffing your own farts and demonising the masses who think wrong and eating their own if they aren't the purest of woke BS and intersectional PC politics instead of worrying about how the everyday person feels their needs are and their vision of the country.


You really don't understand the Australian political scene, like a few others here posting from outside... or Queensland. What you have posted there just doesn't apply.

Intersectional PC politics wasn't a factor. The Labor party offered greater tax cuts than the victors to a larger proportion of the electorate. Woke BS is what I see when I read most of your posts.



Yours have a touch.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 12:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4426
I liked this little gem:

Quote:
"When Scott Morrison talks about quiet Australians, I think he has a significant point. Online, quiet Australians are either lurkers - who observe but do not comment - or are much more likely to comment in 'safe' online third spaces such as a parenting groups or sports forums: non-political online communities, where political talk emerges."


https://www.smh.com.au/federal-election ... 51owf.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 12:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1578
Farva wrote:
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
Admirable for Farva to stick up for his line of work. Much like the Turnbull's supported Alex's renewables business. I find it very hard to believe that there is a place that has 100% sustainable renewables efficiency over tradition power sources to supply energy to their people. Moving to renewables cost money particularly with having to own a property to put a solar panel on and having to rely on base. Australia has the resources internally to support nuclear energy. The French went nuclear in the 70s and are still doing well off that. They export the power that they don't use and make coin out of it.

Im not advocating for rooftop.
Nuclear is not economically viable. This is a fact.
Renewables at 100% are fine when supported by storage such as pumped storage. This creates that baseload.


Nuclear IS expensive.
Sadly it seems the main reason it is expensive is an unbelievable amount of over-regulation.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ts_Forgone

Sadly I don't think there is any likelihood of politics changing to the degree where people will hold nuclear to the same safety standards as other more dangerous forms of generation (i.e all the others).

Pumped hydro is great, way better than batteries, but it requires the right geology, and availability of water.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 12:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 12:24 am
Posts: 755
Location: Sydney (for now)
mdaclarke wrote:

You are also right about the politics. I actually consider myself quite a green person but I have right of centre politics. The Green party seems to think that Green = Socialist. It is a real shame there isn't a right of centre Green party. I would add a strong military to your winning policy wishlist as most voters are patriotic and like to see a strong military.


This is a good point, the green revolution is far more likely to succeed through a technology-driven, R&D focused innovation which create better batteries, more productive sources etc. It is unlikely to succeed through heavy-handed, top-down state intervention.

Further, I have no idea why Anglosphere green parties have to wrap up environmentalism with extreme left wing policies as it's gravely off-putting to most of the electorate. Is it possible to, perhaps, make R&D tax deductible form EBIT whilst not insisting on open borders and abolishing world institutions like NATO, IMF and WTO. As long as the greens continue to be fringe lunatics on most issues, their appeal will never improve.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 12:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5769
So the Libs have changed PM three times due to bad polling figures only to find out the polling figures a farking useless and Labor primary vote is down 34%

Who would have thought

Antony Green gave a pretty good explanation of how the disappearance of the landlines makes it near impossible to get the same level of accuracy from polling as we are used to, they used to be able to call landlines in specific electorates - no more.

So I would be highly sceptical in the future of any polling being anymore than a guess


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 12:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18082
Green is right, calling landlines in specific electorates was very handy.

However ...

_fatprop wrote:
So I would be highly sceptical in the future of any polling being anymore than a guess


This is a sweeping statement.

There are other ways to skin the cat


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 12:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21281
guy smiley wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
I much agree about this. And I have some of the strongest progressive views on this forum. I'm disappointed that another, potentially forward thinking party lost another major election to a low tax support corporates government, but then, from what I've heard, I'm even more frustrated that supposed progressives just don't "get it". Across the anglosphere there is just this terrible culture of sniffing your own farts and demonising the masses who think wrong and eating their own if they aren't the purest of woke BS and intersectional PC politics instead of worrying about how the everyday person feels their needs are and their vision of the country.


You really don't understand the Australian political scene, like a few others here posting from outside... or Queensland. What you have posted there just doesn't apply.


You're right I don't. Which is why I'm happy for people to explain. Which is why I'm reading the thread and only picking up what is being said in commentary elsewhere and here. Though you cut out the bit where I say it's not even the political parties projecting the intersectional stuff towards voters.

Quote:
Intersectional PC politics wasn't a factor. The Labor party offered greater tax cuts than the victors to a larger proportion of the electorate. Woke BS is what I see when I read most of your posts.


LOL I'm not woke, I don't promote oppression points or make false claims about gender pay gaps and stuff. I am a proud 2nd wave feminist which is why I'm against 3rd and 4th wave feminism.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 12:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21281
guy smiley wrote:
wamberal99 wrote:
What an arrogant poop you are, Guy.


I've been having the odd disagreement with EDF on exactly these lines for ages. What I see from him repeatedly is diving into a discussion and presenting an opinion that doesn't fit the scenario.

I've already suggested where I think the 'left' if you like needs to change here. They're not connecting with the wider electorate and there's more than a trace of moral superiority at the root of that. After reading some FB posts from aghast acquaintances since the result, I'd go further and suggest it's snobbery on the part of many. Thomas' point about the fears of working people is bang on. Knowing that things won't get better under the winners isn't cause to scorn those who voted for them.


This was my point earlier,

Quote:

Across the anglosphere there is just this terrible culture of sniffing your own farts and demonising the masses who think wrong and eating their own if they aren't the purest of woke BS and intersectional PC politics instead of worrying about how the everyday person feels their needs are and their vision of the country.



and yet you literally claimed this wasn't the case. Sure you can say the woke bit wasn't an australian issue but is the rest of my point not understanding the situation here?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15940
Location: STRAYA PLUM
Caley_Red wrote:
mdaclarke wrote:

You are also right about the politics. I actually consider myself quite a green person but I have right of centre politics. The Green party seems to think that Green = Socialist. It is a real shame there isn't a right of centre Green party. I would add a strong military to your winning policy wishlist as most voters are patriotic and like to see a strong military.


This is a good point, the green revolution is far more likely to succeed through a technology-driven, R&D focused innovation which create better batteries, more productive sources etc. It is unlikely to succeed through heavy-handed, top-down state intervention.

Further, I have no idea why Anglosphere green parties have to wrap up environmentalism with extreme left wing policies as it's gravely off-putting to most of the electorate. Is it possible to, perhaps, make R&D tax deductible form EBIT whilst not insisting on open borders and abolishing world institutions like NATO, IMF and WTO. As long as the greens continue to be fringe lunatics on most issues, their appeal will never improve.


This is interesting.
I dont necessarily agree that the policies put forward by the Greens in Australia are all that lunatic.
Here are there policies: https://greens.org.au/policy
There are a handful in there that I dont agree with (GMOs for instance). But most are quite sensible. I do tend to think that the way the policy is sold can be quite condescending, and there are certainly some fringe members, but the actual policy is reasonably sound and the leadership is now pretty decent and rational.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15940
Location: STRAYA PLUM
merlin the happy pig wrote:
Farva wrote:
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
Admirable for Farva to stick up for his line of work. Much like the Turnbull's supported Alex's renewables business. I find it very hard to believe that there is a place that has 100% sustainable renewables efficiency over tradition power sources to supply energy to their people. Moving to renewables cost money particularly with having to own a property to put a solar panel on and having to rely on base. Australia has the resources internally to support nuclear energy. The French went nuclear in the 70s and are still doing well off that. They export the power that they don't use and make coin out of it.

Im not advocating for rooftop.
Nuclear is not economically viable. This is a fact.
Renewables at 100% are fine when supported by storage such as pumped storage. This creates that baseload.


Nuclear IS expensive.
Sadly it seems the main reason it is expensive is an unbelievable amount of over-regulation.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ts_Forgone

Sadly I don't think there is any likelihood of politics changing to the degree where people will hold nuclear to the same safety standards as other more dangerous forms of generation (i.e all the others).

Pumped hydro is great, way better than batteries, but it requires the right geology, and availability of water.


Nuclear's cost is down to decommissioning and commissioning, and you are right, the costs there are due to regulation. It has tough regulation for a reason, without that regulation, the safety standards that it now achieves wouldn't be there. And the cost of a failure of a nuclear plant is exponentially larger than the cost of failure of say a wind farm. A wind turbine might catch fire, and then that needs to be replaced. A meltdown in a nuclear facility can render a large area uninhabitable for millennia.

ANU did a study and found around 25,000 suitable sites in Australia from a geological perspective. Also dont get caught up with the water issue, a pumped hydro system is a closed system, it doesnt require a river, it requires a basin (and this is one that can be filled) to create the storage at the top of a hill and one at the bottom. It is incredibly well suited to Australia as the geology is not seismic and there is ample land available.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:02 am
Posts: 3532
Farva,

What is the Greens policy on transitioning workers in coal mining regions, and their assets (the family home, for example) to the places where there will be new, green, jobs?


What about people who do not want to go? What about the communities that exist now?


These are complex and difficult problems. Not amenable to simple, easy to remember, solutions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 1:50 am
Posts: 3802
wamberal99 wrote:


The ALP is going to have to take some tough decisions, and bring some new talent into the House. People who actually have some real life working experience, not just more party hacks.


This applies to the Liberals as well. Very few have has a real career that anyone else would recognise.
Don't forget, they did not expect to win at all - those spineless MPs who jumped ship before the election...they must be very displeased with the result.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15940
Location: STRAYA PLUM
wamberal99 wrote:
Farva,

What is the Greens policy on transitioning workers in coal mining regions, and their assets (the family home, for example) to the places where there will be new, green, jobs?


What about people who do not want to go? What about the communities that exist now?


These are complex and difficult problems. Not amenable to simple, easy to remember, solutions.


Wambers, the Greens will not be forming government and so have not developed in depth policy to address these. Frankly, given many of their members, I think a Greens led government would be scary.
However, the point was made that they were fringe and lunatic with their policy and I dont actually think they are. Their policy aims are reasonable IMO. They arent far left, they are centre left.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4426
Pat the Ex Mat wrote:
wamberal99 wrote:


The ALP is going to have to take some tough decisions, and bring some new talent into the House. People who actually have some real life working experience, not just more party hacks.


This applies to the Liberals as well. Very few have has a real career that anyone else would recognise.
Don't forget, they did not expect to win at all - those spineless MPs who jumped ship before the election...they must be very displeased with the result.


I thought Julie was looked radiant on Saturday night .... a future ambassador for sure...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14814
Location: STRAYA!
Pat the Ex Mat wrote:
wamberal99 wrote:


The ALP is going to have to take some tough decisions, and bring some new talent into the House. People who actually have some real life working experience, not just more party hacks.


This applies to the Liberals as well. Very few have has a real career that anyone else would recognise.
Don't forget, they did not expect to win at all - those spineless MPs who jumped ship before the election...they must be very displeased with the result.


Pyne looked ecstatic. I get the feeling he left politics because he no longer identified with his party.

Now he's just having fun.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7173
It's a rock and a hard place for centre-left parties I think. The perception facing them in the face is that the traditional party of the coalmines is now anti-coalmine. The party that traditionally fought for the working class now goes silent when those working class jobs are threatened to be taken away because climate change. Seems to be one of the vibes I am getting from the election. Trump did a similar hit job in the US election.

In NZ I think one of these days the old Labour coalmining and forestry heartlands of the West Coast will eventually vote National. I think the only reason it remains in the red corner is because of the MP they have there at the moment. Once he goes, it's all over I reckon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5769
Farva wrote:
merlin the happy pig wrote:
Farva wrote:
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
Admirable for Farva to stick up for his line of work. Much like the Turnbull's supported Alex's renewables business. I find it very hard to believe that there is a place that has 100% sustainable renewables efficiency over tradition power sources to supply energy to their people. Moving to renewables cost money particularly with having to own a property to put a solar panel on and having to rely on base. Australia has the resources internally to support nuclear energy. The French went nuclear in the 70s and are still doing well off that. They export the power that they don't use and make coin out of it.

Im not advocating for rooftop.
Nuclear is not economically viable. This is a fact.
Renewables at 100% are fine when supported by storage such as pumped storage. This creates that baseload.


Nuclear IS expensive.
Sadly it seems the main reason it is expensive is an unbelievable amount of over-regulation.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ts_Forgone

Sadly I don't think there is any likelihood of politics changing to the degree where people will hold nuclear to the same safety standards as other more dangerous forms of generation (i.e all the others).

Pumped hydro is great, way better than batteries, but it requires the right geology, and availability of water.


Nuclear's cost is down to decommissioning and commissioning, and you are right, the costs there are due to regulation. It has tough regulation for a reason, without that regulation, the safety standards that it now achieves wouldn't be there. And the cost of a failure of a nuclear plant is exponentially larger than the cost of failure of say a wind farm. A wind turbine might catch fire, and then that needs to be replaced. A meltdown in a nuclear facility can render a large area uninhabitable for millennia.

ANU did a study and found around 25,000 suitable sites in Australia from a geological perspective. Also dont get caught up with the water issue, a pumped hydro system is a closed system, it doesnt require a river, it requires a basin (and this is one that can be filled) to create the storage at the top of a hill and one at the bottom. It is incredibly well suited to Australia as the geology is not seismic and there is ample land available.


The French worked it out and have had no issues, the high build costs are often down to bespoke design, the French standardised design and have cheap power


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2830
_fatprop wrote:
Farva wrote:
merlin the happy pig wrote:
Farva wrote:
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
Admirable for Farva to stick up for his line of work. Much like the Turnbull's supported Alex's renewables business. I find it very hard to believe that there is a place that has 100% sustainable renewables efficiency over tradition power sources to supply energy to their people. Moving to renewables cost money particularly with having to own a property to put a solar panel on and having to rely on base. Australia has the resources internally to support nuclear energy. The French went nuclear in the 70s and are still doing well off that. They export the power that they don't use and make coin out of it.

Im not advocating for rooftop.
Nuclear is not economically viable. This is a fact.
Renewables at 100% are fine when supported by storage such as pumped storage. This creates that baseload.


Nuclear IS expensive.
Sadly it seems the main reason it is expensive is an unbelievable amount of over-regulation.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ts_Forgone

Sadly I don't think there is any likelihood of politics changing to the degree where people will hold nuclear to the same safety standards as other more dangerous forms of generation (i.e all the others).

Pumped hydro is great, way better than batteries, but it requires the right geology, and availability of water.


Nuclear's cost is down to decommissioning and commissioning, and you are right, the costs there are due to regulation. It has tough regulation for a reason, without that regulation, the safety standards that it now achieves wouldn't be there. And the cost of a failure of a nuclear plant is exponentially larger than the cost of failure of say a wind farm. A wind turbine might catch fire, and then that needs to be replaced. A meltdown in a nuclear facility can render a large area uninhabitable for millennia.

ANU did a study and found around 25,000 suitable sites in Australia from a geological perspective. Also dont get caught up with the water issue, a pumped hydro system is a closed system, it doesnt require a river, it requires a basin (and this is one that can be filled) to create the storage at the top of a hill and one at the bottom. It is incredibly well suited to Australia as the geology is not seismic and there is ample land available.


The French worked it out and have had no issues, the high build costs are often down to bespoke design, the French standardised design and have cheap power



They probably also run their ships and submarines with nuclear power too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15940
Location: STRAYA PLUM
_fatprop wrote:
Farva wrote:
merlin the happy pig wrote:
Farva wrote:
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
Admirable for Farva to stick up for his line of work. Much like the Turnbull's supported Alex's renewables business. I find it very hard to believe that there is a place that has 100% sustainable renewables efficiency over tradition power sources to supply energy to their people. Moving to renewables cost money particularly with having to own a property to put a solar panel on and having to rely on base. Australia has the resources internally to support nuclear energy. The French went nuclear in the 70s and are still doing well off that. They export the power that they don't use and make coin out of it.

Im not advocating for rooftop.
Nuclear is not economically viable. This is a fact.
Renewables at 100% are fine when supported by storage such as pumped storage. This creates that baseload.


Nuclear IS expensive.
Sadly it seems the main reason it is expensive is an unbelievable amount of over-regulation.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ts_Forgone

Sadly I don't think there is any likelihood of politics changing to the degree where people will hold nuclear to the same safety standards as other more dangerous forms of generation (i.e all the others).

Edit: Its not the high build costs. it is the high decommissioning costs that pushes up the LCOE.

Pumped hydro is great, way better than batteries, but it requires the right geology, and availability of water.


Nuclear's cost is down to decommissioning and commissioning, and you are right, the costs there are due to regulation. It has tough regulation for a reason, without that regulation, the safety standards that it now achieves wouldn't be there. And the cost of a failure of a nuclear plant is exponentially larger than the cost of failure of say a wind farm. A wind turbine might catch fire, and then that needs to be replaced. A meltdown in a nuclear facility can render a large area uninhabitable for millennia.

ANU did a study and found around 25,000 suitable sites in Australia from a geological perspective. Also dont get caught up with the water issue, a pumped hydro system is a closed system, it doesnt require a river, it requires a basin (and this is one that can be filled) to create the storage at the top of a hill and one at the bottom. It is incredibly well suited to Australia as the geology is not seismic and there is ample land available.


The French worked it out and have had no issues, the high build costs are often down to bespoke design, the French standardised design and have cheap power


Maybe. I think its mostly down to tighter safety standards pushing up prices.
I will say I am keen to see nuclear available to Australia. I think if the price issues can be resolved its a great solution. I just dont see the price issue being sorted. That is another policy area I dont agree with the Greens.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31525
Location: in transit
eldanielfire wrote:
Sure you can say the woke bit wasn't an australian issue but is the rest of my point not understanding the situation here?


I just don't like you. You smell funny.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 2:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31525
Location: in transit
kiap wrote:
Green is right, calling landlines in specific electorates was very handy.

However ...

_fatprop wrote:
So I would be highly sceptical in the future of any polling being anymore than a guess


This is a sweeping statement.

There are other ways to skin the cat


this is illuminating...

Quote:
The above graph shows that the 20% of the polling booths with the fewest people with a graduate degree saw a swing of nearly 7% to the Coalition. On the other end of the spectrum, the most educated fifth of polling booths- actually swung 0.5% towards Labor (two party preferred).

How I did it: first I got this morning’s results for each polling booth in the country from the electoral commission and looked at the population in the Microburb directly surrounding it, making the assumption that if you live within a few blocks of a polling booth, that will be the one you vote at.

Then I gave it over to the machine to find the drivers of the swing. Out of the many tens of thousands of potential predictors I’ve collected over the years, university education came up #1. It has a correlation of -0.4 with a negligible P value (6061 polling booths could be matched and had enough data).

A pattern of bias among experts

The core problem is that when humans ask specific questions in surveys or of databases, they are starting with bias. Whereas the “big data” approach to throw in as much data as possible and let the machine find the patterns.

In this case, survey targets no longer reliably answer land line calls and even when called on their mobiles, most don’t agree to be surveyed. So it was left to the experts to try and make the surveys representative. Chances are they weren’t entirely empirical about this and relied on their intuition.

My work analysing the data of big Australian consumer brands has routinely uncovered this systematic bias: market researchers and analysts make sense of numbers using a mix of stats and intuition. That intuition is always informed by their own life and experiences. They are mostly cosmopolitan, don’t encounter uneducated people so their voice is not properly extracted or smoothed over as noise.

There are many factors at play of course and I’m certainly not saying that all the Left has to do is send people to university. In the corporate world, I encounter lots of assumptions about them like that they are simply poorer versions of us and all they want to do is be like us. But these forgotten people have their own values, and don’t understand the world in the same way.

Nor am I saying intuition is worth nothing. It’s very valuable in coming up with hypotheses. But eventually these assumptions are tested in the marketplace and the polling booth.

The two Australias

In predicting behaviour these days, my models end up dividing Australia into two classes: a university educated, affluent, multicultural, cosmopolitan one on one side and on the other have to be very delicately described – the people who go against the brand’s values. But every mainstream brand should strive to understand the latter, not least ones that are supposed to champion the working class.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23900 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 589, 590, 591, 592, 593, 594, 595 ... 598  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bayern, Blake, BokJock, clydecloggie, crash 669, danny_fitz, danthefan, diarm, Diego, Floppykid, Frodder, Google Adsense [Bot], happyhooker, irishrugbyua, Leffe, Mad-Scientist, Man In Black, Mr Fedora, MunsterMan!!!!!, obelixtim, penguin, sewa, terryfinch, The Sun God, Toro, Trig, Trostan, WestCymruPanther and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group