Global Warming | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Global Warming

Liverpool said:
Its not a Willy Wonka's chocolate factory, I can assure you :cutelaugh

so dirty is cute and laughable? Im pretty sure a Tuvaluan, clinging on to his floating kitchen table, would have a strong case to mount that a first world, big business man cute laughing at polluting and global warming is about as tasteful as George Pell cute laughing at a kid who got rooted by a priest. Matter of fact, if your looking at the big picture, you could probably find it more disturbing. Over to you Livsy.
 
tigergollywog said:
so dirty is cute and laughable? Im pretty sure a Tuvaluan, clinging on to his floating kitchen table, would have a strong case to mount that a first world, big business man cute laughing at polluting and global warming is about as tasteful as George Pell cute laughing at a kid who got rooted by a priest. Matter of fact, if your looking at the big picture, you could probably find it more disturbing. Over to you Livsy.

Well, I can only laugh when I read the melodramatic doomsday picture you paint.

"Tuvaluan, clinging on to his floating kitchen table".....and people wonder why climate change isn't being taken seriously :-X
 
Liverpool said:
As I have said many times already...if you really think our pitiful carbon tax and the carbon we emit is going to change the world, then you are deluded.
I would be more supportive if the world's biggest polluters were also in on the game but they are not.
They are enjoying companies moving offshore or sub-contracting work to their companies....whether it be manufacturing, procrument, call-centres, banking...you name it.

And I have said many times already, to say 'the carbon tax hasn't worked' is either missing the point, or disingenuously setting up a straw man. The CT is the the first baby step toward halting 200 years of externalised pollution, and resultant cheap energy and exponentially rising emmisions. You have to start somewhere. With the emphasis on the 'have to'.
 
tigersnake said:
And I have said many times already, to say 'the carbon tax hasn't worked' is either missing the point, or disingenuously setting up a straw man. The CT is the the first baby step toward halting 200 years of externalised pollution, and resultant cheap energy and exponentially rising emmisions. You have to start somewhere. With the emphasis on the 'have to'.

Livsys logic is the same as the grade 2 kid who gets sprung by the teacher with his *smile* in his hand behind the shelter shed. He points to his mates, also with dicks in hand, and says "but they were doing it too". Id bung a cute laugh in if the stakes wernt so high.
 
tigersnake said:
And I have said many times already, to say 'the carbon tax hasn't worked' is either missing the point, or disingenuously setting up a straw man. The CT is the the first baby step toward halting 200 years of externalised pollution, and resultant cheap energy and exponentially rising emmisions. You have to start somewhere. With the emphasis on the 'have to'.

Unless the big emitters, such as China, India, the USA, Canada, Russia have a similar tax (or even stricter due to the amount of emissions they emit) then all GIllard has us doing is pissing on a bushfire.

Baby steps to ruining our economy and whatever industry we have left here, thats all it is.
 
Liverpool said:
Unless the big emitters, such as China, India, the USA, Canada, Russia have a similar tax (or even stricter due to the amount of emissions they emit) then all GIllard has us doing is p!ssing on a bushfire.

Baby steps to ruining our economy and whatever industry we have left here, thats all it is.

Funny, your idol Johnny H gave the economy a big tick only this week.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/opinion/political-news/resilient-economy-in-better-shape-than-most-says-howard-20130514-2jke5.html

Oh, China is heading off down the ETS road as well. Baby steps towards combatting climate change and CO2 emissions?

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/world/where-theres-smoke-theres-china-20130507-2j5lk.html

Perhaps your company better rethink its decision to send manufacturing to China.
 
Liverpool said:
Unless the big emitters, such as China, India, the USA, Canada, Russia have a similar tax (or even stricter due to the amount of emissions they emit) then all GIllard has us doing is p!ssing on a bushfire.

Baby steps to ruining our economy and whatever industry we have left here, thats all it is.

"But they are doing it too ....." :brickwall
 
antman said:
Funny, your idol Johnny H gave the economy a big tick only this week.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/opinion/political-news/resilient-economy-in-better-shape-than-most-says-howard-20130514-2jke5.html

Oh, China is heading off down the ETS road as well. Baby steps towards combatting climate change and CO2 emissions?

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/world/where-theres-smoke-theres-china-20130507-2j5lk.html

Perhaps your company better rethink its decision to send manufacturing to China.

Firstly, Howard said the economy was in good shape compared to Japan, USA, and most of Europe.
I agree with him.
But I wouldn't say that is anything to brag about either, especially during a resources boom and having had a healthy surplus circa 2006-2007 now staring down a $20-billion abyss.

Anyway, I disgress...

China having an ETS? :cutelaugh
Please don't make me laugh Antman...anyone worth their pinch of salt knows that any Chinese carbon tax or trading scheme has more holes in it than a Swiss cheese.
It will be small, negligible, but there to try and appease certain factions...but it will not be a threat to their manufacturing or economy.

Example:

China may soon get a carbon tax. But how effective will it be?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/02/21/china-may-soon-get-a-carbon-tax-but-will-it-make-any-difference/
 
Liverpool said:
Unless the big emitters, such as China, India, the USA, Canada, Russia have a similar tax (or even stricter due to the amount of emissions they emit) then all GIllard has us doing is p!ssing on a bushfire.

Baby steps to ruining our economy and whatever industry we have left here, thats all it is.

This discussion is pointless, I'll say that global emissions trading is inevitable, and getting in on the ground floor is smart, especially for a small nation. And you'll post up the laughy emoticon and say 'but China aren't doing it'. (they are, but you'll ignore or refute that). Great fun
 
Liverpool said:
China having an ETS? :cutelaugh
Please don't make me laugh Antman...anyone worth their pinch of salt knows that any Chinese carbon tax or trading scheme has more holes in it than a Swiss cheese.
It will be small, negligible, but there to try and appease certain factions...but it will not be a threat to their manufacturing or economy.

Are you fair dinkum so naive as to think that China, or anyone, would bring in a sledghammer, greenies dream scheme? Dou you understand the concept of 'making a start?', or 'transitioning?'. Suppose not.
 
tigersnake said:
Are you fair dinkum so naive as to think that China, or anyone, would bring in a sledghammer, greenies dream scheme? Dou you understand the concept of 'making a start?', or 'transitioning?'. Suppose not.

If you really believe they are "transitioning" then I think you may be the naive one mate.

Anyways, nothing changes...we should be 'transitioning' after these bigger emitters have made some concrete commitments themselves otherwise any headway we make is superfluous to the global climate.
 
Liverpool said:
I don't know what line of work you are in or what company you work for, but you're certainly not experienced in big business with a naive comment like this.
Of course companies, especially bigger ones, will cut costs as much as they can and I would say with the majority of them, the budgets are tighter each year 9especially with the current economic climate)
Companies here now see investing their capital in new infrastructures in cheaper areas...whether that be in Asia, Africa, or even the USA...they will not waste a lot of money in 'old' areas like Australia, where they won't get the return.
Its a band-aid job here. Patch it up so we can keep going but let's invest our money where we will make profit, where we can grow in new markets.
You may not like it or agree with it, but thats the reality.

Now with a carbon tax here, companies are expected to invest money in new technologies or new processes, which usually require new buildings, machines, and infrastructures....just to make the same product they make now! Where is the return there? This money could be spent better elsewhere in a new plant in China or the USA and help set the company up for the next 50 years.

You talk about growth...but to grow you need profit...you need capital...you need investors...you need money.
You need to diversify, invest in new markets, invest in new infrastructure....so you get a return, get a profit, and grow again.

You ask why does profit have to grow each year....its no different to why we expect a payrise each year (or want a payrise each year)...we all want to do better and improve.
There is nothing wrong with that!

I don't mind if you try to pass me off as naive Livers. We have a very different ideology but that doesn't mean I don't understand how the world works, just that I don't accept that it is the only way it can work. Your analogy is deeply flawed by the way, perhaps because you didn't think it through. A business in profit can afford a larger wage bill year on year even if its profit is static Livers, surely even at the big end of town you can still figure out that profit means a growing bottom line. It is GROWING profit I was talking about. That is the mathematical fallacy. Profit is growth, growing profit, is growth on top of growth. And it is usually unsustainable.
 
KnightersRevenge said:
Profit is growth, growing profit, is growth on top of growth. And it is usually unsustainable.

Correct, and a company that chooses to axe local jobs because they haven't met their 'growth' targets are obviously more sympathetic to the needs of shareholders than they are to the very people who have helped build the business. It's no wonder that there is very little loyalty left in the workplace, the notion of 'a job for life' is all but a distant memory.
 
KnightersRevenge said:
It is GROWING profit I was talking about. That is the mathematical fallacy. Profit is growth, growing profit, is growth on top of growth. And it is usually unsustainable.

20080213DRA.png


Looking pretty sustainable at the moment.
21 years and counting.

Also, the profits (and growing profit) allows them to diversify into all sorts of other areas and markets, which allows them to keep this growing profit on an upward trend.
 
Liverpool said:
China having an ETS? :cutelaugh
Please don't make me laugh Antman...anyone worth their pinch of salt knows that any Chinese carbon tax or trading scheme has more holes in it than a Swiss cheese.
It will be small, negligible, but there to try and appease certain factions...but it will not be a threat to their manufacturing or economy.

Example:

China may soon get a carbon tax. But how effective will it be?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/02/21/china-may-soon-get-a-carbon-tax-but-will-it-make-any-difference/

So first you say we shouldn't do it as others don't. Then you say they are doing it but it won't be effective. Always a reason to do nothing eh Livers?

The Chinese and others always see these sorts of "constraints" as opportunities anyway. They see the big picture - adapt, and capitalise. Unfortunately manufacturing industries in Australia tend to look to the past nostalgically - and then move offshore due to a failure of planning.
 
Liverpool said:
If you really believe they are "transitioning" then I think you may be the naive one mate.

Anyways, nothing changes...we should be 'transitioning' after these bigger emitters have made some concrete commitments themselves otherwise any headway we make is superfluous to the global climate.

See my above point. With your reactive philosophy we will always one step or more behind on technology, policy and process. Naive is a word that comes to mind.
 
antman said:
See my above point. With your reactive philosophy we will always one step or more behind on technology, policy and process. Naive is a word that comes to mind.

Too true, our reluctance to adjust the MRET has seen many of our fledgling renewable companies shipped off to China, a monumental blunder in hindsight. China is now the leading manufacturer of wind turbines in the world, they are the biggest adopter of renewable technologies and they have even piloted a program which will see an entire city powered on renewable energy.

It's so common place for the Liberals to trot out the idea that China is the bad guy therefore we should just sit on our hands. These excuses simply don't hold up to close scrutiny and if anything, they are holding as back as the world shifts to a new energy paradigm.
 
And for those who are still championing the 'climate change is crap' cause, read this article.

http://www.theage.com.au/environment/climate-change/not-much-climate-change-doubt-science-says-20130515-2jmup.html