Kevin Rudd announces Maximum 15pc emissions cut by 2020 (1 Viewer)

[boris]

Nah, I think he means per capita (and on a per capita basis, it's pretty big). Still, we can do better.

Oh ok, i didnt hear it very well, it was just on the triple j news.

In the meantime, im going to burn some fossil fuels for the fun of it, take that 5% cut.

 

[Lentern]

I wonder how history will remember Rudd. Mr Inbetween? Trying to satisfy every interest.

No they'll remember him as the conviction politician, unafraid to wear the tough decisions, all gumption no gloss, don't ask me how but history will find a way, look a some newspaper clippings from Howards premiership then look at how history has re-written him. He is a weak,populist mouthpiece who spins everything like a windmill and isn't afraid to do what is right even if it's unpopular who has no interest in pandering to influential bodies and who tells it like it is rather than bowing to the spin doctors.

 

[Silver Persian]

Oh ok, i didnt hear it very well, it was just on the triple j news.

In the meantime, im going to burn some fossil fuels for the fun of it, take that 5% cut.

I think you're both right actually. I'm pretty sure the 5% cut is taken from 1990 levels (or something)

Edit: It is 2000 levels

 

[Graney]

You can't seriously believe this is a good policy.

 

[Silver Persian]

You can't seriously believe this is a good policy.

What is your proposal, sir?

 

[Graney]

some scientism dude yesterday said that this was actually a huge cut because of the fact it was based off 2000 levels or someshit and in reality its like 20% cut?

Our population is forecast to grow, unlike those in european countries, so our per-capita emissions cuts are as good as europes apparently- matching the 34% or whatever they're doing in parts of europe.

 

[Graney]

What is your proposal, sir?

I was referring to Lenterns post.

I don't know. It's a difficult issue. I like cutting emissions, but I also hate government intervention. I think it is possible to cut emissions without load based licensing or anything of the sort... but load-based licencing is the best way to go if you must.

I would be happy with any policy that is not this one. Introduce proper, serious emissions targets or don't bother at all.

 

[Lentern]

You can't seriously believe this is a good policy.

No I think it's terrible policy, the point in which we differ is not on the quality of Rudd's premiership which we both have little patience for but how we believe history will rewrite it.

I can see the documentary interviews now,

Kevin: We had the greens threatening to withold preferences and to be honest it would have been very easy to just say, yeah we'll slash them all. But it wouldn't have been the right policy, we needed to find a solution that balanced the economic needs with the environmental needs and unfortunately Senator Brown wasn't interested in that.

Swan: It took alot of courage to take on the greens at that time because the way they were growing their preferences could well have made them kingmakers by thenext election. But Kevin wasn't having any of it.

Gillard: I remember saying to the prime minister, look just cut them, it'll be the end of the greens and we'll have the security to really govern propperly once that happened but he told me, Julia, it's not the right policy.

Garrett: I don't know why we didn't cut them more, it just gave ammo to all those saying we were no diferentt to Howard. We really should have cut them.

 

[Graney]

I think it'd be better to put up a real policy and have the coalition shamed and humiliated when they blocked it. It would really hurt Turnbull's credentials as a progressive leader. It would be great politics, and would lead the way to the coalition being forced to conceed greater cuts.

 

[Lentern]

I think it'd be better to put up a real policy and have the coalition shamed and humiliated when they blocked it. It would really hurt Turnbull's credentials as a progressive leader. It would be great politics, and would lead the way to the coalition being forced to conceed greater cuts.

It would be great policy but terrible politics. There's a reason our politicians have become typecast as greying, boring, middle aged populist spin doctors, they're the ones we vote for. You get someone who decides they plan on shaking things up abit like Downer or Latham and they get destroyed.

 

[Silver Persian]

I think you're underestimating the significance of the 5% cut. It certainly doesn't seem very heroic, but in per capita terms (as Kwayera said), Australia will be putting in an effort equal to that of Europe...

And it could rise to 15% if (unlikely) a strong international treaty is created in Denmark.

 

[badquinton304]

I think you're underestimating the significance of the 5% cut. It certainly doesn't seem very heroic, but in per capita terms (as Kwayera said), Australia will be putting in an effort equal to that of Europe...

And it could rise to 15% if (unlikely) a strong international treaty is created in Denmark.

Actually it is significantly more per capita than the EU.

 

[Silver Persian]

I think the main problem with the policy is not so much the 5% target, as much as the fact that Ruddles and co are trying to cushion the impact of the CETS by providing everyone who will be effected with cash handouts or free carbon emission certificates. The whole point of the policy is to make emitting greenhous gases more expensive, and these handouts undermine that

 

[Trefoil]

5% is an absolute bullshit level. It's designed purely to cockblock Turnbull so that if he complains, he looks like he doesn't care about the climate (Which he probably doesn't), but if he accepts it, Rudd wins.

Smart politics, horrible for the future of our environment (and hence economy).

In fact, with all the subsidies he's given to the polluters with this, I'd say we'll see them actually polluting more.

I've cut Rudd a lot of slack up till now, but with him fucking up on both the Internet and the environment, he hasn't got much wiggle room left in my head. And from what I can tell, he also has a horrible population growth policy: basically import more immigrants and pretend we don't have a population ageing problem (same as Howard).

 

[Trefoil]

Lindsay Tanner just lost his seat.

His seat is Mayo, right?

It's funny because Rudd is going to lose his most trusted party member (aside from Gillard) to the Greens.

 

[jb_nc]

His seat is Mayo, right?

It's funny because Rudd is going to lose his most trusted party member (aside from Gillard) to the Greens.

Mayo is in SA and was the seat of Alexander Downer, now held by James Briggs.

Lindsay Tanner has Melbourne in VIC. I think Libs re-direct their prefs to Greens (looking at 07) so lol, he's gone.

 

[Silver Persian]

5% is an absolute bullshit level. It's designed purely to cockblock Turnbull so that if he complains, he looks like he doesn't care about the climate (Which he probably doesn't), but if he accepts it, Rudd wins.

Read everything that has been said in the past two pages and explain to me why 5% is a bullshit cut.

I agree that subsidies for anyone and everyone effected by the carbon emission trading scheme is retarded.

 

[Lentern]

I've cut Rudd a lot of slack up till now, but with him fucking up on both the Internet and the environment, he hasn't got much wiggle room left in my head. And from what I can tell, he also has a horrible population growth policy: basically import more immigrants and pretend we don't have a population ageing problem (same as Howard).

I'm telling you people go into mainstream politics for power and Rudd is no exception to the rule. He wants a nice big population irrespective of the ageing population and the potential drain it could have on the natural environment because a big population in a country as organised as Australia means a big economy and a big economy means Australia becomes relevant on the world stage. He wants to sit at the grownups table basically.

 

[impervious182]

But he is bringing change! All the school students will get govt laptops to keep. And they're implementing the internet filter so that we're all safe from unwanted internet material!

Hahahahahahahaha!

One of the funnier comments on the BoS... though, I take it you were being sarcastic. I wonder how many of these laptops will break down in the first year, and how many students will be neglectful of these laptops.

A huge waste of money, which could have been used in more important ways and areas.

 

[Myse]

Cutting emissions by 5% won't make a difference.
What's the point?

It's a waste of money and time.