Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
The Green Hypocrites

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern
 
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
thebaldfacts 



Joined: 02 Aug 2007


PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 3:13 pm
Post subject: The Green HypocritesReply with quote

The carbon tax is Gone, there will be no ETS under a Government that Tony Abbott leads, so it seems that the only game in town is Direct Action.

So what is the reaction of those Greens who claim the moral high ground and warn of calamity if global warming is not addressed?

It seems their position is either do it their way (given that they are the enlightened ones who know all) or they prefer nothing at all.

Guess global warming is not such a big problem after all if they prefer nothing.

HYPOCRiTES.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 4:19 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Their problem is not that "direct action" is not their preferred option. Their problem is that it isn't a meaningful option at all. In its current state, "direct action" is a white elephant that has been designed to be just that. Everyone, including the Abbott government, knows that it's a joke. The only people who support it are climate sceptics like you. Wonder why that is?

I'll grant that the Greens were foolish to vote down Rudd's ETS—not because it was a particularly effective means of doing our bit to tackle climate change (it wasn't), but because it was about as good as Gillard's carbon tax, which is better than nothing. A compromise there might have at least led to an ongoing climate change program today that could later be expanded. "Direct action", on the other hand, is not even a compromise of a compromise. It's an insult to everyone's intelligence.

At least by voting it down, the Greens can hope for some international pressure to be brought to bear on the Abbott government so that it actually institutes a scheme that means something. That seems unlikely, however, because the Abbott government has already made a cast-iron commitment to do absolutely nothing.

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
Wokko Pisces

Come and take it.


Joined: 04 Oct 2005


PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 4:56 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Tell me what China and the USA are doing and then get back to me about our contribution. We're a minnow that thinks we're a Shark, a yapping pekinese that thinks it's a mastiff. Nobody gives a shit what we do, but I'm happy that the fact it's all partisan political bullshit has had an ugly light shined onto it. Very few people understand, or even have the faintest idea what Direct Action means but, while possibly not as effective as the Carbon Tax stick, an incentive to lower carbon rather than a tax for producing it seems like sane plan leveraging the same motivation for business in a different way.

The only reason the Greens are not supporting it is because it's not THEIR policy and they get no political traction if it works. They're not an environmentalist party at all, they're a socialist party in a Green suit.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 5:17 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^ That's nonsense because the Greens have of course been at the forefront of the Australian environmental movement for 30 years now. The fact that they are also socially progressive (socialist, lol) is hardly hidden; it's what makes them more than a single-issue party and is the main reason young inner-city latte-sipping types like me vote for them. Wink

What I find bizarre is that, for all the vitriol flung by right-wingers and News Limited papers, the Greens are a mainstream party on nearly any metric—indeed, more mainstream than the current government, with its right-libertarian streak and flashes of (very) old-world conservatism. I'm all for intelligent radical proposals, but I struggle to see anything in the Greens' policy list that could genuinely be described as "radical". It's all just common sense stuff.

There are many countries in the world where Labor and the Greens could be the two major parties and the Liberals (in their current incarnation) could be a BNP or UKiP collecting 5-10%. Unfortunately, the Libs sacked their David Cameron in 2009 and as a result our country is being led by an antipodean Nigel Farage. (No offence intended to Nigel, wherever he is.)

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
watt price tully Scorpio



Joined: 15 May 2007


PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 5:36 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
^ That's nonsense because the Greens have of course been at the forefront of the Australian environmental movement for 30 years now. The fact that they are also socially progressive (socialist, lol) is hardly hidden; it's what makes them more than a single-issue party and is the main reason young inner-city latte-sipping types like me vote for them. Wink

What I find bizarre is that, for all the vitriol flung by right-wingers and News Limited papers, the Greens are a mainstream party on nearly any metric—indeed, more mainstream than the current government, with its right-libertarian streak and flashes of (very) old-world conservatism. I'm all for intelligent radical proposals, but I struggle to see anything in the Greens' policy list that could genuinely be described as "radical". It's all just common sense stuff.


I woudn't worry too much David when the extreme rabid religious right that has infested the once great Liberal party are trying ever so hard to be amusing.

Sad really.

Speaking of rabid religious right infesting the Liberals, how about this beauty:

(Welcome to the US of Russia baby):

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/16/victorias-attorney-general-to-address-anti-abortion-and-anti-gay-campaigners

Andrews opening & closing the same ceremony & off course good ol' Bernie Finn, Corey Bernadi & their bunch of dangerous nutters

This from Finn: A Victorian politician has said there is “no acceptable reason” for abortion, and claimed that rapists and paedophiles used it (abortion) to get rid of the evidence of their crimes.

Surely there's a sanity clause for membership of the Liberal party?

_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Wokko Pisces

Come and take it.


Joined: 04 Oct 2005


PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 6:07 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

The Greens are nowhere near mainstream, they're crazy, batshit insane policies that appeal to metrosexuals in the inner city. Ask yourself why very few people in rural areas support their crazy shit? Maybe because policies like opposing back burning contribute to bushfires that kill people?

They're not progressive either, their policies are about wealth distribution and handouts for their pet 'downtrodden' group of the day. They also want to ban coal without a viable alternative to provide baseline power. In effect the only defence for their bullshit is "they'll never form government to institute their crazy shit, but they make me feel good". The Democrats were a responsible 'watchdog' third party. The Greens are dangerous crazies.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
watt price tully Scorpio



Joined: 15 May 2007


PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 6:17 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Wokko wrote:
The Greens are nowhere near mainstream, they're crazy, batshit insane policies that appeal to metrosexuals in the inner city. Ask yourself why very few people in rural areas support their crazy shit? Maybe because policies like opposing back burning contribute to bushfires that kill people?

They're not progressive either, their policies are about wealth distribution and handouts for their pet 'downtrodden' group of the day. They also want to ban coal without a viable alternative to provide baseline power. In effect the only defence for their bullshit is "they'll never form government to institute their crazy shit, but they make me feel good". The Democrats were a responsible 'watchdog' third party. The Greens are dangerous crazies.


Try referencing their policies

http://greens.org.au/policy

_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Wokko Pisces

Come and take it.


Joined: 04 Oct 2005


PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 6:32 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh yes, the indepth policies they post on their website.

"Clean Energy

Renewable energy reduces bills, cuts pollution and frees people from power companies."

http://greens.org.au/policy-platform

Go there to absorb the crazy a little deeper, but still it's not like they advertise that their policy of stopping back burning causes deadly bushfires.

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/green_arrogance_burns_fiercely/

Read that and because it's a conservative commentator that you're going to ad hom to death, follow the links she provides as sources. The Greens are dangerous and destructive.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
watt price tully Scorpio



Joined: 15 May 2007


PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 7:01 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Wokko wrote:
Oh yes, the indepth policies they post on their website.

"Clean Energy

Renewable energy reduces bills, cuts pollution and frees people from power companies."

http://greens.org.au/policy-platform

Go there to absorb the crazy a little deeper, but still it's not like they advertise that their policy of stopping back burning causes deadly bushfires.

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/green_arrogance_burns_fiercely/

Read that and because it's a conservative commentator that you're going to ad hom to death, follow the links she provides as sources. The Greens are dangerous and destructive.


Firstly, you quoted a heading (nice try)

You're also referencing & relying on Miranda Devine Shocked really Shocked

Surely, you can't be serious (& I won't call you Shirely)

Miranda makes Corey Bernadi seem reasonable: She's a natural fit for US Fox News. Rolling Eyes Shocked Wink

_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman


Last edited by watt price tully on Sat Jul 19, 2014 7:04 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Wokko Pisces

Come and take it.


Joined: 04 Oct 2005


PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 7:03 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Play the ball.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
watt price tully Scorpio



Joined: 15 May 2007


PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 7:15 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Wokko wrote:
Play the ball.


There was agreement between the greens, various other conservationsists, the timber industry & the relevant players that was conducted through consultation, negotiation, compromise, hard work and at the end of the day goodwill between conflicting & disparate parties. It wasn't a winner take all attitude.

Unfortunately all that time, effort & goodwill was destroyed like a chainsaw going through an old growth tree in Tasmania by the Mad Misogynist Monk & his Meercats.

Devine is employed to be anti Labour & anti Green as you well know. That's her polemecist raison d'etre.

_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
partypie 



Joined: 01 Oct 2010


PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 7:28 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Wokko wrote:
Tell me what China and the USA are doing and then get back to me about our contribution. We're a minnow that thinks we're a Shark, a yapping pekinese that thinks it's a mastiff. Nobody gives a shit what we do, but I'm happy that the fact it's all partisan political bullshit has had an ugly light shined onto it. Very few people understand, or even have the faintest idea what Direct Action means but, while possibly not as effective as the Carbon Tax stick, an incentive to lower carbon rather than a tax for producing it seems like sane plan leveraging the same motivation for business in a different way.

The only reason the Greens are not supporting it is because it's not THEIR policy and they get no political traction if it works. They're not an environmentalist party at all, they're a socialist party in a Green suit.


I have read numerous times that emissions trading schemes in the US and China are being introduced at state and provincial levels, eg California, one of the largest economies in the world has one.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 2:39 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Let's have a look at some "crazy" Greens policies in greater depth, shall we?

First up: drugs.

http://greens.org.au/policies/drugs-substance-abuse-addiction

Quote:
The Australian Greens believe that:

The use of all drugs, including legal drugs such as alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceuticals, has the potential to cause harm to the individual and to the community.
The response to illegal drug use is best addressed within a health and social framework.
A harm minimisation approach is the most appropriate way to reduce the adverse health, social and economic consequences of drug use, for the individual user and the community.
Policy and programs should be adopted that are evidence-based and subject to continuous evaluation.
All Australians with a substance abuse problem should have access to a range of evidence-based and regularly evaluated treatment and recovery services.
Information and education programs should be available to enable informed debate about the effects of all drugs, including prescription, non-prescription, legal and illegal drugs.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities must control, to the greatest extent possible, the development and management of harm minimisation policies and treatment and recovery programs in their communities.

ILLICIT DRUGS

The Australian Greens do not support the legalisation of currently illegal drugs.
There should be greater funding for demand and harm reduction.
The individual use of illegal drugs should not fall within the criminal framework.

ALCOHOL

The costs to the community of alcohol abuse are enormous, and include negative health effects, traffic deaths, violence and domestic abuse.

TOBACCO

Active and passive consumption of tobacco smoke is a demonstrated health risk and is a significant cost to the community and health.

AIMS

The Australian Greens want:

A reduction in harmful substance abuse, including smoking rates that are close to zero and alcohol consumption patterns that are within the limits recommended by public health experts.
The cost to government and the community of regulating drug use to be reduced with improved health and social outcomes.
Improved effectiveness of all management, treatment and other regulatory and judicial responses to drug use in the community, to maximise harm reduction, supply reduction and demand reduction, and to improve health and social outcomes.
Universal access to drug and alcohol treatment programs for those in need.
An increase in public dissemination of scientifically rigorous information on the risks and safe use of licit and illicit drugs.
The regulated use of THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) for specified medical purposes, such as intractable pain.
Increased availability of harm reduction programs including drug-substitution therapy, medically supervised injecting rooms, and widely accessible supply of clean needles, including in prisons.
Public funding of drug substitution treatment and its distribution.
The removal of legal barriers to both research and the evidence-based management of substance-abuse and other medical conditions, where considered necessary by the public health community.
Severe penalties for driving under the influence of alcohol and/or other drugs that impair cognitive or psychomotor skills.
To address the problem of inhalant misuse by supporting the rollout of measures, such as non-sniffable fuel throughout regions of Australia where petrol sniffing is a problem, as well as associated diversionary and rehabilitation programs.
To support research trials and evaluation of policy and treatment programs.
To extend the range of counselling and treatment programs covered by Medicare.

ILLICIT DRUGS

Maintenance of criminal penalties for drug dealers, and introduction of a system of civil sanctions for personal use of illicit drugs, when not associated with other crimes, including measures such as education, counselling and treatment, rather than criminal penalties.
Increased availability of diversion to rehabilitation and treatment and recovery programs as a sentencing alternative for people convicted of crimes committed to support a personal addiction to drugs.
Improved communication between relevant agencies and local communities to address problems associated with harmful drug use.

ALCOHOL

No advertising promotions of alcohol in sport, that target young people, or encourage excessive drinking.
All alcoholic beverages to be taxed based on alcohol content rather than value.

TOBACCO

A ban on financial donations from the tobacco and alcohol industries to political parties and candidates.
Australia to lead the world in reducing the consumption of tobacco products.
Increased assistance to support programs to quit tobacco, and treatment strategies for nicotine addiction.
To reduce the effects of passive smoking, by disallowing smoking in defined public spaces.


Essentially the policies you would get if you put a bunch of healthcare professionals in charge. How radical!

Wokko, your mob (the LDP) want firearms back in the homes of ordinary Australians. The current government want state-funded religious chaplains in public schools (secular counsellors need not apply). If you can point me to any equivalently crazy Greens policy I'm all ears.

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 2:47 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Next: economics. This is the area that the Greens are supposedly weakest in and the area in which the Liberals are supposed to be best suited to:

http://greens.org.au/policies/economics

Quote:
While government finances must be sustainable over the long-term, it is appropriate to stimulate the economy during economic downturns and save during economic booms. Government financing should be responsibly managed so as to minimise intergenerational debt.


Contrast this with the "surplus or bust" approach of the current government. Which approach is more economically credible?

Quote:
Unemployment benefits, pensions and other government allowances should enable all Australians to live with dignity, provide an adequate income and be structured to avoid poverty traps.


Socialists!

Contrast with the "6 months off Centrelink" geniuses currently running the ship. Really socially responsible brainwave, that one.

Justice:

http://greens.org.au/policies/justice

Quote:
An end to politically motivated law and order campaigns that exploit and fuel public anxieties; and to the threat of terrorism being used to undermine or discard basic principles of law.


What, not allowing the Herald Sun to set our legal agenda? And not allowing random claiming of "temporary" emergency powers to deal with the bogeyman of the moment? This is so out there!

Quote:
All those held in Australian prisons to have access to quality rehabilitation, education and training programs in an effort to reduce recidivism.

The decriminalisation of consensual adult sex work.


This is all sounding suspiciously (civil) libertarian. Not to mention, modern. Speaking of which...

Quote:
The legalisation of marriage between two consenting adults regardless of sex, sexuality or gender identity.


A view shared by over 70% of Australians nowadays, only adopted as an ALP policy platform 18 months ago and rejected by the current government altogether. So tell me, which is the more mainstream party?

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
thebaldfacts 



Joined: 02 Aug 2007


PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:11 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Lovely to see that the Greens have nice sounding policies. The reality is more important than the policies. How are they to implement and what are the consequences is the real test. Remember Swan and his mythical surpluses. Even Adolf Hitler had some nice sounding policies.
Even Labor stripped single mothers allowances back to the much lower paying unemployment benefit. In power hard choices are required, but the Greens can promise the world knowing they never have to deliver on their nice sounding policies or deal with their consequences.

More importantly, can they be trusted? As I said their major policy is the environment and global warming. Their utter hypocrisy in this area is breathtaking. Refuse to support direct action because they know better and their policy is better. Stop being election change deniers! If global warming is really happening, then take what is on offer, rather than risk nothing.

Remember, not only are they not supporting direct action, they have already rejected the fuel excise increase. Of all policies, you would think that the Greens would love this. Increase petrol prices to decrease the use of cars to decrease pollution and hopefully decrease global warming, but alas they objected to this because the funds were going to build roads which would ease congestion which would ease pollution and global warming.

HYPOCRiTES.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern All times are GMT + 11 Hours

Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4   

 
Jump to:  
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
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group