Expressive
#YourProblem
"Probably around 50 to 60 people every single day say to Peta Credlin, why won't you run?" - Rita Panahi
I hope Rita is bad at maths, because that scares me."Probably around 50 to 60 people every single day say to Peta Credlin, why won't you run?" - Rita Panahi
I wonder if she ever leaves the Murdoch bubble."Probably around 50 to 60 people every single day say to Peta Credlin, why won't you run?" - Rita Panahi
"The plan is to get to net-zero by 2050."
"Great, what's the plan?"
"To get to net 0."
"But how?"
"By following the plan?"
"Yes, but what is the plan?"
"To get to net zero."
"How do we do that?"
"By following the plan."
Like ALP is any better. I remember they would not reveal how much their plan would cost in the last election.
Criticising one side of politics and disregarding the other is clear partisanship.
There are many things you can say, "either party is shit" on. This isn't one of them.
The last Labor Federal Government enacted CO2 reduction policies that were actually working. They were highlighted around the world as an example to follow. We were a global leader.
The liberals got in and shit canned them and emissions started increasing again. Making us a global embarrassment.
The only reason we may reach 2030 goals is not due to any Federal policy but state-based ones. No prizes for guessing which state Governments are better at rolling out renewables.
So this is actually clearly an issue where you can draw a divide. On climate policy and reduction of CO2, where we have clear examples of Labor actually delivering.
Nats/Liberals are still climate-denying parties. The global policy has shifted to the point Scotty has to now pretend he's for emission reductions, but it's just lip service. Highlighted by their non-plan to get there and trying to undermine global efforts. He's trying to do the bare minimum for us to not become a global pariah because of the looming threat of boycotts and sanctions over our inaction.
We're now internationally seen as a bad faith actor when it comes to tackling climate change. On every level, it's an international policy disaster. It's tossing our reputation as a nation further down the toilet. Alienating our regional and Pacific neighbours. Which will lead to them being more aligned with China, reducing our regional influence.
It's also seriously bad domestic policy and another prime example of how they can't look forward to the future and plan. How will we cope once the global demand for coal drops? Denying the reality means they won't be doing anything to soften that impact on the economy and jobs.
Scotty's plan is that someone, not us, will invent magic technology so we can still pollute. It's the same clean coal scam they've been running for a few decades. It doesn't exist and the laws of physics dictate it to be impossible on a large scale. Did you know the largest carbon capture plant in the world takes a whole year to capture 3 seconds worth of emissions? Just 10,512,999 more plans and she'll be right!
Scotty went to the last election lying about electric cars.
So yeah, this is not an issue where you can go, "both suck." That is objectively wrong.
I disagree. I think looking at it the way you are is viewing it from a partisan lens. As I said before, Labor went into the last election with a climate plan but refused to detail how much that plan would cost. Also did not provide much detail into what the plan is. Criticising one party for not detailing their plan while not doing the same for the other party is partisanship.
Unfortunately politics in Australia sucks overall. Both parties are as bad as each other.
lol
So you actually think a party that has enacted an emissions reduction policy that has worked and been globally held up as an example of what to do, is just as bad as the party that repealed it on emissions reduction? The party which currently has most of the global community holding us out as an example of what not to do. How to be a bad member of the global community in tackling this issue. Facing international repudiation for our lack of action.
Whatever criticisms you want to say about Shorten's plan, at least it was one to actually try and reduce emissions. I kind of think the intention is something one should look at with the emissions reduction policy.
"Do they actually want to reduce emissions?"
"Yes / No"
The answer to that question is different for each party. So I really think you should take some self-reflection on how is being partisan when considering which party might take action on emissions reduction.
lol.
Yet here you are criticising Morrison who is also looking to reduce emissions by 2030. Even though the plan has not been released, it is no better or worse than what Labor did at the last election by deflecting questions about the cost of their climate plan.
Perhaps you should take some reflection on your partisanship as it is pretty clear to everyone where you stand. E.g. No accountability for ALP and Dan who is your state premier. Yet you criticise the Federal LNP and Gladys/ Perrottet who are NOT even your state premiers all the time which I can only think of is because they are Liberals.
Who cares about reducing emissions. Were all going to die anyway. Except for the betters of course. They'll just ascend to a higher state of being anyway.lol
So you actually think a party that has enacted an emissions reduction policy that has worked and been globally held up as an example of what to do, is just as bad as the party that repealed it on emissions reduction? The party which currently has most of the global community holding us out as an example of what not to do. How to be a bad member of the global community in tackling this issue. Facing international repudiation for our lack of action.
Whatever criticisms you want to say about Shorten's plan, at least it was one to actually try and reduce emissions. I kind of think the intention is something one should look at with the emissions reduction policy.
"Do they actually want to reduce emissions?"
"Yes / No"
The answer to that question is different for each party. So I really think you should take some self-reflection on how is being partisan when considering which party might take action on emissions reduction.
Anyways, I will stop there as I am not looking for an argument.
Just to be clear, not that there is anything wrong with partisanship anyway. It just makes me take your political opinions a lot less seriously than someone who is a centrist.
It is a centrist position to state the Nats/Libs aren't good if you want climate policy. That's a fact. Have you not picked up your friends on Sky News constantly criticising Labor for wanting to reduce emissions?
It's a centrist issue to want action on climate change and planning for the future.