is he going to think about it first ?
Or just wade in, full of bravado, at our expense ?

just answer the question please

Whatever you say Sprint. I'll even answer both.

is he going to think about it first ?  

Yes.

Or just wade in, full of bravado, at our expense ?

No.

And we will have to give financial incentives and key technology away to China to make a minute difference to GHG...which may or may not provide any benefit.

Way to f'k us over you LW freaks

No Aussie I didn't see it.

I have no idea who half of those people are.

They don't worry me either IQ. The sooner they go up the better.

Of course, I would prefer if other prices came down at the same time.

freediver wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2007 at 10:10pm:


They, Elde Fruit, are the buggers who formulate our policy.

'Yes Minister.'

Bamsey is a Grade A, died in the wool, ingrained Public Service excellence.........background in Foreign Affairs (once our Rep to the UN) and then on to whales and now, this job.

Smart cookie.

Let's see if the Rock Star keeps him there?

On what basis are you able to conclude that Bamsey is a bludger?

Aussie wrote on Dec 4^th, 2007 at 8:49am:


Little Kevvy concluded it - he calls it 'bloating' and 'fat' but we know what he means.  We Australians just use the vernacular "bludger".

Quote:

Aussie wrote on Dec 4^th, 2007 at 9:35pm:


Bludger = Annihilation, according to Kevvy.

Kevvy's the dude cutting the 'fat' out of the Public Service and unless he is completely bonkers he means the bludgers, after all he surely won't keep them while getting rid of the workers.  And as he has referred to excising the 'fat' while still maintaining services to the newly suffering taxpayer he must mean bludgers like Bamsey.

Trouble is I have no idea how he is going to do even that.  During the election bulltesticularing he promised to get a bunch of review committees going (well over a hundred) and set up a stack of duplicate bureacracies like the Petrol Timewasting Committee and the Grocery Timewasting one and even one to look at house prices.

What will they do sitting on their fat arses watching prices go up as prices have since the dinosaurs started selling their eggs to the highest bidders?  Just what will they do other than chew up taxpayer dollars?

so kevvy rushed in without due consideration. typical newboy.

we are going to be left holding the baby, with no upside.

oceans - because DT makes practical decisions ?

Aussie wrote on Dec 5^th, 2007 at 5:24pm:


So do I hope he reads it.   He has great reason to fear the new Liebor government's razor gang.  In fact the site of the AGO carries this message

Quote:


One assumes your mate will not know what is happening next.  The dole queue?

Incidentally, why not tell us what he has done as CEO of the Greenhouse Office - freediver greeted my revelation that Australia even had a Greenhouse Office with considerable mirth, he will be keen to hear the contributions Bamsey has made too.  You have been very quick to defend this fellow - I assume you have a lot of things to tell us and explain why he's not a bludger.

Deepy, you made the claim, you should back it up, not expect others to defend some guy against unsubstantiated, and largely unsubstantiable allegations.

So uour view of him as a bludger is based on nothing more than his job title?

Did you intend to post a reply, or are you conceding the point?

freediver wrote on Dec 6^th, 2007 at 4:00pm:


Perhaps you should read it for the first time - I said I have already been through this exercise before (now for the fifth time) and I am happy to keep repeating it though as you and Aussie don't seem to read so well the first few dozen times I say stuff.

Read what I say.  I always say what I mean and I am happy to stand behind it.  Any questions just ask - but do try and ensure it hasn't already been covered or I will just post the same thing again.  And again.  And again.



deepthought wrote on Dec 5^th, 2007 at 8:55pm:



Aussie?  Your reams of good deeds performed by this 'senior public servant'?

freediver wrote on Dec 6^th, 2007 at 4:50pm:



Quote:


This is my reasoning and I keep repeating it as you don't seem to comprehend the way the world works so well.

Let me ask you an analogous question.

IF a new manager comes into a company and he states that he will trim the bloat from it while maintaining front line services at the same level where do you think the cuts will be?   And what may you deduce from his statements about 'bloat' and 'fat'?  

I claim victory.

DT posted that Bamsey is a bludger.  DT has provided NIL evidence in support, just clap-trap Uni student gibberish that gets him nowhere, and will get him nowhere if he ever steps inside a Court Room, where real live judicial animals await, and where play-school counts for nil, zip and even zero. 

QED.

Meantime Little Kevvy and his mates are making odd noises.

Quote:


Just how will they take a lead when they won't reveal where they are going?  Who will follow?   

freediver wrote on Dec 7^th, 2007 at 5:30pm:


I reckon these dudes sit around laughing while they make this stuff up.  If you need to see the truth you only need look at what has happened to date.  Just this year the Queensland Liebor Minister for Mines and Energy approved a retail electricity price increase of 11.37%.  

Now we don't use a great deal of electricity so that meant an increase of $2 a week (approx).  But for users who do that would mean far more than $2 a week and according to those dopes that isn't going to happen until 2030.  Now that's Queensland.  In NSW they have had a price iincrease of 24% over the last three years.

But that's domestic use.  Some commercial users have faced price increases of up to 100% this year.

Did an economist get involved in that stuff free?

deepthought wrote on Dec 5^th, 2007 at 7:20am:


You don't like change.

The world turns, mate!

Seems ALP now have to take a cautious approach. ie, reality raises its head.



"LABOR is getting a dose of their own environmental medicine as Kevin Rudd navigates the tricky issue of binding targets to restrict carbon emissions.

The very issue with which Labor was so successfully able to persecute the Howard government is now is its own burden.

Targets, particularly short term ones, cannot be pulled out of the air. As he prepares to fly out for Bali, the Prime Minister is trying to look co-operative while not signing a blank cheque.

It is a tricky tightrope.

Labor wants to look like it is taking the Vienna declaration of a 25 to 40 per cent cut in emissions in developed countries by 2020 seriously, but is resisting pressure to commit.

Pressure from whom? Generally the same groups that under Kyoto found it easier to push developed countries – the richer ones with a more dynamic domestic political constituency to satisfy – into binding agreements on targets, rather than demand developing ones to commit to action.

Trade Minister Simon Crean showed the difficulty of the nuances at the weekend when he said that the Bali conference was looking for "targets" from developed countries and "commitments" from developing ones.

But the China and India of 1990 is not the China and India of 2020. China is already a bigger emitter than the United States. The old paradigm of rich nations first does not apply as cleanly as it might once have.

Labor won political kudos by getting respected academic Ross Garnaut to explore in detail what the costs would be.

The Coalition was slow off the mark but had finally turned the weight of treasury to the task.

Wayne Swan made the remark last week that visited the office for the minister in the Department of Treasury’s headquarters the space had been taken up with climate change modellers.

Why the caution? The same caution that fuelled the Coalition’s tardiness: costs. "

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22898576-5013481,00.html

"Green jobs" to outweigh losses from climate change

http://uk.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUKL0612674420071206?source=cmailer

NUSA DUA, Indonesia (Reuters) - Climate change is creating millions of "green jobs" in sectors from solar power to biofuels that will slightly exceed layoffs elsewhere in the economy, a U.N. report said on Thursday.

Union experts at U.N. climate talks in Bali, Indonesia, said the findings might ease worries among many workers that tougher environmental standards could mean an overall loss of jobs for many countries.

deepthought wrote on Dec 10^th, 2007 at 5:41pm:



Like serfchoices and Nuclear Power was progressive....

Aren't there more costs involved to make an investment into Nuclear. I'm not particuarly knowladgeable as far as Nuclear power is concerned. Is it a viable option. Personally I don't like the idea of producing nuclear waste and dumping it on another country's soil (or in our case in the Northern Territory)

I would rather support subsidies for greener technologies such as Solar etc.

deepthought wrote on Dec 12^th, 2007 at 7:22pm:


Serfchoices was so bad...it reeks of being a trojan horse for Nuclear Power.

To bring in a policy such as serfchoices in a time of "BOOM" is mercilessly unkind and not many, bar the hardest right, could believe there was a kind heart behind it.

The question is...was it a trojan horse for Nuclear Power/Waste?

deepthought wrote on Dec 14^th, 2007 at 7:14pm:


Balls...the coalition don't believe in fairness!

Have the coalition dropped their pro-Nuclear stance yet and what is the rationale behind them not dropping it?

DRAH would prefer that the world suffers under the strain of continual emittance of GHG rather than containment of energy pollution

IQSRLOW wrote on Dec 17^th, 2007 at 9:45pm:


Why did Renewables go down under John Howard?

 

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Dec 19^th, 2007 at 3:05pm:


For the same reason they went down under Menzies, Holt, McEwen, Gorton, McMahon, Whitlam, Fraser, Hawke, Keating and now Rudd.

Demand outstrips supply and renewables (apart from Hydro) can not supply base load.  Everyone knows that.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Dec 19^th, 2007 at 9:12pm:


Sorry mate, only hydro, fossil fuels and nuclear can.  If the sun stops shining or the wind stops blowing . . . . .

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Dec 19^th, 2007 at 10:48pm:


Well I don't see the use of renewables going up.  Who is the current Prime Minister?

Aussie wrote on Dec 20^th, 2007 at 9:02pm:


Yes, then there was those Liebor dudes Hawke and Cheating for 13 years before that.  So what's going on Aussie?  Can you explain it?

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Dec 21^st, 2007 at 12:05pm:



Thank you.

And I don't mind waiting - in fact the longer I wait the more right I become.  In every way.   

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2007 at 8:14am:


In as much as the current power generation fuel creates airborne waste (and therefore shifts the problem elsewhere) I guess you're right that we can be quite irresponsible by doing what we have always done.

But I support green policies - hence I voted Liberal.