How will this work? You don't explain it, you just assert it. It's like some old drunk whose had a belly full and goes off expecting nothing more then his rage to make his case. Its useless to everybody, let alone those who are trying to find genuine solutions to the mess the world has gotten itself in.   

OH for goodness sake. How? Tell us!!! Don't just assert it. Tell us how you get to that conclusion. You do know govts can do more then 1 thing at a time. You can have an education policy at the same time that you have a defence (orwellian for war) policy.  Of course what you're really saying is that the govt can't protect the environment while it does other things that are low on your priorities. Saying we cant have environmental protection and do gonski and disability care at the same time is like saying we cant protect the environment AND spend billions fighting a war in Afghanistan and Iraq or we cant protect the environment AND give YOU tax cuts, tax exceptions and a lower tax rate then everyone else. So do you understand aquascoot.  All you're doing is asserting that you have different priorities to us and then claiming that we're "really lost" if we cant see how implementing your priorities and protecting the environment "are pulling in the opposite direction". (Oh and just as an aside when the polls showed over and over that a huge majority of Australian's wanted a resources tax to help fund government programs it was your side of politics went troppo). But if my guessing at what you're trying to say is incorrect why don't you go ahead and fill in the gaps and explain how you get from your assertions to your conclusion.   

Here, let me show you how.  (1) Unregulated capitalism is a system of economic activity that runs in the opposite direction of environmental protection (That was Spartacus' assertion and now comes Spartacus' reasons, the bit you always miss out). Capitalism produces and uses up resources for profit instead of for what the community needs and what is in the interests of the community.  Therefore Capitalism (and especially unregulated capitalism) will happily frac and happily risk transporting oil through the Great Barrier reef because this does make profits even though it is not in the medium to short term interests of the environment and thereby the community. There, you starting to follow how logical argument (instead of emotions" flows.  Lets try another example shall we. (2) Unregulated capitalism runs in the opposite direction of environmental protection because history has shown over and over and over that capitalism will do everything it can to maximize profits even if that means not telling the world that their nuclear power plant is leaking 300 tons of radioactive water into the sea every day; even if that mean taking short cuts and spilling unfathomable amounts of oil into the Gulf of Mexico and rendering it a dead zone. And this is just as much a problem with small business and farmers (who are less visible) as it is with big business. Clearly more regulation not less regulation is whats needed from an environmental point of view.  Lets tray another shall we. (3) Unregulated capitalism runs in the opposite direction of environmental protection because the nature of capitalism is to encourage more and more consumerism which leads to the burning of more and more fossil fuel, more and more depletion and pollution of the waterways and the land, lower quality, less durable throw away goods and more and more global warming (just to mention a very few of the detrimental impacts. And its getting worse. Why? Because capitalism says if you dont grow bigger this year then you did last year you're a failure.  The recipe for self destruction. See how its done. 

Oh and just one last thing; anna bligh a socialist?  You really have lost it.  Clearly your definition of socialism is anything that falls in your ever growing list of things that you happen not to like and are are opposed to.