|
John Smith
|
ImSpartacus2 wrote on Feb 8 th, 2015 at 4:13pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8 th, 2015 at 4:08pm: ImSpartacus2 wrote on Feb 8 th, 2015 at 3:36pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8 th, 2015 at 2:51pm: ____ wrote on Feb 8 th, 2015 at 2:49pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 8 th, 2015 at 2:41pm: ____ wrote on Feb 8 th, 2015 at 2:35pm: It is the bases of your argument.You say the only job available is working in a coal mine.Do you work in a coal mine? meanwhile you are willing to destroy agricultural jobs via driving the climate into a tail spin.What of all the people reliant on food and the economy based around food. We have a choice between coal or food. really? now you want to tell me what I'm arguing for?  there are estimated to be about 100 000 directly employed by mining, and probably ten times that amount indirectly ... when you address their needs I will take you seriously .. if you think your stupid 'what if the world ended' scenarios are an argument, you are kidding yourself. There are approximately 134,000 farm businesses in Australia, 99 percent of which are family owned and operated. Each Australian farmer produces enough food to feed 600 people, 150 at home and 450 overseas. Australian farmers produce almost 93 percent of Australia’s daily domestic food supply. As of 2010-11, there are 307,000 people employed in Australian agriculture. The complete agricultural supply chain, including the affiliated food and fibre industries, provide over 1.6 million jobs to the Australian economy. www.nff.org.au/farm-facts.htmlThis is what you are wanting to write off by driving the climate out of control, via digging up coal and burning it. yes, and every single one of them will cease to exist because of mining?  see, this is the sort of logic that has me convinced the greens are lunatic fringe dwellers. The science tells us the world is facing a strong possibility of a catastrophic threat and that it may be too late unless we act quickly. In those circumstances it doesn't make much sense to say yeah but we cant take any steps that may threaten jobs. I agree the burden of transition must be born by all of us but to simply continue as we are going because its the way we have been doing things up to now is not very sensible in view of the risk. I have no problem with transitioning to greener energy, in fact I've been advocating it for years (yes i know you have) .. its stupid comments like 'the greens would stop all mining within 5 years' that I have a problem with. Transitioning from one system to another must take place at its own speed ... as more and more people switch to alternative energy less and less mining activity will take place, price of coal powered energy will go up to try and compensate for losses thereby increasing the rate of take up of alternate energies. You can't just say stop all mining tomorrow. You won't change anything and people will still starve to death because they've no way to buy to the food they need. But you will agree wont you that if the science is telling us that we only have 5 years to change then we have no choice but to change in 5 years. If the science says we have more time then of course we should make the transition as painless as possible. change doesn't mean we stop all mining within 5 yrs. It's that sort of alarmist bullshit which the greens are renowned for, that keeps them on the fringes. The carbon tax was a good start, and yes, any transition should be as painless as possible ... stopping all mining by some predetermined 'due date' will not be painless.
|
Forum
Pages: 
The Greens Will Step Up The Attack On Coal. (Read 5498 times)
