Civic Duty and Sausages Too(An Australian Election Thread)

[Costa Fierro]

I think the problem with Labour, and honestly many climate aware political parties is that they don't focus on how the government can transition to the economy to renewable's while also helping people cope with lost jobs (coal miners for example). Instead they go for the moral argument, or "the children will PAY" which might work on wealthy suburbanites, but certainly doesn't do it for regional voters.

To be fair, the economic arguments for transitioning out of fossil fuels and into a green economy sound crazy -- and in fact don't make sense economically. Fact is, it's very easy for policymakers to find themselves on the wrong side of the economic lodger when tackling responses to climate change, if they keep to themselves.

It's a lot more difficult for Australia to do because of how dependent they are on fossil fuels for electricity.

[Kowani]

To be fair, the economic arguments for transitioning out of fossil fuels and into a green economy sound crazy -- and in fact don't make sense economically. Fact is, it's very easy for policymakers to find themselves on the wrong side of the economic lodger when tackling responses to climate change, if they keep to themselves.

It's a lot more difficult for Australia to do because of how dependent they are on fossil fuels for electricity.

You’d think they could tap into the giant fucking ocean for hydropower, pr the desert covering almost all of the damn country for solar energy.

[Costa Fierro]

You’d think they could tap into the giant fucking ocean for hydropower, pr the desert covering almost all of the damn country for solar energy.

They're already investing in them.

[Neu Leonstein]

To be fair, the economic arguments for transitioning out of fossil fuels and into a green economy sound crazy -- and in fact don't make sense economically.

Explain please? I'm curious about how one would make a good argument for what most of us here accept to be a worthwhile thing to do (reduce Australians' carbon footprint), to people who don't currently believe or don't understand that reasoning. How does one convince some high school grad from two hours outside of Townsville?

[Special Aromas]

I'm surprised but to be honest, I'm not really surprised. When your party indirectly supports a campaign of activists from all over Australia to drive into one of the most disadvantaged regions in the country and preach about the importance of the environment when unemployment is in the double digits you've got to expect a bit of backlash and that's why the ALP was wiped out in QLD. And that's hugely problematic that the traditional party of the working class is now seen by the actual working class as being out of touch.

It's worth noting that the primary vote of the LNP barely changed, but there was a huge swing of votes towards PUP and ON which shows it was a protest vote as much as anything.

If the ALP is going to win next time, they need to:

• Drop the socially progressive bandwagoning that holds no water outside of inner Melbourne & Sydney. They should not be competing for the Green vote in the inner electorates.
• Hammer the government on the state of the country. For an opposition campaign, they spent far too much time talking about themselves and spent very little going after the government in any way
• Actually offer people in coal mining region viable employment alternatives. Offering TAFE courses and promising training and shit is insulting because it still implies that people will be unemployed for a period of time and/or they'll need to move away from the area and not return.

Shouldn't have continued with Shorten after 2016 either, he's a good politician but he's almost robotic in the way he speaks.

[Turbofolkia]

I'm surprised but to be honest, I'm not really surprised. When your party indirectly supports a campaign of activists from all over Australia to drive into one of the most disadvantaged regions in the country and preach about the importance of the environment when unemployment is in the double digits you've got to expect a bit of backlash and that's why the ALP was wiped out in QLD. And that's hugely problematic that the traditional party of the working class is now seen by the actual working class as being out of touch.

It's worth noting that the primary vote of the LNP barely changed, but there was a huge swing of votes towards PUP and ON which shows it was a protest vote as much as anything.

If the ALP is going to win next time, they need to:

• Drop the socially progressive bandwagoning that holds no water outside of inner Melbourne & Sydney. They should not be competing for the Green vote in the inner electorates.
• Hammer the government on the state of the country. For an opposition campaign, they spent far too much time talking about themselves and spent very little going after the government in any way
• Actually offer people in coal mining region viable employment alternatives. Offering TAFE courses and promising training and shit is insulting because it still implies that people will be unemployed for a period of time and/or they'll need to move away from the area and not return.

Shouldn't have continued with Shorten after 2016 either, he's a good politician but he's almost robotic in the way he speaks.

This was the stupidest stunt in years. If the locals opposed the mine, it would have been perfect, but they were massively in favour of the mine. All it did was piss off a lot of people and made Adani an issue for people to rally around the LNP. LNP MPs were even thanking Bob Brown for the convoy in their victory speeches. Good luck stopping Adani now. Morons.

Moreover, Shorten's worst mistake was trying a both-sides approach to such a hot button issue. It fed into the Coalition’s characterisation of him as a slippery chameleon, and didn’t impress the people on either side. Since Labor couldn't make up its mind, the pro-Adani vote went to the Coalition and the anti-Adani vote went to the Greens. Shorten had nothing to lose in choosing a side, yet he wanted it both ways. I'm just stunned at the stupidity of it all. This should have been so simple.

[Neu Leonstein]

• Actually offer people in coal mining region viable employment alternatives. Offering TAFE courses and promising training and shit is insulting because it still implies that people will be unemployed for a period of time and/or they'll need to move away from the area and not return.

I get where you're coming from, but I can't help but notice the similarities with the plight of remote Aboriginal communities for decades now. Governments basically do a half-arsed job keeping people there alive (for some value of "alive"), but really there's just no activity that can be performed out there that generates enough economic value to sustain what's considered an acceptable standard of living. The answer for the people there is, from a purely rational perspective, to move somewhere with greater population density. But cultural ties and economic constraints make that obviously very difficult.

We're traveling towards a world where the sort of mining and farming activities that some communities are based around become less and less economically valuable. And so these communities and lifestyles become more and more of an artificial construct kept in place by welfare provided by the big cities.

The question arises at some point what is the better thing to do, from the nation's perspective. Be honest, and tell people that staying out there is just not what it was thirty years ago? Or promise them jobs that either can't come or can't stay?

[Special Aromas]

• Actually offer people in coal mining region viable employment alternatives. Offering TAFE courses and promising training and shit is insulting because it still implies that people will be unemployed for a period of time and/or they'll need to move away from the area and not return.

I get where you're coming from, but I can't help but notice the similarities with the plight of remote Aboriginal communities for decades now. Governments basically do a half-arsed job keeping people there alive (for some value of "alive"), but really there's just no activity that can be performed out there that generates enough economic value to sustain what's considered an acceptable standard of living. The answer for the people there is, from a purely rational perspective, to move somewhere with greater population density. But cultural ties and economic constraints make that obviously very difficult.

We're traveling towards a world where the sort of mining and farming activities that some communities are based around become less and less economically valuable. And so these communities and lifestyles become more and more of an artificial construct kept in place by welfare provided by the big cities.

The question arises at some point what is the better thing to do, from the nation's perspective. Be honest, and tell people that staying out there is just not what it was thirty years ago? Or promise them jobs that either can't come or can't stay?

I fully agree, but the problem is that when somebody is offering to build a coal mine and create a job, you're not being honest when you tell people that there's just no economic viability in the region anymore which put the ALP in a very difficult spot. The ALP allowed themselves to be baited by the Greens into drawing a line in the sand between the progressive types and the union types when the bulk of the ALP's policies should have been extremely attractive to the FNQ demographic, but they seem to have been drowned out by "the climate election" which the Clive Palmer-types manipulated into a scare campaign to perfection.

I think another key lesson here is that "big tent", party-for-all policies can easily backfire when you're trying to accommodate groups with fundamental ideological differences.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politi ... 51owg.html

What a cunt.

[Neu Leonstein]

I fully agree, but the problem is that when somebody is offering to build a coal mine and create a job, you're not being honest when you tell people that there's just no economic viability in the region anymore which put the ALP in a very difficult spot.

In some sense, yes. But the economic viability depends on the net value generated to society. Once upon a time that meant having others willing to buy the stuff produced. Now it means that, but also means people willing to pay to clean up after you, either by suffering the consequences of environmental degradation or by paying to offset them. It's perfectly possible for a mine to seem like a good idea for Adani and for the people building it and working in it, and also for it to be a subsidy to the region by Australia's society as a whole.

So that's the purely economic part of the argument. But that's, in practical terms, of secondary importance to the electoral argument. If you've got enough FNQ people united in their demand for the subsidy, and people opposed to it not united in voting on that particular issue, then that's probably the situation we're in now.

[Turbofolkia]

I wonder what's being cut to fund the Coalition's tax cut. Frydenberg wouldn't answer it during the campaign but we're about to find out.

[Turbofolkia]

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/queensland/greed-won-in-federal-election-bob-brown-20190519-p51owg.html

What a cunt.

I love how Bob Brown can't see past his egotistical view of himself as a climate warrior, when he just had a big hand in handing power to the worst party for the environment.

[Turbofolkia]

Australian Labour didn't seem to be presenting a significant alternative to the Liberals, but it nevertheless sucks to see a victory for what amounts to a death cult to obsolete and harmful industries that are helping destroy our world.

But hey, Abbott and Anning are gone at least, so that's two fewer irredeemable cunts to worry about holding political power.

Actually, the ALP offered one of the most substantive platforms since 1972. The difference between the two parties in a lot of areas couldn't have been clearer. Labor had a suite of funded policies for all to see, especially in regards to reforming the tax system. Problem is the Coalition is very good at attaching the word "tax" onto anything they think could be used to wedge Labor. Carbon Tax, Retiree Tax, Death Tax etc. Utterly misleading but very effective.

[Australian rePublic]

To be fair, the economic arguments for transitioning out of fossil fuels and into a green economy sound crazy -- and in fact don't make sense economically.

Explain please? I'm curious about how one would make a good argument for what most of us here accept to be a worthwhile thing to do (reduce Australians' carbon footprint), to people who don't currently believe or don't understand that reasoning. How does one convince some high school grad from two hours outside of Townsville?

I'm not against renewables per se. Renewables are the undeniable future of this country... and the world... I more concerned about how fast we're rushing into it. Our economy and our electrical grid is based on coal. There are entire towns which would completely collapse economically if we were to cut off mining them. Further, our grid would be unable to sustain itself. Just look at Victoria and South Australia. We'll eventually get there just slowly. All countries have their faults with something bad or rather. For example, Europe might be extremely green, but many European countries heavily rely on tobacco. Unlike Australia, where ciggaretts are heavily regulated, if you try to take away the cogaretts of some European countries, their whole econic structure would collapse, which is probably why Europe is slow to act on the tabacco issue. Cigaretts are actually worse, because in addition to harming the environment, they also harm your health. Why is noone pressuring the EU to do away with cigaretts sooner? We all understand that Europe is taking steps, but these steps are understandably slow. The difference between Europe and Australia is, however, that Australia is a tiny far away country that the UN thinks she can push around; and Australia complies with being pushed around by the UN. Replace Australia's coal with tabacco, and we wouldn't be having this discussion. It also doesn't help that Australians are mostly influenced by cultures of countries which are far removed from Australia's circumstances

[Australian rePublic]

I fully agree, but the problem is that when somebody is offering to build a coal mine and create a job, you're not being honest when you tell people that there's just no economic viability in the region anymore which put the ALP in a very difficult spot.

In some sense, yes. But the economic viability depends on the net value generated to society. Once upon a time that meant having others willing to buy the stuff produced. Now it means that, but also means people willing to pay to clean up after you, either by suffering the consequences of environmental degradation or by paying to offset them. It's perfectly possible for a mine to seem like a good idea for Adani and for the people building it and working in it, and also for it to be a subsidy to the region by Australia's society as a whole.

So that's the purely economic part of the argument. But that's, in practical terms, of secondary importance to the electoral argument. If you've got enough FNQ people united in their demand for the subsidy, and people opposed to it not united in voting on that particular issue, then that's probably the situation we're in now.

As said earlier, if the ALP can't refute it, then they're not very good at campaigning, which is a significant aspect of the job

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

I wonder what's being cut to fund the Coalition's tax cut. Frydenberg wouldn't answer it during the campaign but we're about to find out.

Hopefully the military and corporate welfare, but I'm not optimistic.

[Neu Leonstein]

For example, Europe might be extremely green, but many European countries heavily rely on tobacco. Unlike Australia, where ciggaretts are heavily regulated, if you try to take away the cogaretts of some European countries, their whole econic structure would collapse, which is probably why Europe is slow to act on the tabacco issue.

What in god's name are you talking about?!

[Shrillland]

For example, Europe might be extremely green, but many European countries heavily rely on tobacco. Unlike Australia, where ciggaretts are heavily regulated, if you try to take away the cogaretts of some European countries, their whole econic structure would collapse, which is probably why Europe is slow to act on the tabacco issue.

What in god's name are you talking about?!

That's what I'm thinking too. Most of Europe has clamped down on tobacco, actually.

[Turbofolkia]

I wonder what's being cut to fund the Coalition's tax cut. Frydenberg wouldn't answer it during the campaign but we're about to find out.

Hopefully the military and corporate welfare, but I'm not optimistic.

Lol, good look getting a Liberal government to do that.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... /?cs=14350

As usual, they’re cutting the APS.1.5 billion in efficiency dividends. Ugh. As a public servant, my own job may be on the line.

[Turbofolkia]

So Tania Plibersek has confirmed she’s not standing for the leadership. Looks like Antony Albanese is a lock now.

I mean, I’d rather Labor be led by someone new and someone who isn’t associated with the Rudd/Gillard era, but I can understand he is the most qualified and electorally appealing right now. I just hope his deputy will be someone solid and not some Labor Right hack from Victoria who is only there to appease the factions.

[Special Aromas]

Probably better if Fitzgibbons gets the nod because he's someone with real appeal to the working class areas that turned on the ALP in this election.

The problem that the ALP still needs to navigate is the divide in ideology between the inner city, progressive voters (socially progressive and mostly economically liberal) and the outer-suburban, rural working class voters (more often than not socially conservative with more protectionist views).

[Neu Leonstein]

Lol, good look getting a Liberal government to do that.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... /?cs=14350

As usual, they’re cutting the APS.1.5 billion in efficiency dividends. Ugh. As a public servant, my own job may be on the line.

I'm glad I'm out of that racket. Which is sort of sad to say, but not only did it prove difficult to maintain a belief in serving the Australian public when it was clearly an unhealthy and one-sided relationship, but working in government at this point feels largely like everyone is trying to survive on a rapidly shrinking pool of resources. The pace of the effect depends on the organisation, but you start noticing it bit by bit. It encourages increasingly unfair internal policies, cuts that clearly affect some (usually junior) staff much more than others, managers who stay put forever in order to milk grandfathered things for all they're worth.

Say what you will about the private sector, but if resources start to disappear, at least it's not because some former student politician guts an institution just to finally get revenge on the guy who stole his girlfriend in first year.

[Turbofolkia]

Probably better if Fitzgibbons gets the nod because he's someone with real appeal to the working class areas that turned on the ALP in this election.

The problem that the ALP still needs to navigate is the divide in ideology between the inner city, progressive voters (socially progressive and mostly economically liberal) and the outer-suburban, rural working class voters (more often than not socially conservative with more protectionist views).

Fitzgibbon almost lost his seat to One Nation, hopefully he and the party will learn what went wrong in his seat so that doesn't happen again.

I think they need a Queenslander either as leader or deputy to be able to win back their blue collar base. Federal Labor was
destroyed in Queensland because there was a perception that Labor was opposed to their way of life. It will take a long while for that sentiment to wash out. Labor will have to very consciously set out to rebuild its connections with those voters who have just rejected the party. People like Jim Chalmers and Joel FItzgibbon do seem like the most likely candidates who can do that.

But Christ, if Chris Bowen becomes leader, I will honestly vote Liberal just to spite the party.

[Turbofolkia]

Lol, good look getting a Liberal government to do that.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... /?cs=14350

As usual, they’re cutting the APS.1.5 billion in efficiency dividends. Ugh. As a public servant, my own job may be on the line.

I'm glad I'm out of that racket. Which is sort of sad to say, but not only did it prove difficult to maintain a belief in serving the Australian public when it was clearly an unhealthy and one-sided relationship, but working in government at this point feels largely like everyone is trying to survive on a rapidly shrinking pool of resources. The pace of the effect depends on the organisation, but you start noticing it bit by bit. It encourages increasingly unfair internal policies, cuts that clearly affect some (usually junior) staff much more than others, managers who stay put forever in order to milk grandfathered things for all they're worth.

Say what you will about the private sector, but if resources start to disappear, at least it's not because some former student politician guts an institution just to finally get revenge on the guy who stole his girlfriend in first year.

I do enjoy my work here, but you're dead right about the culture of public service. We're stretched pretty thin these days. Contractors costing upwards of $200 per hour are everywhere. The government loves contractors because they can use money from a different bucket.

With each “efficiency dividend”, we are forced to squeeze more into the same amount of time. Yet there's never any consideration as to what the inefficiency is, what problem it’s meant to be solving, whether the methods used to solve the inefficiency will actually have an effect, whether the cost/benefit ratio makes it worth it etc. It's just cutting for the sake of cutting if you ask me.

Say what you will about the private sector, but if resources start to disappear, at least it's not because some former student politician guts an institution just to finally get revenge on the guy who stole his girlfriend in first year.

Lol, yeah. It's either that or some former student politician guts an institution because he's still salty about the fact he couldn't get into DFAT or DPMC as a grad and had to settle for a consultancy role in the Big 4.

[Beggnig]

Probably better if Fitzgibbons gets the nod because he's someone with real appeal to the working class areas that turned on the ALP in this election.

The problem that the ALP still needs to navigate is the divide in ideology between the inner city, progressive voters (socially progressive and mostly economically liberal) and the outer-suburban, rural working class voters (more often than not socially conservative with more protectionist views).

Fitzgibbon almost lost his seat to One Nation, hopefully he and the party will learn what went wrong in his seat so that doesn't happen again.

I think they need a Queenslander either as leader or deputy to be able to win back their blue collar base. Federal Labor was
destroyed in Queensland because there was a perception that Labor was opposed to their way of life. It will take a long while for that sentiment to wash out. Labor will have to very consciously set out to rebuild its connections with those voters who have just rejected the party. People like Jim Chalmers and Joel FItzgibbon do seem like the most likely candidates who can do that.

But Christ, if Chris Bowen becomes leader, I will honestly vote Liberal just to spite the party.

Bowen as opposition leader means Morisson will be the next R. G. Menzies.