Poor little pet lamb

[Bribie G]

Queensland: the lying little turd has conceded.

Now the pressure is on Big Ears and I bet he's not having a good night.

hahahahahahahahahahaha

 

[DJ_L3ThAL]

I wish australian politics was interesting and had some actual bearance on our future.

 

[Black Devil Dog]

The major parties are on the nose and it looks likely that the Newman government is going to get booted from office. Labor are, in the minds of some people, a better choice, but given that their Queensland leader doesn't even know the rate of GST, who knows where we'll be in 3 years time.

There are no visionaries, no leaders to inspire major development in new technologies. Instead, we have 3 word slogans and photo opportunities, with politicians in hard hats and hi-viz vests.

For example, we should be world leaders in solar power technology, but instead, it seems our leaders want to make it as difficult as possible to make solar power viable.

They have a slash and burn approach to our natural resources and rely too heavily on the easy money that comes with it. And when they need to cut spending, they hit the sick, the elderly, the poor and the young. Good luck with that!

We should be trying to make our health and education systems the best in the world, but our leaders, from whichever party you align yourself to, would rather blame the other for the woes that exist.

We have an endless blame game, where each party blames the policies of the previous government. This sort of stuff turns an increasing number of voters toward lunatic fringe parties, such as Palmer party, The Greens and Independants.

The cycle of blame will continue, regardless of which party is in power and we still won't have anyone of substance to make a significant difference.

 

[spog]

Well said ,and speaking of the lunatic fringe,what of those who want to Oz to become a Republic.
FFS. The staggering amount of money that would be wasted on that ***** would be better used for education,health etc.
And yet we would all still be Australians.
Buggered if I can see any logic in it.

 

[Ducatiboy stu]

Watching TV this morning....Will they ever learn..

One high ranking LNP member interviewed this morning kept going on about how the Unions where partly to blame for the QLD result, along with "nonsense" from the Greens about the reef, Bob Katters party, Clive Palmer....Just blamed everyone from the other sides for the LNP getting slammed.

Didnt want to know why the LNP got slammed, just wanted to blame everyone else for the loss....


I am sure Abbott had a good nights sleep...

 

[AndrewQLD]

Good thing we have preferences, 43% of voters voted LNP, 38% voted Labour clearly more voted LNP but we will have a Labour Gov form with thanks to Clive Palmers hatred of all things Newman and giving his preferences to Labour not to mention the rest of the greens and independents passing their votes to Labour as well.
Not bothered by Labour winning the election by the way, just can't get my head around how stupid our system is.
If I vote green, PUP or Independent it's because I DON'T want to vote for the two Major parties.

 

[Ducatiboy stu]

It is unfortunate that your vote ends up at either of the two major parties, regardless of who you voted for

 

[spog]

Hmm,vote preferences ie which party will side with which if they don't get enough votes to be bothered with,then which party will cut them a deal if the preference is given to their party,meantime the party that gets the most preferences from a minor party ,due to a close call ,ie coz the voters hate both major parties and vote for the independant parties, then claim victory,has a party coz they won a 2 horse race.
Which leaves us all footing the bill for party's held by party's who are celebrating a win over another party.
**** me if dont hate them all !
....beer,where the hell did I put my beer!, Search party, help I've lost my beer,quick sent a search party.........

 

[manticle]

The major parties are on the nose and it looks likely that the Newman government is going to get booted from office. Labor are, in the minds of some people, a better choice, but given that their Queensland leader doesn't even know the rate of GST, who knows where we'll be in 3 years time.

There are no visionaries, no leaders to inspire major development in new technologies. Instead, we have 3 word slogans and photo opportunities, with politicians in hard hats and hi-viz vests.

For example, we should be world leaders in solar power technology, but instead, it seems our leaders want to make it as difficult as possible to make solar power viable.

They have a slash and burn approach to our natural resources and rely too heavily on the easy money that comes with it. And when they need to cut spending, they hit the sick, the elderly, the poor and the young. Good luck with that!

We should be trying to make our health and education systems the best in the world, but our leaders, from whichever party you align yourself to, would rather blame the other for the woes that exist.

We have an endless blame game, where each party blames the policies of the previous government. This sort of stuff turns an increasing number of voters toward lunatic fringe parties, such as Palmer party, The Greens and Independants.

The cycle of blame will continue, regardless of which party is in power and we still won't have anyone of substance to make a significant difference.

We've had our differences in many socio-political threads but there's not a word here with which I disagree.

 

[Mardoo]

Definitely on board with that myself BDD! Politics is now a game of winning, rather than a duty and honour of leadership.

 

[Liam_snorkel]

people (politicians included) seem to forget that government is both the the executive government AND the opposition. At least now we will have a balanced parliament, and the lot of them have been given a strong (pun intended) message that borderline corrupt practices will not be tolerated. Hopefully it sinks in.

 

[Dave70]

For example, we should be world leaders in solar power technology, but instead, it seems our leaders want to make it as difficult as possible to make solar power viable.

We should also be world leaders in nuclear power.
We are one of the most geologically stable countries on the planet sitting on top of the the most abundant reserves of uranium. Its zero emission. And Its virtually inexhaustible.

 

[Airgead]

We should also be world leaders in nuclear power.
We are one of the most geologically stable countries on the planet sitting on top of the the most abundant reserves of uranium. Its zero emission. And Its virtually inexhaustible.

Weeeeeeeeellllll.... kinda sorta but not quite.

The power generation is indeed zero emissions... but the mining, refining, processing etc of the ore onto fuel for the reactors is very much not zero emissions. Unless you run the whole operation on zero emissions electricity but then you have a chicken and egg problem.

Also the construction of the plants is very energy intensive as is their eventual decommissioning.

It is a lot better than fossil fuel generation but its not zero emissions.

As a side note on the unlimited bit -

"The European Commission said in 2001 that at the current level of uranium consumption, known uranium resources would last 42 years. When added to military and secondary sources, the resources could be stretched to 72 years. Yet this rate of usage assumes that nuclear power continues to provide only a fraction of the world’s energy supply. If electric capacity were increased six-fold, then the 72-year supply would last just 12 years"

And as an other side note... commissioning time for a new nuclear plant, from project approval to power generation (including site selection etc) is on the order of 20 years. If you already have a site selected its closer to 12. It will cost around 8-10 Billion. You can build an awful lot of turbines and solar panels in 12 years gibe 8-10 billion to play with...

The reason we don't have a nuclear power industry is that its simply not economical. The erst of the world has one because its really a nuclear weapons industry with power as a side product. Straight out nuclear power has never been an economic proposition without massive government subsidies due to the huge capital cost of construction and even huger capital cost of decommissioning. "the marginal levelized cost for "a 1,000-MWe facility built in 2009 would be 41.2 to 80.3 cents/kWh, presuming one actually takes into account construction, operation and fuel, reprocessing, waste storage, and decommissioning". That's not exactly cheap power...

 

[Dave70]

I think much of the information, and dis information regarding nuclear power depends on the source. Yes, really!..
You must have a bunch or trade unionists building you power plant, not efficent Asian workers.

How long does it take to build a nuclear power plant?
As nuclear power plants are complex construction projects, their construction periods are longer than other large power plants. It is typically expected to take 5 to 7 years to build a large nuclear unit (not including the time required for planning and licensing). Currently in countries such as South Korea and China, typical construction times range from 4 to 6 years, and in European countries construction may take between 6 and 8 years. In comparison, large coal plants can be built in about 4 years, while the construction time for natural gas fired plants is around 3 years.



source:

https://www.oecd-nea.org/press/press-kits/economics-FAQ.html#2

 

[Liam_snorkel]

back onto the topic of elections, check this **** out. One Nation set to win Lockyer on the back of preferences from Labor voters. FFS.. we have optional preferential voting here in Qld, YOU DON'T HAVE TO NUMBER EVERY BOX:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/qld-election-2015/guide/lock/

 

[tavas]

Well, you wanted change. You got it.

 

[Liam_snorkel]

a few years of fodder for satirists at least.

 

[jphowman]

"The European Commission said in 2001 that at the current level of uranium consumption, known uranium resources would last 42 years. When added to military and secondary sources, the resources could be stretched to 72 years. Yet this rate of usage assumes that nuclear power continues to provide only a fraction of the world’s energy supply. If electric capacity were increased six-fold, then the 72-year supply would last just 12 years"

Not agreeing with nuclear proponents, but this is a bit of a red herring.

In the 60s the world only had copper resources that would last us ~50 years at that rate of consumption. The consumption has obviously increased dramatically and there are now ~70 odd years worth of inferred resources. This has mainly come on the back of improved geological models and extractive capabilities.

If there was a need for it it could be found.

 

[DJ_L3ThAL]

If there was a need for it it could be found.

Yeah I've even seen reports companies are looking at developments to mine minerals from the moon. Could easily see them taking waste on the trip up and coming back with minerals too.... *sigh*.

Renewables are the only way of demonstrating in general the human race does want to change it's energy, resources and climate impact situation.

 

[Dave70]

back onto the topic of elections, check this **** out. One Nation set to win Lockyer on the back of preferences from Labor voters. FFS.. we have optional preferential voting here in Qld, YOU DON'T HAVE TO NUMBER EVERY BOX:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/qld-election-2015/guide/lock/

But maby they chose to?
How often do you see it. Constituents become disheartened with the squabbling impotent middle and swing to the far left or right. Could be a microcosm.
Look at Greece. Weary of austerity, they choose to vote in a socialist. That should go well.