What would happen if a party won every seat

[Marty_d]

4 hours ago, Siso said:

Please supply me with a link to the relative costs. No politician is being straight forward with it. Intermittents are the cheapest form of electricity if you forget about the extra transmission, battery's, artificial inertia and the considerable amount of underutilized gas backup. Being Aircraft type dudes on this site we realize underutiliseded plant is expensive, still need to do a hundred hourly every year weather you do 98 or 2 hours. Having a lot of inertia on the grid also reacts relatively quickly, has for a hundred years. Synchronous plants give a nice consistant sine wave. Inverters work by very fast switching and produce a steeped sinewave by switching on and of quickly. This is filtered to give a smooth wave form. Ask Spain what happens when an inverter starts acting up with little inertia on the grid.

If you don't know the relative costs, why are you arguing that renewables are not cheaper?

 

Anyway this thread is about politics.  Happy to have a discussion about the relative costs and merits of various types of generation over on the climate change thread.

 

But getting back to politics, these are the facts:

 

1. The Libs had their arses handed to them by people voting for the Teals, and did not get those seats back when they went to the last election with their uncosted and unrealistic nuclear plans.
2. Compulsory voting in Australia means that overall, people go for the centre.
3. 65+% of people in Australia rate action on climate change as one of the top 2 issues.
4. Older voters are dying off and a massive proportion of younger voters want action on climate change (because guess what, they have to live on this earth a lot longer with the effects).
5. Apart from the few thousand idiots who watch Sky News, voters are not particularly interested in culture wars, DEI, wokeness (whatever that is), the colour of their neighbour's skin or other non-issues.

With those political facts, it seems clear that the Libs have decided to commit political suicide.

 

I don't actually want them to.  I'm not an LNP voter but I want a strong opposition with sensible, costed policies - backed up by science -  to hold the government to account.  They can't do that when the conservatives, desperate to keep suckling at the teat of the fossil fuel industry, throw out ridiculous ideas like government funded nuclear power plants, government funded propping up of elderly coal plants, inefficient and expensive carbon capture and storage.

The LNP is supposed to be the party of the free market.  There are plenty of players looking to provide wind farms, big batteries, solar farms, household solar & batteries.  There are zero players looking to build new coal and nuclear without it being funded by YOU the taxpayer.  Ask yourself why?

 

[old man emu]

1 hour ago, Marty_d said:

I want a strong opposition with sensible, costed policies

It would be great to have the Party in government having the similar things.

[Marty_d]

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

It would be great to have the Party in government having the similar things.

Maybe they would if they had an effective opposition nipping at their heels!

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Despite their not being a credible alternative to the ALP at the moment (beyond the Teals and David Pocock - the Greens seem to have swayed a little to the activist side at the moment), the ALP seems to be doing a reasonable job. There will be stuff ups and vested interests to contend with, as well as powerful lobbyists, but compared to the previous governments, they could do a lot worse given how crap the others are. 

 

I didn't think Albo had it in him and the Voice referendum jusitifed my position. But to his credit, unlike Starrmer here, he has learned a pretty valuable lesson from that stuff up and seems to be far better than many people's expectations. 

 

He hasn't made decisions that will satisfy everyone - you can't do that in politics. But it seems, with a couple of exceptions, he is finding the correct balance. 

[Siso]

11 hours ago, Marty_d said:

If you don't know the relative costs, why are you arguing that renewables are not cheaper?

 

Anyway this thread is about politics.  Happy to have a discussion about the relative costs and merits of various types of generation over on the climate change thread.

 

But getting back to politics, these are the facts:

 

1. The Libs had their arses handed to them by people voting for the Teals, and did not get those seats back when they went to the last election with their uncosted and unrealistic nuclear plans.
2. Compulsory voting in Australia means that overall, people go for the centre.
3. 65+% of people in Australia rate action on climate change as one of the top 2 issues.
4. Older voters are dying off and a massive proportion of younger voters want action on climate change (because guess what, they have to live on this earth a lot longer with the effects).
5. Apart from the few thousand idiots who watch Sky News, voters are not particularly interested in culture wars, DEI, wokeness (whatever that is), the colour of their neighbour's skin or other non-issues.

With those political facts, it seems clear that the Libs have decided to commit political suicide.

 

I don't actually want them to.  I'm not an LNP voter but I want a strong opposition with sensible, costed policies - backed up by science -  to hold the government to account.  They can't do that when the conservatives, desperate to keep suckling at the teat of the fossil fuel industry, throw out ridiculous ideas like government funded nuclear power plants, government funded propping up of elderly coal plants, inefficient and expensive carbon capture and storage.

The LNP is supposed to be the party of the free market.  There are plenty of players looking to provide wind farms, big batteries, solar farms, household solar & batteries.  There are zero players looking to build new coal and nuclear without it being funded by YOU the taxpayer.  Ask yourself why?

 

My first sentence in my first post was "Its still up in the air weather renewables are cheaper." Not saying they aren't cheaper