Guest essay by Eric Worrall
The Australian Government ABC confirming my view that climate activism is a virtue signalling hobby for comfortable urban elitists.
Election 2019: What happened to the climate change vote we heard about?
By Matt Mcdonald
It was supposed to be the big issue of the 2019 Australian federal election: climate change.…
In the survey more than 60 per cent of Australians agreed with the sentiment that “Global warming is a serious and pressing problem. We should begin taking steps now even if this involves significant cost”.
And while a self-selecting sample, those filling out the ABC’s Vote Compass survey consistently emphasised climate change as a crucial issue for them at the election.
Crucially, those identifying it as the most important issue had risen from 9 per cent in 2016 to 29 per cent in 2019.…
Here the emphasis on quality of life over immediate economic and physical needs encourages a focus on issues like climate change. But this is a sensibility that speaks to those in higher socio-economic brackets, and principally with higher levels of education.
It isn’t particularly applicable to regional Queensland, for example, especially when constituents in the latter view large scale mining operations as a crucial potential source of income and employment.
…
Voters feared climate policy more than climate change
…
In this election, Australians were suddenly faced with a prospective Labor Government ready with a suite of measures to tackle climate change.
And they were presented with an account of these measures as a devastating economic blow to Australian prosperity and growth.
However discredited much of this modelling ultimately was, and the broader fear campaign about everything from electricity prices to the end of petrol-based cars, it raised the spectre of immediate economic sacrifice for Australians.…
Read more: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-20/what-happened-to-the-climate-change-vote/11128128
Of course there is a simpler question the ABC failed to ask; why were any government measures at all required to tackle climate change?
Last December the Australian Government CSIRO claimed wind power plus energy storage is cheaper than coal, even without government subsidies.
Yet during the election the Australian opposition manifesto included an intimidating raft of targets and mandates to force the adoption of these allegedly cost saving green energy options.
What’s up with that? Voters aren’t idiots. The green narrative simply doesn’t make sense.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well re. the rising wages, that was one of Bill Shortens major selling points. Labour fails to grasp the difference between a slow economy, where wage growth is naturally going to be sluggish, and a expanding economy, being the result of increased productivity, which by creating jobs, reduces the unemployment, and the then shortage in some sectors automatically results in demand , thus causing wage growth.
The Socialest thinking is not good at basic economics. This of course shows in their thinking about CC and the resulting belief in windmills and solar panels being the only answer.
I being old enough, think back to a Labour PM in the UK in the 1930 tees, , who faced with massive unemployment said “I want to see all of the chinmeys smoking again Back then the Labour Parties thought of their base as being the s called “”Blue collar workers”
But today with what amounts to professional politicians, from University to a desk job in a Union, or the office of a sitting MP. Then if they toe the party line, but completely out of touch with the electorate, they are in due course nominated for a seat in Parliament.t.
We here in Austraila look back to the days in the 1940 tees when it was possible for steam engine driver to become a Prime Minister
MJE VK5ELL
“…why were any government measures at all required to tackle climate change?” and the necessary next question – if ANY of these government measures is really taken is there ANY verifiable information that the intended result will be achieved in any measurable way?
“However discredited much of this modelling ultimately was…”
Hey? What? I must have missed that. I saw the modelling by an independent economic expert, I saw him getting called a liar by the leader of the opposition, I saw one of Australia’s wealthiest people publish his home address so it could be (and was) subsequently attacked, causing him to pull out of the climate economic modelling field altogether.
But I DID NOT SEE any rebuttal of his modelling. None. Zip. Nada.
Typical of the big green ratbaggery.
Isn’t it astonishing that so many people refuse to accept that giving up the basis of their material well-being is in their own best interest? (/sarc just in case)
Alternatively:
Isn’t it amazing that so many people are beginning to see that giving up the basis of their material well-being serves only the best interests of the 21st-century green plutocrats and their enablers in environmental NGOs, left(ish) political parties, academia and the media?
Priceless interaction on that ABC last night.
https://twitter.com/QandA/status/1130457836448669696
Start at about the 4 minute mark
One has to laugh at the fallback argument of ‘we have to believe the scientists’ whenever the CAGW-manics are asked for the knowledge of the details.
They obviously have never asked the ‘scientists’ for their sources, data, proof, etc.
I wonder if they would buy a bridge from a scientist who told them it was a good idea.
There is good evidence that they would. They don’t balk at destroying the economy of their own country for what they think the scientist said.
The Australian ABC is rapidly becoming a danger to the rest of Australia.
Their failure to even discuss topics and instead jumping straight to the answer they not only want to hear, but they themselves spoke in the first place, means that people are making business decisions based on the moronic predictions being offered.
SportsBet is the (current) most public example, having thrown away over a $1million because EVERYONE told them Labor was going to win. More fool them one might say, but this isn’t the only thing. In the day job a few months ago the concept of a change of government and possible affects on our current projects was raised by employees. Don’t worry, management informed us, we are well aware and have already been in deep discussions with the relevant shadow ministers.
Why? Again, because everyone told Australians that Labor would win government. Well they didn’t, and now that is 100s of hours of middle and senior management time companies will never get back.
Not only does the ABC cost Australians roughly a billion a year in taxes, but by being utterly unable to correctly report on current trends or even discuss conflicting possibilities it is also costing Australian business millions as well.
Close it, and then salt the earth as a warning to others.
“Close it, and then salt the earth as a warning to others.”
It is happening – unfortunately to Australian business though
I’d say SportsBet is looking to recoup the million they lost on actual sports betting. Betting on polls is like betting on a horse when you don’t know the jockey gets left and right mixed up.
All the lefties have forgotten that the polls are statistical MODELS and often can’t “predict” anything. The best they can do is suggest a possible outcome from many possibles.
Our view was 12 years is plenty of time, she’ll be right mate. Next election the cries will be only 9 years, still heaps of time whats the rush. Eventually we will be having elections well after we are all supposed to be dead and these pathetic humans will still be imitating harbingers of death.
BEWARE
Arthur Sinodinos.
The wolf in conservative clothing!
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/20/arthur-sinodinos-urges-liberals-to-use-renewables-to-boost-environmental-credentials
Sinodinos is one of the remaining Turnbull acolytes. We all know it and ignore everything that comes out of his mouth.
None of the people arguing to ‘fight climate change’ have explained what the climate will be like after they win the battle.
Will there no longer be bush fires, hurricanes, droughts, floods? Will sea levels remain static?
No doubt they will argue that all of these natural disasters would have been worse except for their gallant efforts.
We have Bill Shorten to thank for this win after he told a reporter that asking for a price on his climate change policy was a dumb question, then back-tracking to ‘explain’ that he really meant a dishonest question. Lots of rhetoric, no detail and an expectation that we voters just have to ‘believe’.
The fool that calls them idiots is no drongo.
Plebersek has no idea how much CO2 is currently in the atmosphere, without this knowledge it would be impossible for her to tell you how much nicer the weather will be post policy implementation.
Its a dumb /dishonest question because its not about making the weather nicer!
There is a whole bunch of twitter feeds with lefties trying to understand how they lost the Australian Election
The best response
In surveys, people know that the correct answer for the pollster is to say that they believe in ‘Global Warming/Climate Change’. When people go to vote they can see that there is nothing wrong with the weather in 2019, nor is there anything unusual in the weather. They also feel their wallet and know that ‘Climate Change Solutions’ will cost them a great deal of money and possibly also an arm and a leg.
Everyone loves the climate cult – until they find out how much the climate cult will cost them.
One Green Party candidate elected out of 151 in the House . Not surprising , but what are the unions doing supporting a Party who’s stated intent is to shut down fossil fuel jobs. ? Why would the members of a Union
condone their dues going to a party that will destroy the middle class if their agenda was imposed ?
Australia dodged a huge bullet . Now how about having a Prime Minister that lasts a while or they will be right back into the same unproductive nonsense ?
The ABC lives in a bubble, only 14% of Australians are regular viewers/listeners of the ABC. Despite 100% of Australians paying $1.3 billion pa to fund it, only wealthy inner city leftists pay attention to it.
So the leftists of the ABC believe their surveys which are only contributed to by other leftists in the ABC bubble and they think the entire country agrees with them because they never leave their bubble and never hear other opinions.
I have met wealthy inner city lefties who truly believe the Australian electoral system is rigged because they are convinced they have ever met anyone who would vote for the right.