Australian Politics Forum - Ferguson serious about nuclear

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #45 - Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 7:00pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 1:51pm:

Please delete wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 1:49pm:

Doesn't mean what I thought it meant ... oh well.

One thing I give credit to you is that you don't cover up an error.
Several times now you have admitted errors.

We had a conference last week and part of it was regarding 'accepting responsibility' etc.

Well done.

Gay people should hang themselves in shame!

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #46 - Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 7:02pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 2:36pm:

Please delete wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 10:04am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 9:09am:

Good to see Ferguson thinking outside his labor 'box'.

Except he talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk.

Some people want the debate - so bring it on, start, raise the issues, make some proposals, answer some questions.

Stop talking as if there was someone or something stopping a putative debate, because there isn't.

ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!!! What I want is a fair open and balanced debate - no ideological scare-mongering. I want to know the facts and then see a decision made on them.

Yeh, bullshite!

You love miners telling the country they give a shite about this country when all they give a shite about is overseas investors!

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23818
Carlsbad, CA
Gender: male

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #47 - Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 7:04pm

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 6:54pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 1:33pm:

Nuclear to me has always been the prime highlight of how far behind the rest of the world Australia can be at times.

We have had nuclear since I was a kid in England.

We had Oldbury, Hinckley Point A, B and now C all within distance of my hometown - completely safe, completely accident free and producing emissions-free power for the country.

But you ask Aussies, who admittedly suffer from cabin fever of being the other side of the world to everyone else, and they conjure up thoughts of Mad Max and Chernobyl.

Nuclear is safe, low emissions and sensible.

Get involved.

How much do you get paid?

How much do you get paid?
How much do you get paid?

How much do you get paid?

Seriously, we all want to know:

How much do you get paid?

How much do you get paid?
How much do you get paid?

How much do you get paid?

Cool

Loads

Back to top

Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #48 - Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 7:05pm

bogarde73 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 2:41pm:

The facts have already been built around the world longie, and functioned smoothly for years in the US, France, Germany etc.
I don't know how many nuclear power stations the Chinese are building each year but I seem to remember it's a lot.
The same people who are against nuclear would have been afraid to invent the wheel in case the gods didn't like it.

You should be careful whenst talking bullshite!

Was Einstein pro, or anti-, Nuclear?!!?

Keep that chin up won't you son! Wink

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #49 - Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 7:08pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 2:42pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 1:33pm:

Nuclear to me has always been the prime highlight of how far behind the rest of the world Australia can be at times.

We have had nuclear since I was a kid in England.

We had Oldbury, Hinckley Point A, B and now C all within distance of my hometown - completely safe, completely accident free and producing emissions-free power for the country.

But you ask Aussies, who admittedly suffer from cabin fever of being the other side of the world to everyone else, and they conjure up thoughts of Mad Max and Chernobyl.

Nuclear is safe, low emissions and sensible.

Get involved.

Your attitude is typically anti-australian and it gets old! The facts (remember those??) is that australias coal and gas reserves are the biggest in the world and by far the cheapest. Because of that the price of our fossil fuelled electricity has always made nuclear an uneconomic alternative. It has nothing to do with 'being behind the rest of the world'. there simply was no need and no economic value to it. The economic argument you hold so dear would have come to the same unequivocal conclusion. But now, with cost and demand pressures and environmental/social pressures coming to bear, the nuclear question is being raised again. It's a new world with new parameters in play. the nuclear question needs to be looked at again. If a decision were made to embrace nuclear power it would not be a case of 'cathing up', but rather embracing a suitable technology for a changing world.

oH NOES: the pro-nuclear are working the angles!

I tells ya, investment buys motsa brainpower.... WOW!

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #50 - Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 7:12pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 2:46pm:

bogarde73 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 2:41pm:

The facts have already been built around the world longie, and functioned smoothly for years in the US, France, Germany etc.
I don't know how many nuclear power stations the Chinese are building each year but I seem to remember it's a lot.
The same people who are against nuclear would have been afraid to invent the wheel in case the gods didn't like it.

The facts I refer to are cost, location, environmental considerations and a host of others. I just want to see how it all looks without the bias and ideology colouring everything.

Ideology colours everything.

What is a conservative?!!?

Whya re their rules regarding the applications of technologies such as genetic engineering.

Blow me you think we're as high as you!

Get off the crack and the old man! Why don't you get off one or the other atleast!?!!?

You can't! Sorry to hear that!!

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded Gold Member Offline MediocrityNET: because people died for this! Posts: 26966	Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear Reply #51 - Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 7:13pm Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 2:50pm: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 2:42pm: Your attitude is typically anti-australian My argument has nothing to do with being anti-anyone. It is a matter of fact that Australia lags behind the world on this subject. Where, pardon?!!?
Back to top	Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #52 - Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 7:16pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 6:39pm:

Please delete wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 6:03pm:

Gizmo

I think I said this at the time - there is nothing specifically stopping the licensing of a NPP.

There are many restrictions on the operations of Commonwealth entities, but nothing specifically preventing the issue of a licence.

States, who are more logical entitites to think about building new Power plants, have only their own policies, which, of course, can be reversed by the government of the day.

Correct me if I'm wrong?

the politics is what will hoild it back and you can absolutely bet the politics of this would be HUGE. THAT is what is holding it back. First the ALP is anti-nuke, the union movement is anti-nuke, the Greens make the ALP look PRO-nuke and the liberals are lukewarm - mainly because of alack of a convincing economic argument AND the possible politicla backlash.

So, where do you go from here???????

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #53 - Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 7:19pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 6:52pm:

some greenies and hippies probably do think my overall employer is the devil.

You are seriously gay.

Don't think that anyone missed you not replying to my last assertion that you were gay.

You are gay and hate yourself for being so!

THE END! Huh

Go find a rope, gaylord!

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #54 - Feb 4^th, 2011 at 1:09pm

Please delete wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 6:42pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 6:39pm:

Please delete wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 6:03pm:

Gizmo

I think I said this at the time - there is nothing specifically stopping the licensing of a NPP.

There are many restrictions on the operations of Commonwealth entities, but nothing specifically preventing the issue of a licence.

States, who are more logical entitites to think about building new Power plants, have only their own policies, which, of course, can be reversed by the government of the day.

Correct me if I'm wrong?

the politics is what will hoild it back and you can absolutely bet the politics of this would be HUGE. THAT is what is holding it back. First the ALP is anti-nuke, the union movement is anti-nuke, the Greens make the ALP look PRO-nuke and the liberals are lukewarm - mainly because of alack of a convincing economic argument AND the possible politicla backlash.

And still nothing stopping a debate, nor proposals by proponents.

Yes there is Ernie....Gillard has ruled out debate on Nuclear power several times, recently...

And it's not really any point to putting forward a proposal that you know in advance will be knocked back.....all it does is waste money...

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

Please delete

Gold Member

Offline

Please delete this smacking
PROFILE

Posts: 2936

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #55 - Feb 4^th, 2011 at 1:58pm

"Yes there is Ernie....Gillard has ruled out debate on Nuclear power several times, recently...

And it's not really any point to putting forward a proposal that you know in advance will be knocked back.....all it does is waste money... "

Gee, she's more powerful than I thought - she can dictate what we think and say?

Debate is what will change the ALP's policy. If you are waiting for the ALP to change on this, well, you're right.

But if I was determined, and convinced of the worth of my argument, it wouldn't stop me.

the mining industry has $22M to stop a tax, but someone who wants to spend hundreds of BILLIONS doesn't have $20m to mount a PR campaign?

My opinion? It's all hot air - there is no company or organisation who thinks nuclear has legs in Australia.

Back to top

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #56 - Feb 4^th, 2011 at 2:14pm

Please delete wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 1:58pm:

"Yes there is Ernie....Gillard has ruled out debate on Nuclear power several times, recently...

And it's not really any point to putting forward a proposal that you know in advance will be knocked back.....all it does is waste money... "

Gee, she's more powerful than I thought - she can dictate what we think and say?Debate is what will change the ALP's policy. If you are waiting for the ALP to change on this, well, you're right.

But if I was determined, and convinced of the worth of my argument, it wouldn't stop me.

the mining industry has $22M to stop a tax, but someone who wants to spend hundreds of BILLIONS doesn't have $20m to mount a PR campaign?

My opinion? It's all hot air - there is no company or organisation who thinks nuclear has legs in Australia.

No, but she can in fact say what's 'legal' to be built in this country.....as ANY government can...

You can't build an inground pool in your backyard without local council approval, can you?
You can't build a carport for that matter...

Hell there's a family that have been trying to paint their HOUSE for 10 years (in Wagga Wagga) that can't get council permission....So why is it surprising that power station (using nuclear power), can't get clearance without the Government signing off on it???
Try building an abbattoir or a car factory...

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

Please delete

Gold Member

Offline

Please delete this smacking
PROFILE

Posts: 2936

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #57 - Feb 4^th, 2011 at 2:22pm

"So why is it surprising that power station (using nuclear power), can't get clearance without the Government signing off on it???"

First step - ask. You can't get approval to build anything unless you apply. That would put the heat on the government.

There is no serious proponent. Not one.

And if they're waiting for a Labor government to invite them to apply, it'll be a long wait.

You can't change government policy unless you get serious.

And people calling for a debate are just flapping their gums.

Back to top

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #58 - Feb 4^th, 2011 at 2:38pm

Please delete wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 2:22pm:

"So why is it surprising that power station (using nuclear power), can't get clearance without the Government signing off on it???"

First step - ask. You can't get approval to build anything unless you apply. That would put the heat on the government.

There is no serious proponent. Not one.

And if they're waiting for a Labor government to invite them to apply, it'll be a long wait.

You can't change government policy unless you get serious.

And people calling for a debate are just flapping their gums.

No Ernie, HOW do you know there hasn't been any applications???

The 'People' can't change Government policy at ALL...unless the Government is serious about looking at change.......The people calling for a debate 'ARE just flapping their gums' if the group in power refuse to even discuss the options...

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

Please delete

Gold Member

Offline

Please delete this smacking
PROFILE

Posts: 2936

Re: Ferguson serious about nuclear
Reply #59 - Feb 4^th, 2011 at 2:44pm

I simply don't accept that debate begins and ends with the government.

I've said numerous times - if some company has a desire to introduce this industry to Australia, they should announce that plan.

Then the debate can begin.

Until that time, no one in the pro side will answer any questions, and no-one in the anti side needs rebutt anything.

There's nothing to debate.

Back to top

IP Logged