Australian Politics Forum - Lowering the age of crim responsibility

Grappler Truth Teller Feller Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 84738 Proud pre-1850's NO Voter Gender:	Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility Reply #435 - Dec 4^th, 2024 at 8:58am expert (n) - a has-been under pressure and capable only of dribbling.
Back to top	“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ― John Adams IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12968
Gender: male

Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility
Reply #436 - Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:30pm

lee wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 12:34pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 9:52am:

China just connected Gobi-desert-sourced renewables to the east coast using UHV tranmission tech, on the path to achieving net zero by 2060.

You do know NET zero is NOT ZERO.

(sigh)Net zero is what is required to stop increasing the quantity of AGW- CO2 in the atmosphere.

Quote:

So they anticipate using fossil fuels further than 2060, even IF they achieve NET zero by then.

Your error: when they achieve net zero, they won't be using fossils - fossils which would require additional technologies other than renewables, or more renewables to...achieve net zero.

Quote:

You seem to think pathways are proof positive of success. Roll Eyes

I think -like most of the world's commentators on AGW-CO2 - that logic and science can achieve net zero, yes.

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide Gold Member Offline Australian Politics<br /> Posts: 12968 Gender:	Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility Reply #437 - Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:33pm Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Dec 4^th, 2024 at 8:58am: expert (n) - a has-been under pressure and capable only of dribbling. Hey graps, don't encourage Gnads, he's only making a fool of himself; let's see how he explains his <China owning Oz iron ore> theory..
Back to top	IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12968
Gender: male

Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility
Reply #438 - Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:37pm

Gnads wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 6:58pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 9:52am:

lee wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2024 at 5:06pm:

And yet they haven't to date done so.

China just connected Gobi-desert-sourced renewables to the east coast using UHV tranmission tech, on the path to achieving net zero by 2060.

Quote:

That means theoretical "knowledge".

Only to a dummy who rejects scientific and engineering progress.

Poor lee, displaying the inadequacies of the Conservative brain, wants to maintain the fithy, injurious to health, price-gouging, private fossil industry whose days are numbered.

What are Gobi Desert renewables?

Don't tell me - the Chinese have covered the Mongolians desert areas with mega solar panels and wind turbines?

A fraction of the desert, but othwisewise - corect. .....

Quote:

I bet a whole lot of consultation went into that.

You really are a clueless clot.

Classic: you gave a (nearly) correct answer to you own question, and then accused me of being a clot Shocked

Back to top

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17673
Gender: male

Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility
Reply #439 - Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:50pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:30pm:

(sigh)Net zero is what is required to stop increasing the quantity of AGW- CO2 in the atmosphere.

So you believe in the continued use of fossil fuels. Goodo. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:30pm:

Your error: when they achieve net zero, they won't be using fossils -

So not NET ZERO then But ZERO. You are confusing yourself. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:30pm:

fossils which would require additional technologies other than renewables, or more renewables to...achieve net zero.

But renewables cannot be made from renewables. The output varies too much. Roll Eyes

So after renewables bring about this much glorified net zero, how will they be replaced? Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:30pm:

I think -like most of the world's commentators on AGW-CO2 - that logic and science can achieve net zero, yes.

So you believe in the "world's commentators"? Not the scientists?

But perhaps you can cite where you found this list of the "most of the world's commentators"? I mean you do have proof of your assertions? Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12968
Gender: male

Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility
Reply #440 - Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:53pm

Gnads wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 6:52pm:

....

No. I want to end the insanity of Musk soon being the world's first $trillionaire (equivalent to the entire wealth of Oz) and the hideous idea that billionaires "earned" their wealth by "hard work" , when the system enabled such grotesque accumulation of wealth to individuals.
Indeed some aware ("woke") billionaires are urging governments to impose higher taxes on rich people, before capitalism collapses.

Quote:

Now what does that sound like??? Roll Eyes

"Dragging everyone down to the same level"? ...that's the Conservative lie: ending hideous wealth accumlaition by some, and curbing soaring inequality is NOT "bringing everyone down to the same level".

Only your blind Conservative ideology can lead you to that error.

Meantime, I'm educating you:

"Money doesn't grow on rich people". Stephanie Kelton.

..provided government can have access to some of the nation's resources, before the rich comandeer them - like Gina has comandeered $22 billion of Oz iron wealth (Oz resources) for herself, with the connivance of government.

Quote:

Yes we are overtaxed ....

...while billionaires amd the wealthy know how to avoid taxes.

Quote:

BHP, Fortesque and the Chinese own more Iron ore than Gina.

(sigh)the travails of educating Conservatives....

1. My answer is to tax billionaires more , not "we" - spot the difference?

Even aware millionaires/billionaires are urging higher tax rates on the wealthy: google 'Patriotic Millionaires'.

2. BHP is the world's largest mining COMPANY, whose CEO earns a fraction of what Gina 'earns'. And China has to BUY the stuff.

Quote:

BS not when they own it.

Roy Hill Mining in WA is part owned by the Chinese - if anything Gine has been a middleman for Chinese interests ....... including The Kidman Cattle Co. portfolio.

Even if this is correct, Gina's holdings are a fraction of the big three who are NOT owned by China.

Now, back to taxation: you can't address it after being shown how and why to address it...

Deplorable.

Quote:

You haven't shown how to address shyte.

The 2nd largest shareholder of Fortesque next to Andrew Forrest is Hunan State-Owned Assets Supervision & Admin. Commission

And......THE LARGEST SHAREHOLDER in Rio Tinto is .....

Aluminum Corporation of China: The largest shareholder with 14.57% of the company.

You should do your homework better. Grin

[/quote]

OK, I give in; China doesn't need to pay for Oz iron ore, because China already owns the ore, got it. Shocked

Yet China is importing over $100 billion of Oz ore annually, and supporting the very shaky Oz Treasury as well.....how does that work?

After you explain that, you might address the taxation issue which had you very agitated a few posts back, with you apparently not wanting to tax 'Gina's ore" wealth, (or any other grossly inequitable "earnings" attributed to all billionaires), wealth which in fact belongs to the Oz nation, despite your assertion it is "owned by the Chinese".

Quote:

Stupid Australian politicians & greedy entrepreneurs.

Absolute assumptive bollocks.

Your knack for finally supplying the correct answer and then repudiating it is remarkable.

Listen carefully: Oz could eradicate poverty and much associated crime (and close the gap) if billionaires, millionaires and Oz's natural resources were properly taxed.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:01pm by thegreatdivide »

IP Logged

Jasin Gold Member Offline Posts: 48641 Gender:	Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility Reply #441 - Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:55pm Kids having babies at 16.
Back to top	AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY. IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17673
Gender: male

Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility
Reply #442 - Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:59pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:53pm:

"Dragging everyone down to the same level" ...that's the Conservative lie: ending hideous wealth accumlaition by some, and curbing soaring inequality is NOT "bringing everyone down to the same level".

Tell that to the leftist billionaires. "Bringing everyone down to the same level" is leftist for "except for me". Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12968
Gender: male

Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility
Reply #443 - Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:05pm

lee wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:59pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:53pm:

"Dragging everyone down to the same level" ...that's the Conservative lie: ending hideous wealth accumlaition by some, and curbing soaring inequality is NOT "bringing everyone down to the same level".

Tell that to the leftist billionaires. "Bringing everyone down to the same level" is leftist for "except for me". Wink

Good try but no cigar, only confirming your low IQ:

By billionaires, I mean all billionaires, regardless of political stance.

See the errors your blind ideology leads you into...

Back to top

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 17673 Gender:	Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility Reply #444 - Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:26pm thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:05pm: By billionaires, I mean all billionaires, regardless of political stance. Of course you do. Who else is gunna fund your lifestyle.
Back to top	IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12968
Gender: male

Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility
Reply #445 - Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:50pm

lee wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:50pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 6:30pm:

(sigh)Net zero is what is required to stop increasing the quantity of AGW- CO2 in the atmosphere.

So you believe in the continued use of fossil fuels. Goodo. Wink

low IQ non sequitur reply; which you won't be able to defend in logic even if you tried.

Quote:

So not NET ZERO then But ZERO. You are confusing yourself. Wink

Net zero means not adding more AGW-CO2 (the result of burning fossil fuels) than you are subtracting by not using fossils OR by other means eg removing CO2 directly out of the atmosphere if possible.

The "net" proposition allows for the development of other technologies, as we approach zero emissions from fossils.

Quote:

But renewables cannot be made from renewables. The output varies too much. Roll Eyes

Yes they can with renewables powering 70, then 80, then 90%, etc, as we approach net zero AND zero AGW CO2 emisions.

Quote:

So you believe in the "world's commentators"? Not the scientists?

another non sequitur: commentators from tje UN down, and the majotrity of IPCC scientists.

Now, despite yur ideologically crippled brain, are you ready to offer solutions to reduce youth crime, other than "locking them up"

Back to top

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17673
Gender: male

Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility
Reply #446 - Dec 5^th, 2024 at 9:31pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:50pm:

low IQ non sequitur reply; which you won't be able to defend in logic even if you tried.

So you believe in NET ZERO and believe in ZERO? Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:50pm:

Net zero means not adding more AGW-CO2 (the result of burning fossil fuels) than you are subtracting by not using fossils OR by other means eg removing CO2 directly out of the atmosphere if possible.

So you know what is the "normal" level of CO2. That's good, because the Climate Scientists you like don't know that. Better tell them quick, we wouldn't want to overdo the sucking of CO2 out of the atmosphere. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:50pm:

The "net" proposition allows for the development of other technologies, as we approach zero emissions from fossils.

Ah, so we don't have them. It is not like you to be so open. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:50pm:

Yes they can with renewables powering 70, then 80, then 90%, etc, as we approach net zero AND zero AGW CO2 emisions.

And yet you haven't been able to cite any paper that says so. You rely on "reading between the lines", and fail signally at that. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:50pm:

another non sequitur: commentators from tje UN down, and the majotrity of IPCC scientists.

Commentators like Gutterres - "the oceans are boiling"? Grin

Figueres - "This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution. That will not happen overnight and it will not happen at a single conference on climate change, be it COP 15, 21, 40 - you choose the number. It just does not occur like that. It is a process, because of the depth of the transformation."

Edenhofer - "Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, says the German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer. The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the worlds resources will be negotiated."

And then the IPCC WG1 - The Physical Science Basis, something you studiously ignore. I have given you the information before. You just don't BELIEVE it, you prfer your own cabal of "scientists". Wink

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter12.pdf

Page 90.

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:50pm:

Now, despite yur ideologically crippled brain, are you ready to offer solutions to reduce youth crime, other than "locking them up"

So where exactly did I say that. I searched and it appears I didn't. Wink

Just another "attribution" study you got wrong. Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 84738 Proud pre-1850's NO Voter Gender:	Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility Reply #447 - Dec 5^th, 2024 at 10:14pm Dividie?? Net zero age of responsibility? Is that your allusion? Not ILLUSION... or is it zero age of responsibility - little bastard's guilty from the moment he pops out.... Zero/Net Zero.... what is this? Pearl Harbour with the falcon Zeroes?
Back to top	“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ― John Adams IP Logged

thegreatdivide Gold Member Offline Australian Politics<br /> Posts: 12968 Gender:	Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility Reply #448 - Dec 6^th, 2024 at 10:34am lee wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:26pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 7:05pm: By billionaires, I mean all billionaires, regardless of political stance. Of course you do. Who else is gunna fund your lifestyle. The government, you blind idiot.
Back to top	IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12968
Gender: male

Re: Lowering the age of crim responsibility
Reply #449 - Dec 6^th, 2024 at 10:58am

lee wrote on Dec 5^th, 2024 at 9:31pm:

[quote author=AusbetterWorld link=1728677423/445#445 date=1733392257]low IQ non sequitur reply; which you won't be able to defend in logic even if you tried.

So you believe in NET ZERO and believe in ZERO? Wink

Yes...beyond your low IQ abiliy to understand: as we approach Zero, net zero might be a necessary step to Zero (eg, if non fossil technology to create plastics hasn't yet been disci overed).

Quote:

So you know what is the "normal" level of CO2.

The AGW-CO2 scientists know, dummy; both pre and post Industrial Revolution.

[quote author=AusbetterWorld

Quote:

Commentators like Gutterres - "the oceans are boiling"? Grin

Backed by scientists.

Quote:

Figueres - "This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution. That will not happen overnight and it will not happen at a single conference on climate change, be it COP 15, 21, 40 - you choose the number. It just does not occur like that. It is a process, because of the depth of the transformation."

Correct. So pull your finger out and transition to renewables ASAP.

Quote:

Edenhofer - "Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, says the German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer. The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the worlds resources will be negotiated."

Again...the highlighted is correct, but the opening sentence is BS: filthy fossils are injurious to the environment and humans, as well as the climate.

Quote:

So where exactly did I say that. I searched and it appears I didn't. Wink

Dummy, you haven't addressed the thread's title, nor the underlying problem, ie, the cause of youth crime. I'm asking for your solution, other than graps "locking them up".

Quote:

Just another "attribution" study you got wrong. Grin

Refuted above, though poor dumb lee can't see it.

Deplorable.

Now, move your ignorant "clean fossils" and "climate hoax" theories to where they belong; I won't be discussing them further here, because graps is easily confused...

Speaking of graps, let's check his lastest "contribution"...

Back to top

IP Logged