New centrist green party?

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › New centrist green party?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11

52 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2173345 5-Feb-2019 11:27

Fred99:

Aredwood:

Labor probably likes coal anyway. More unionized workers needed for coal mines. And the railways would be needed to transport coal all over NZ.

Oh dear. This thread is truly borked - but as an optimist I'll say at least it makes Twitter look sane.

Aredwood is just banging his own drum again. What he does not appreciate is that unionized workers have done a lot for this country. Teachers/nursers are a good example. I'm sure Aredwood has some in the family? Without the unionized workers this country will be screwed again and we would all be slave to the evil capitalist regime.

Aredwood

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2173348 5-Feb-2019 11:40

Fred99:
Aredwood:

Labor probably likes coal anyway. More unionized workers needed for coal mines. And the railways would be needed to transport coal all over NZ.

Oh dear. This thread is truly borked - but as an optimist I'll say at least it makes Twitter look sane.

There has already been enough conspiracy theories floated, So why not add another one.

On a more serious note, what is Labours (and the Greens) plan to replace the gas fired generation, along with the industrial Natural gas usage? Because if they do nothing, then coal would replace Natural gas.

Have they approved any consents for new major Hydro or Geothermal generation? As more power will also be needed for EVs. Or are they going to simply do nothing? While their favorite criticism of National is that National did nothing about (housing market, pollution, whatever).

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2173356 5-Feb-2019 11:48

Aredwood:
Fred99:

Aredwood:

Labor probably likes coal anyway. More unionized workers needed for coal mines. And the railways would be needed to transport coal all over NZ.

Oh dear. This thread is truly borked - but as an optimist I'll say at least it makes Twitter look sane.

There has already been enough conspiracy theories floated, So why not add another one.

On a more serious note, what is Labours (and the Greens) plan to replace the gas fired generation, along with the industrial Natural gas usage? Because if they do nothing, then coal would replace Natural gas.

Have they approved any consents for new major Hydro or Geothermal generation? As more power will also be needed for EVs. Or are they going to simply do nothing? While their favorite criticism of National is that National did nothing about (housing market, pollution, whatever).

One would hope they will be looking into this. There is no rush as the EV journey will be slow for a long time, but in today's world where the issue always seems to be climate change, better act sooner than later. There is massively more desire in Labour than National, but Labour needs to out sense into the Greens. That should be Nationals policy next election. "We are getting greener, and we want more Hydro which the Greens don't" That would go a way to getting my vote back

Aredwood

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2173363 5-Feb-2019 11:56

Darude34:
Aredwood is just banging his own drum again. What he does not appreciate is that unionized workers have done a lot for this country. Teachers/nursers are a good example. I'm sure Aredwood has some in the family? Without the unionized workers this country will be screwed again and we would all be slave to the evil capitalist regime.

Except that the most heavily unionized sectors are also sectors where the workers are employed by the government. Teachers, Nurses, Police, various other public sectors etc.

Should we start comparing wages paid to teachers and nurses who work for private schools and hospitals to those who work for public schools and hospitals?

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2173366 5-Feb-2019 12:01

Aredwood: Should we start comparing wages paid to teachers and nurses who work for private schools and hospitals to those who work for public schools and hospitals?

You just highlighting a problem.

Private schools and hospitals should be shutdown. They have no place in modern New Zealand, and are just there for the rich.

Aredwood

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2173373 5-Feb-2019 12:10

Darude34:
Aredwood: Should we start comparing wages paid to teachers and nurses who work for private schools and hospitals to those who work for public schools and hospitals?

You just highlighting a problem.

Private schools and hospitals should be shutdown. They have no place in modern New Zealand, and are just there for the rich.

The government gets money from private schools and hospitals via taxes. And people who use them means less demand on the public system. What exactly is the problem with private schools and hospitals?

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2173377 5-Feb-2019 12:14

Aredwood:
Darude34:

Aredwood: Should we start comparing wages paid to teachers and nurses who work for private schools and hospitals to those who work for public schools and hospitals?

You just highlighting a problem.

Private schools and hospitals should be shutdown. They have no place in modern New Zealand, and are just there for the rich.

The government gets money from private schools and hospitals via taxes. And people who use them means less demand on the public system. What exactly is the problem with private schools and hospitals?

We already pay taxes for schools and healthcare. Private schools and hospitals are an indication that something is wrong which needs to be fixed. If we fix the public schools/hospitals we wont need the private ones. Unfortunately National let this all deteriorate, and that brought on a rise in private schools and healthcare. As I already mentioned, they need to be shutdown.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2173378 5-Feb-2019 12:15

Aredwood:

The government gets money from private schools and hospitals via taxes. And people who use them means less demand on the public system. What exactly is the problem with private schools and hospitals?

Don't keep feeding him. Others are already learning that.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2173402 5-Feb-2019 12:55

tdgeek:

Aredwood:
Fred99:

Aredwood:

Labor probably likes coal anyway. More unionized workers needed for coal mines. And the railways would be needed to transport coal all over NZ.

Oh dear. This thread is truly borked - but as an optimist I'll say at least it makes Twitter look sane.

There has already been enough conspiracy theories floated, So why not add another one.

On a more serious note, what is Labours (and the Greens) plan to replace the gas fired generation, along with the industrial Natural gas usage? Because if they do nothing, then coal would replace Natural gas.

Have they approved any consents for new major Hydro or Geothermal generation? As more power will also be needed for EVs. Or are they going to simply do nothing? While their favorite criticism of National is that National did nothing about (housing market, pollution, whatever).

One would hope they will be looking into this. There is no rush as the EV journey will be slow for a long time, but in today's world where the issue always seems to be climate change, better act sooner than later. There is massively more desire in Labour than National, but Labour needs to out sense into the Greens. That should be Nationals policy next election. "We are getting greener, and we want more Hydro which the Greens don't" That would go a way to getting my vote back

The (economically) unpalatable reality of it is that for climate change / environmental degradation to be adequately tackled, consumers will have to consume less energy.

NZ has high emissions per capita, very high private car use, very large houses, very high level of packaging etc going to landfill, bugger-all recycling.

The big hydro schemes weren't put there for "environmental" reasons but economic - they were an affordable way to generate electricity. If we'd had ample local oil or gas then, we'd have used it as climate change wasn't a known issue. Coal was "dirty" - but soot/smog a local issue vs CO2 emissions not considered.

What if the Greens are right? Just because (apparently) most people don't want them to be correct doesn't mean they aren't. Science, be it economics or environmental shouldn't be a popularity contest.

GV27

5896 posts

Uber Geek

#2173444 5-Feb-2019 14:25

Fred99:

What if the Greens are right? Just because (apparently) most people don't want them to be correct doesn't mean they aren't. Science, be it economics or environmental shouldn't be a popularity contest.

What if they are? What does it mean? Does it mean electricity no one can afford, or rolling blackouts? Does it mean dismantling coal stations with no replacement capacity because there's no economic way to generate replacement units?

Or do poor people just go without? Or will it be Wellington vs. Auckland again like it has been for most vital infrastructure?

I think this is the bit that grates most about Green politics; on one hand, it's doom, gloom and everyone must make drastic changes, but on the other it's a total failure to articulate a credible alternative for people already doing it tough that isn't "ride a bike everywhere" or something equally out of touch.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2173450 5-Feb-2019 14:31

Agree. I am actually listening to Peter Garrett as we speak. Passionate, got into office, achieved many things. The Green party seems more just a green movement, than actually achieving anything

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2173497 5-Feb-2019 14:40

GV27:

What if they are? What does it mean? Does it mean electricity no one can afford, or rolling blackouts? Does it mean dismantling coal stations with no replacement capacity because there's no economic way to generate replacement units?

Or do poor people just go without? Or will it be Wellington vs. Auckland again like it has been for most vital infrastructure?

I think this is the bit that grates most about Green politics; on one hand, it's doom, gloom and everyone must make drastic changes, but on the other it's a total failure to articulate a credible alternative for people already doing it tough that isn't "ride a bike everywhere" or something equally out of touch.

Is that true? I don't know and am honestly asking. I haven't studied the issue but one hears so much about alternative generation technologies. Do they really offer no prospects? I am also convinced that a lot of energy gets wasted because it didn't used to matter and that's how people are used to doing things. It is sort of like the plastic bag issue. If consumers modified their behaviour even a little, and companies followed suit because consumers demanded it, that might already make a big difference. I'm sure studies must have been done on this, though I don't know of them offhand.

A lot of these arguments seem to be based on an assumption of doing the same things in the same way. On that basis, coal may well be the only viable option for some industrial processes, but what if the processes change? Maybe there are better ways of doing things that remove the need for coal or even gas.

Is it true that there are no credible alternatives, or is there just a reluctance to seriously work on them because it is easier to carry on doing the same old thing?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2173502 5-Feb-2019 14:48

The one that comes to my mind is hydro. We want to be 100% renewable, we are over 80%, we want to stop using coal and gas. Hydro can do that, but we don't want to dig up any native plants and upset any wildlife. If we can land on a comet we can mitigate 75 sq km of land that we take over for a hydro reservoir. That's where the Greens fall down for me.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2173518 5-Feb-2019 15:20

People made it to the moon, several times, using 1960s technology because there was an all-out, no expenses spared, effort to do so before the Soviets got there first. Huge risks were taken, and limitless amounts of money were spent.

A comparable, though less well-known, engineering feat was the Delta Works project of the Dutch. Devastating floods in 1953 did so much damage, and created so much shock, that an all-out undertaking to ensure that such a thing could never happen again led to a massive, multi-generational commitment to invent, design, and construct a system of dykes and enormous movable barriers to protect the southwest of the country.

Here in l'il o'l New Zealand, there is no will to do anything like that. Life is too easy for too many people. No-one wants to spend the money. The politicians are too timid. So instead we diddle around poking mud with a stick and telling each other it is too hard.

An all or nothing national commitment to an Apollo or Delta Works-style project would fix this. More dams may or may not be the best solution, but at least we would find out once and for all. Same with more thermal. Instead of stuffing farting cows with artificially boosted clover, the hills would be alive with bio-fuel crops. That technology already works. Just ask Brazil.

Why not wave generation? We certainly have plenty of waves! And more wind, and better battery technology. Electric cars for everyone. Electric everything for everyone. Hell, microwave generation from space. These and many other things are not out of reach. But it's sooo much trouble when instead you can just grab another bunch of low-hanging grapes and recline on your couch and enjoy the view out to sea.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2173521 5-Feb-2019 15:24

GV27:

I think this is the bit that grates most about Green politics; on one hand, it's doom, gloom and everyone must make drastic changes, but on the other it's a total failure to articulate a credible alternative for people already doing it tough that isn't "ride a bike everywhere" or something equally out of touch.

I think it actually is a case of "ride a bike" - but perhaps not that drastic. NZ's private motor car obsession is insane and unsustainable. Catch a bus.

The biggest issue is that the rich consume and pollute the most, and the rich (for the past 30 years or so in particular) always set the dialogue.

Who'd have thought that "the people" would elect an anti-environmentalist schmuck billionaire as President? Yet here we are.

(Yes I know this isn't the Trump thread - but he's an obvious example of anti-environment populist BS)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11