Frankly I see the Greens as Spoilers! And quite dangerous to Australia.Brown may come across as a nice fellow but so do all successful con-men and women. The impression I have of this lot is that they would be most happy to wind back the civilization clock to protect flora and fauna so long as they were there to run what was left.

The questions that worry me are these.
What drives the Climate?. To be able to calculate as opposed to guessing via computer wishful thinking AKA 'modeling', what the changes may be and where they will occur surely is the most important knowledge of all. Is any Gov body actually and seriously looking at that!! Climate change has been with us since day one. There is nothing unusual or untoward about it as its a constant. The trick is to learn to live with it.
Why is it that the Government, a body elected to look after all the citizens of Australia not just some of them so keen to spend so much of our money to reduce our carbon footprint when in the overall scheme of things its minuscule.
Why ,with the reserves of coal Australia has arn't we seriously and vigorously working out how to use it with negligible pollution. To me thats a no-brainer. We have the stuff in abundance at the least cost of any other fuel so where is the research into using it safely. And don’t tell me it can't be done. We have some very bright people out there and we just need them to be turned loose on the problem.

Why not Nuclear. According to the people in the Industry the fears that are raised by all those in opposition to the idea have been addressed years ago. The bottom line is that all the green alternatives seem to fail in providing long term sustainable base line power at a price we can afford.
It really is about time Politicians started planning long term for the benefit of all Australians not just them or their party.

TCM “redirected to deal with the problems created by this unworkable ideology.”

Disagree…

welfare is a crutch, used not just by those who need it but by the indolent, whose selfishness, grabs a free-be instead of working.

Take away the crutch and you will be surprised how many can really walk.

We do not need middleclass welfare.

We do not need corporate welfare, favouring certain industries but not others: such as the supposed “environmentally friendly”, especially when “government” is so totally hopeless at picking “winners”.

We need to leave the market to do what the market does best: match the expectations of consumers with the offerings of suppliers.

“Your extreme ideology may be opposite to extreme socialism on the spectrum, but in the real world it's just as stupid and unworkable and damaging.”

Nothing extreme with suggesting we are better off with small versus big government

Ronald Reagan promoted it
Margaret Thatcher promoted it

The USSR collapsed because their “big government” could not deliver what “smaller “ western democratic government could.

If we look at what you have just written

My “ideology” has worked for centuries.

Your left-wing ideology is the one which collapsed.

It is time for you to think again about what works and what fails

And the evidence is written in the last quarter of the 20th century

All you need to do is what I have already done (well I have lived it, since 1950)…

I suggest you research it and read the evidence,

Don’t get caught in political rhetoric, it will neither feed, house or clothe you.

Think for yourself, experience the richness of self-reliance and the self-esteem which comes from doing things for yourself;

instead of wasting time, waiting for government promises to arrive or ensuring your neighbor does not have more than you

my wife’s “clinic” is for naturopathy, hypnotherapy and acupuncture, although she originally qualified with a medical degree and worked as a pathologist.

She is expert in maintenance of body image, life quality and longevity

And at 62 year old, she still looks good for someone in their early 40s

Bob, what happened to the motion in the senate?

Bob Brown,
the tragedy is with this site is that topic like this tend to be taken over by the curmudgeonly visceral and largely aggressive ignorant deniers.

the whole idea that there maybe an alternative to the current lifestyle that will send us back to loin cloths and the hunters gathers is a foreign concepts. It hasn't occurred to some that too many hunters& gatherers would result in the same issue e.g. the Maori plight before the white man came.Albeit the latter simply created different more wide spread problems.

Some ill informed even went as far as to (ludicrously) imply that green technology was a contributive factor to Spain's fiscal problems.

Another claim he doesn't need any more knowledge and then argues that he keeps his ecological footprint under check by virtue of the limitations of his superior wealth and youthful looking wife?
Then there are those who have no sensible answer to or understand your point and "just don't like it! (emotional foot stamp)" because the shallow sensationalist media chase the buck rather than boring objectivity....the latter doesn't sell.
Then there's the gratuitous advice to the Greens to roll in the mud with the rest of 'the great unwashed'.
The link between those and the point of your article escapes me.

While I may not agree that the plan you either politically or specifically that solution in the plan is apropos to the reality of rampant self interest masquerading as reasoned analysis. At least this article was prepared to look at other alternatives it is a pity a few others aren't prepared to look beyond visceral party platform

examinator "the tragedy is with this site is that topic like this tend to be taken over by the curmudgeonly visceral and largely aggressive ignorant deniers."

and reference to "Posted by examinator, Thursday, 12 August 2010 6:41:12 PM" - thread title "Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth"

quoting examinator "I repeat I have no interest in proselytizing any solution simply because of the level of defensive galloping inertia that abounds here"

I find anyone who posts ascerbic criticism of other posters opinions and denigrates their exercise of a free entitlement to hold and express a viewpoint or opinion, -

whilst lacking the backbone to express their own heart felt views (as admitted by examinator above) represents the personification of ponmpousity at its most contemptible

really examinator, crawling up to Bob Brown, like some reptilian sychophant

"Bob Brown,
the tragedy is with this site....."

"the tragedy with this site" is you manage to keep finding it
to post your vacuous comments.

Stern claims:

"I find anyone who posts ascerbic criticism of other posters opinions and denigrates their exercise of a free entitlement to hold and express a viewpoint or opinion, "

then writes:

"really examinator, crawling up to Bob Brown, like some reptilian sychophant

"Bob Brown,
the tragedy is with this site....."

"the tragedy with this site" is you manage to keep finding it
to post your vacuous comments."

The tragedy is that you can't even spell either acerbic or sycophant.

The sadness is that you fail to apply your rules to yourself.

Does nothing for your credibility either.

So you don't like Bob Brown, big deal. How about offering a comprehensive alternative on how Australia can sustain itself in a future of diminishing energy sources? If you can crawl away from slagging off others, that is.