Hi AC,

Don't be sorry for disagreeing, but its not that simple, this is a complex issue and a complex solution has to be found. Do you equally believe billions of dollars of government support for the mining industry should be withdrawn?

So Indy, ranting that those "jungle bunnies" you like to refer to, and you so detest, didn't dig up these mineral deposits in 50,000 years. Maybe they had no need to. Seems a good starting point for the old farts Seniors National Service, picks and shovels and off to the mines, so they can help pay their way. Are you up for it?

"Do you equally believe billions of dollars of government support for the mining industry should be withdrawn?"

Yeah probably, so long as you don't unfairly over-subsidise other industries like renewables in it's place.
The reason why there's an energy crisis is the lack of investment in energy, and maybe producers don't want to invest with the way things are.

Stop the price caps too, let western fair market economics do what its supposed to do, and let the people instead get mad and point the finger at support for continuing wars.

"...its not that simple, this is a complex issue and a complex solution has to be found."

You're right everything is a bit too complex these days.

AC

I couldn't have said it better myself.

The governments of Australia have happily received the rivers of gold coming from these companies from the sale of mineral rights to royalties, company taxes and personnel taxes, with the profits providing retirement income via super investment.

But the village idiots AKA the greens want to stop all of this.

This coal and gas cap system is a trademark socialist tax and spend policy from the 1950s. It didn't work then and will come back to bite us later.

Hey shadowminister,
FYI I meant to say 'free market economics'

IF THERE IS a case for 'subsidies';
I can't help thinking the opposite of Paul, on the basis of export potential.
With fossil fuels, maybe if the government subsidises the cost of a rail connection or port upgrades for example;
- Then this to me seems like a 'spend money to make money' kind of a proposition, which helps our trade balance.

Renewables on the other hand, cant really be exported, although I'm sure there's a few exceptions.
It's just energy, if you can turn that energy into a product, like hydrogen for example;
Or make a product for export based on energy creation like wind turbines or solar panels, then these could be products for export.

These price caps are concerning.
Were attempting to bring in new financial tools that further remove ourselves from free market economics,
- and whilst I'm no financial expert I'm told that when these kinds of things are employed that it never really ends well in the long term.

I know these people are themselves only trying to do what they think is best for the environment.
But I think that doing anything at all that increases the cost of energy exasperates our ability to actually move forward towards a better kind of future that these climate conscious people want.

Its true resources account for 68% of Australia's export revenue, but to claim its a 'river of gold" is a nonsense. Compared to other resource rich exporting countries, such as Canada, Australia fairs badly as far as net revenue from those resources is concerned. Both Conservatives and Labor governments, had a "begging bowl" mentality when it came to resource negotiation and the resultant income, they sold the farm at a rock bottom price, all to greedy multinational companies. Who can forget the Howard intervention in gas deals with China and Japan, which seen Australia exporting 3.2 million tonnes of LNG annually to China for 25 years at a rock bottom price. The same deal for Japan.

That's why today Australia is now a Debtor Nation, running government deficits.