Hasbeen, nothing like debating from a point of ignorance, is there for you. Many if not most containers from Port Botany are first shipped to a logistical holding yard, sometimes only a short distance from the port, before being on shipped to their final destination.

For the dummyl Ship-Road-Road-Final Destination.

Since you are such an expert Hassy I'll throw this one at you. What comes into the Qube Logistics yard at Botany, and what goes out of that yard? I'll explain in simple English, just for you. Containers come into the yard, where do those containers come from, answer container ships moored at Port Botany. What goes out of that yard, you guessed it containers! Hassy go to the top of the class.

The Greens Transport policy certainly resonated with the good voting folk of Newtown recently, not far from Port Botany. During my time there before the state election, I found very positive feed back for that particular transport Policy, seems I didn't bump into Beach, for a ear bashing of negativity about those "Watermelon Troskyist Greens'. Incidentally. well before the election I did invite Beach to nominate for the seat of Newtown, would have loved his policy of a Para-Miltary Private Army, would have went down well with the voters of Newtown as they overwhelmingly voted Green!

Greens still opposed to a rise in fuel excise? Hypocrites!

This is what happens when Greens 'policies' are subjected to scrutiny (UK example),

"Green Party leader Natalie Bennett delivered a car crash performance in one of the most cringe-worthy interviews you will ever hear.

The politician was doing the media rounds ahead of the launch of the Green Party’s General Election manifesto, when she came up against LBC radio’s Nick Ferrari.

The radio show host asked Ms Bennett how her party would pay for an additional 500,000 new social homes - part of one of its key strands of “ensuring everyone has a secure, affordable place to live."

Ms Bennett said: “Well, what we want to do is fund that particularly by removing tax relief on mortgage interests for private landlords. We have a situation where…”

Mr Ferrari asked how much that would raise, to which Ms Bennett stumbled: "Erm... well... it's... that's part of the whole costing."

The interview went from bad to worse as Ms Bennett’s pauses after the questions became longer, and she she seemed to suffer a coughing attack as Mr Ferrari drilled down into the policy."
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/natalie-bennett-listen-green-party-5220699

It goes without saying that it definitely was NOT a BBC interviewer who asked the obvious questions (that had been asked of other parties!).

In Australia the Greens have been serial nuisances disrupting the federal senate for years, BUT never has the 'fact-checking' ABC set Leigh Sales or any other serious interviewer the task of holding to account the (previous) Greens leader Bob Brown or the present Greens leader and senators.

Why has the 'fact-checking' ABC, the publicly-funded national broadcaster, consistently allowed the Greens and particularly the awful NSW 'Watermelon' Greens to fly under the radar for so many years?

Even when Bob Brown was partnered with Julia Gillard (and white-anting her daily while smirking all the time) the ABC was superficial in its infrequent interviews of Brown and giving him a free podium for petty shots and self-promotion.

A bit of Beach thinking.

I can't find anything in Australia to throw at The Greens, so I thralled the internet and lone behold I found a story 16,000 km away in England. Now let me see what I can make of that. Maybe Paul1405 should look for a redneck story from Alabama USA and throw it at my Australia First Party. Just as relevant, Now Paul1405 didn't bother reading past the first line of my story.
<<This is what happens when Greens 'policies' are subjected to scrutiny (UK example),>> What a YAWN!

Aidan,

"Is Mise,
....your claim of being more efficient for society because they require more jobs is completely wrong. They're LESS efficient for society for precisely that reason! Employing more people for that purpose means they're not able to be employed for a more productive purpose."
and do we now, as a consequence, of these more productive purposes have 100% employment?

My local council bought a dual control truck that sweeps and collects rubbish from the streets.
Unfortunately it can't sweep between parked vehicles and the kerb so it has to miss those places; it runs on imported fuel and imported tyres and needs only one man to operate it.
It was made in Germany.

It replaces a single horse dray that was a two man operation,
fuel was grown locally, the dray was made locally, the tyres and the horse's shoes were made locally and the wages supported two families.
The horse system was more efficient if only because the sweepers could sweep the whole length of the gutters, parked vehicles being no problem; the by product from the exhaust system was immediately usable on the garden
True only one wage is now paid but there is the interest on the purchase loan for the sweeper and the money borrowed went to Germany.
With the Horse and cart system there are more jobs and all the outlay stays in the municipality.

Council periodically bleats about the lack of local industry etc.

Paul,

You still haven't told us the Greens' costing for all that alternative fuel that is to power our transport and you haven't addressed the Greens' preference for rigid trucks over the articulated variety.