News Corp’s blurring of news and views damaging society

Archive

  • RealVenom
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Snowy Hydro 2.0 was something he backed heavily whilst in power. He has also invested and advocate considerably in renewables since leaving politics. Compare that to your regular run of the mill politician like Gladys or Baird swanning into telcos and banking, or the others jumping into gambling industries.

    Also, why are you downplaying him talking about climate change? It’s one of his best assets, he holds huge influence. Would you prefer he install solar panels? Get real. You just want someone to hate but are completely misguided.

    • No1
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Snowy Hydro 2.0 was something he backed heavily whilst in power. He has also invested and advocate considerably in renewables since leaving politics.

      Oops. It would be criminal if that Snowy 2.0 turns out to be worse than what happened with the NBN

      Compare that to your regular run of the mill politician like Gladys or Baird swanning into telcos and banking, or the others jumping into gambling industries.

      I’ll ignore that whataboutism. Again, let’s get back to what Turnbull has or has not achieved.

      Also, why are you downplaying him talking about climate change? It’s one of his best assets, he holds huge influence. Would you prefer he install solar panels? Get real.

      To quote the lyrical poet DMX from the seminal Ruff Ryders Anthem; Talk is cheap, motherfucker.

      And when what you talk about goes as well as NBN and now Snowy Hydro 2.0 is going, well, we should wonder if he maybe, err, should talk less?

      What influence does he have? He certainly didn’t influence anyone in office. In fact he so ‘influenced’ them that they got rid of him.

      You just want someone to hate but are completely misguided.

      And that, my friend, is an ad hominem, which I shall also ignore.

      • RealVenom
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        So you’ve quoted an article that complains about the cost of SH 2.0 and another that complains that it’s delayed (name an infrastructure project that isn’t delayed or over budget). But neither of those refute the projects long term benefit as a renewable energy source. Moving on, you’ve made moot points, congrats.

        At least you admit he was working on a positive climate policy and lost his job because of it. Both sides of the debate now agree he was doing what he could.

        You’ve obviously come from /r/Australia because they certainly had a penchant for slinging the word “whataboutism” around as if it was a good argument. It’s more of a trumpism where you just say a slogan so you don’t have to address the point. Well done.

        • No1
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          So you’ve quoted an article that complains about the cost of SH 2.0 and another that complains that it’s delayed (name an infrastructure project that isn’t delayed or over budget {No1 says: Yo, that’s an ad hominem}). But neither of those refute the projects long term benefit as a renewable energy source. Moving on, you’ve made moot points, congrats.

          Umm, you’ve quoted nothing. Does that make your ‘points’ less than nothing? Nobody is stopping you from providing evidence, articles or scientific studies.

          Also, does just saying something make it your own? Or does talking about something make it a great idea and a fabulous achievement, but if it’s rubbish idea and goes tits up, it’s somebody else’s fault?

          At least you admit he was working on a positive climate policy and lost his job because of it.

          Wait, what? Where did I say that?

          Both sides of the debate now agree he was doing what he could.

          Evidence?

          You’ve obviously come from /r/Australia because they certainly had a penchant

          Yep, that is an ad hominem. You attribute my motives/actions for something without entirely any evidence.

          for slinging the word “whataboutism” around as if it was a good argument. It’s more of a trumpism where you just say a slogan so you don’t have to address the point. Well done.

          Whoa! And you just ad hominem’d your ad hominem. And throwing the ‘trumpism’ in is arguably a whataboutism.

          C’mon bro, you can address the point:

          TURNBULL + ENVIRONMENT + EVIDENCE = POSITIVE RESULTS

          Show me the way!

          • RealVenom
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You said he “influenced” them so much that they got rid of him. You’re implying that his stance wasn’t conducive to their ideology so they removed him as their leader. He lost the party room because he tried to introduce the NEG, he refused to butcher the policy by funding coal fired plants. He didn’t succeed, but he did the best any liberal leader could amongst one of the most aggressively right wing eras in Australian politics.

            What are you expecting me to quote on SH 2.0, you’ve claimed it was worse than the NBN but haven’t backed up legitimate reasons why? Because it’s expensive and went over budget? The original NBN quote was expensive, and you’d be to be highly optimistic if it stayed on budget and was delivered in time, it’s a government project afterall.

            Do you need links?

            • No1
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You said he “influenced” them so much that they got rid of him. You’re implying that his stance wasn’t conducive to their ideology so they removed him as their leader. He lost the party room because he tried to introduce the NEG, he refused to butcher the policy by funding coal fired plants. He didn’t succeed, but he did the best any liberal leader could amongst one of the most aggressively right wing eras in Australian politics.

              Evidence?

              What are you expecting me to quote on SH 2.0, you’ve claimed it was worse than the NBN but haven’t backed up legitimate reasons why?

              No, I never said it was worse than NBN. I said it would be criminal (and I just mean that colloquially, ie that it would be funny in the saddest way) if it turned out worse than the NBN.

              Because it’s expensive and went over budget? The original NBN quote was expensive, and you’d be to be highly optimistic if it stayed on budget and was delivered in time, it’s a government project afterall.

              Original claimed FTTP NBN seemed crazy expensive even though it seems low now. But are you claiming the mixed-tech NBN was a success vs the originally planned FTTP? It was claimed to be cheaper and be implemented faster. And well, it was neither… and we’re still gonna have to pay to basically convert to FTTP anyways…

              You can look into the NZ FTTP with reducing costs as rollout occurred as a counterpoint. Happy to look at your source.

              Do you need links?

              Have you got a link? Any link? You haven’t given one so far. For anything you’ve claimed. Or that Turnbull has claimed.

              BTW: I upvote you bro. Anyone downvoting shouldn’t be, and should join the discussion. We all learn something and see others perspectives! Respect!

              • RealVenom
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                This link speaks a bit to what I’ve been saying.

                https://reneweconomy.com.au/turnbull-says-his-biggest-leadership-failure-was-on-climate-change-83289/

                That being said a lot of what I’ve discussed is covered in both Turnbull’s unauthorised biography and his memoirs, but I can’t expect you to go and read those. But that link touches a bit on just what sort of battle he was facing even in cabinet. Without Turnbull, the NEG would have included 5 billion investment in coal fired plants. Sometimes it’s about what you don’t do that easily gets overlooked.

                I won’t touch the LNP NBN roll out as that’s not what I was referring to and we don’t need another tangent.