Climate Change; Asylum Seekers; John Saffran

A devastating review of the CPRS. The bottom line is, no progressive should support it, and if it were proposed by the Liberals, none would.

The first thing that the CPRS isn’t going to do is reduce our emissions from coal-fired power stations. According to a recent analysis of the Treasury’s modelling, the CPRS will not be responsible for the closure of a single coal-fired power station.

While that may seem absurd, it is in fact quite easy to explain. The carbon price is determined by the interplay of supply and demand. Because the government plans to issue so many pollution permits, the price of the permits will be low. And without a significant carbon price, renewables have no chance of competing with their highly polluting coal-fired competitors.

The next thing the CPRS isn’t going to do is drive down emissions in the transport industry. Why not? Because in a moment of panic when the world oil price was rising, the government decided to reduce the rate of fuel excise by an amount equivalent to the carbon price. This is the policy equivalent of a bank announcing that it has lowered its fees but increased its user charges.

This farcical arrangement allows the minister to maintain her claim that the scheme has “broad coverage” while at the same time assuring voters that her scheme will have no impact on the petrol price.

And when it comes to transport, there is a little sting in the tail that the CPRS’ fans in the environment movement seem to have missed  — while it will do nothing to increase the cost of petrol, the CPRS will actually increase the cost of running electric commuter trains. While the polluters have their hands out for excessive compensation, the state governments aren’t demanding a cent.

And the final thing the CPRS won’t do is reduce emissions from agriculture for the simple reason that agriculture is not covered by the CPRS in the short run. In the longer run, the enormous difficulties associated with accurately measuring emissions across more than 100,000 farms means that agriculture is unlikely to ever be included in the scheme.

Now let’s put these three omissions into perspective. The biggest sources of emissions in Australia are electricity generation, transport and agriculture. And the CPRS does nothing to reduce the number of coal-fired power stations, insulates the petrol price from the carbon price, and does not cover agriculture.

Again, the question for the minister is, what will her CPRS actually do?

Damian Kingsbury is a good dude.

The fourth, domestic political issue, then, is that the motivating factor for this Indonesia Solution is not the government’s supposed humanitarian concerns, but the “dog-whistle politics” of racism in the immigration debate.

Australia’s politicians arguing about who is the toughest on immigration is simply code for who will sink to this lowest common denominator.

Also: John Safran’s Race Relations.

That was quite the show. If Chaser caused controversy, I can’t see how this won’t. If it becomes news in Israel, I imagine there will at least be religious Jews unhappy about Palestinian sperm secretly donated (I can’t remember Moriah education that well, but I can’t think of any reason why they’d oppose artificial insemination generally). Otherwise, there was the repeated masturbation on screen (okay, so Safran didn’t do it, but the Palestinian dude might’ve [I hope not]). And stealing underwear is pretty creepy (was all that necessary anyway? Would it have been so hard to ask to borrow underwear from his female friends? Or to give 20 bucks to possible donors?). I wonder if he’ll be excommunicated from the community for his support of intermarriage and all that. Certainly, it won’t go down well in orthodox educational institutions.

I did find it funny though.

One Response to “Climate Change; Asylum Seekers; John Saffran”
  1. John of Melbourne says:

    I just saw John Safran’s new Race Relations show on the ABC.

    I thought by going into the West Bank (he called it Palestine) through a checkpoint in a matter of seconds and filming a modern looking Palestinian sperm bank clinic he was giving a deceptively normal picture of the occupied territories. No mention of any injustices or the occupation. Just a normal modern country is our Palestine. That’s exactly the type of picture the zionists try to sell us. You know, Thomas Friedman from the NY Times writes how oh yes things are really coming along and just fine in the West Bank because he ate in three different restaurants and there were two discoteques. This is a very selective view of the occupied territories. No talk of the ongoing crimes and oppression, the destruction of Palestinian society.

    I thought Safran at worst was either purposefully wanting to cleanse the image of Israel and normalise it as do the zionist media machine or at best he is very naive.

    He also treated jews like a race by comparing them to eurasians in his body odour experiment. What about black jews?-surely they are a different race to euro jews. Or other types of jews like sephardic jews?

    So while he healthily poked fun at his jewish culture’s desire for him to marry within the tribe I thought he was almost cleansing the image of Israel in parts of his show.

    And also it’s ironic that in the segment where he tries to subvert tribal perpetuation by going into an Israeli sperm clinic and getting his Pal boom operator to ejaculate and pretend to the clinic that it was his sperm and then doing the inverse in the West Bank sperm clinic, he didn’t mention the very strong possibility that the ancient holy land jews most probably have their closest descendants in the modern day Pals, as opposed to the modern day Israelis.

    I wonder how much harm the show did by distorting the picture of life in the occupied territories.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: