Barnaby Joyce, satirist.

Cartoon; By Nicholson.

I often disagree with some of Joyce’s assertions, however he seems to get it right more often than not, and is not afraid to buck the system. One real quality he has is the ability to simply in one line sum up the stupidity of opposing arguments.

On the claims that a carbon tax would create innovation in ‘carbon free’ technologies by making them more viable he said, ”What I do know is that they did not develop the wheel because they taxed walking nor did they develop the car because they taxed the horse …”

Here is an example:

I saw a model and I assumed it wasn’t - Swan

Well Mr. Swan has told us that under his modeling with a carbon tax, employment will grow, gross national income will grow and if he had been pressed, no doubt he would have told us the dahlias would grow and Pinocchio would have been truly excited.

In his ivory tower, assumptionless modeling is self-serving wonder and light.

The other day I was reading modeling by government economists lauding the fact that a Doha trade agreement would lead to a “substantial” rise in world output of 0.1 per cent.(1) Now we learn from the Treasurer that actually a change in output of 0.1 per cent due to a carbon tax is only modest. It would seem that economists choose the wrapping depending on what they think of the package inside.

In amongst Mr. Swan’s lunch time thrashing around, we are told that China is driven by a moral imperative to reduce emissions and we should catch up and be like China. So what is all that black stuff that we sell them that is propping up Mr. Swan’s budget figures?

Effusive would be a very kind word to describe Mr. Swan’s speech. It was trust me this will not hurt a bit, taxes are good for you especially ones that can cool the planet, oh do not look at me like that I have a model that can prove it.

1 ABARE found in a paper titled "Increasing benefits to Australia from WTO agricultural trade liberalization":

"The global gains in GNP amount to US$47 billion, about 0.1 per cent of base levels in 2010."
The abstract of the paper reports these findings as:
"In this paper it is shown that global benefits from agricultural trade liberalisation are substantial."

Carbon Tax Favours Foreigners.

By: Viv Forbes, 
Chairman,
The Carbon Sense Coalition

The Carbon Sense Coalition today claimed that Australia's proposed carbon tax will favour foreigners at the expense of Australians.

The Chairman of “Carbon Sense” Mr Viv Forbes said that with the Kyoto foolishness collapsing, it was unwise of the Gillard government to impose more costs than our competitors will face.

"Coal produces the cheapest electricity in most areas of the world, especially in the modern clean power stations being constructed in Asia and India. Many of these plants will rely on imports of high quality Australian coal and the cheap power they produce will be supplied to Asian manufacturing and processing plants competing with Australian industry.

"The aim of the carbon tax is to increase the domestic cost of carbon fuels like coal, oil products and gas. This is designed to force Australian industry and consumers to use high-cost non-carbon energy options like wind and solar power. In many industries such as transport, green energy is not feasible and the carbon tax will thus merely add to the costs of fuel.

"The Green/ALP carbon tax coalition is thus asking Australian industry and exporters to use expensive energy while we supply cheap energy to their competitors.

"This policy of cheap energy for foreigners but not for locals is a path signposted with promises of paradise, but paved with poverty for those forced to tread there."

Green Policies destroy the Wild Environment.

Radical greens should spend World Environment Day doing penance for all the damage their mis-guided policies have done to the world's natural environment.

Only rich societies have the leisure and resources to care for their environment but green policies threaten to make us all poorer.

Where people have a daily struggle to find the food and fuel to survive, concern for the environment is not a consideration.

Everywhere we look we see unintended consequences of foolish green policies that are directly harming the wild environment.

Probably the worst damage is a result of their mindless promotion of wind energy. Their demands for ever higher wind power targets can only be achieved when wind towers and their associated roads and transmission links scar and uglify every wild mountain and every exposed headland. Then their whirling scythes will shred even more bird and bat populations in all the wild places.

Greens should also ask for forgiveness for their misguided campaign to turn plants into ethanol and biofuels. They should apologise for all the forests turned into regimented plantations producing palm oil and carbon credits and all the natural grasslands ploughed up for monocultures of ethanol crops.

Before the use of coal and oil for energy, the wild environment was being stripped of trees for firewood, crops and pastures were consumed by armies of horses and working bullocks, and whales were hunted for whale oil for lamps. Coal and oil saved the forests, the pastures and the whales. Today's "pretend greens" are turning back the clock to those dark days when burning biofuels to produce energy for heating lighting and transport was the only option for humans.

On this world environment day, greens should resolve to repeal all the silly energy policies that take us back to the dark days when the environment was ravaged to provide fuel.

Wilders speech to Dutch court.

H/t Libertarian Republican.

Those of us who believe in a free society tend to find it bizarre that citizens of countries considered to be part of the free world could be dragged into a star chamber to answer for their comments. Unfortunately it is relatively common as in the rather high profile cases of Mark Steyn in Canada, and Andrew Bolt in Australia.

Wilders is in court at present in the Netherlands defending his right to freedom of speech. He is charged for criticizing Islamic radicals. Here is part of his final speech there:

I am obliged to speak. For the Netherlands is under threat of Islam. As I have argued many times, Islam is chiefly an ideology. An ideology of hatred, of destruction, of conquest. It is my strong conviction that Islam is a threat to Western values, to freedom of speech, to the equality of men and women, of heterosexuals and homosexuals, of believers and unbelievers.

All over the world we can see how freedom is fleeing from Islam. Day by day we see our freedoms dwindle.

Islam is opposed to freedom. Renowned scholars of Islam from all parts of the world agree on this. My witness experts subscribe to my view. There are more Islam scholars whom the court did not allow me to call upon to testify. All agree with my statements, they show that I speak the truth. That truth is on trial today.

We must live in the truth, said the dissidents under Communist rule, because the truth will set us free. Truth and freedom are inextricably connected. We must speak the truth because otherwise we shall lose our freedom.

I wish to be a politician who serves the truth end hence defends the freedom of the Dutch provinces and of the Dutch people. I wish to be honest, I wish to act with honesty and that is why I wish to protect my native land against Islam. Silence is treason.

That is why I have spoken, why I speak and why I shall continue to speak.

Freedom and truth. I pay the price every day. Day and night I have to be protected against people who want to kill me.

Mister President, members of the Court, you must now decide whether freedom still has a home in the Netherlands

Franz Kafka said: “one sees the sun slowly set, yet one is surprised when it suddenly becomes dark.”

Mister President, members of the Court, do not let the lights go out in the Netherlands.

Do not let that source go dry just to cosy up to a totalitarian regime. “Freedom,” said the American President Dwight Eisenhower, “has its life in the hearts, the actions, the spirit of men and so it must be daily earned and refreshed – else like a flower cut from its life-giving roots, it will wither and die.”

Mister President, members of the Court, you have a great responsibility. Do not cut freedom in the Netherlands from its roots, our freedom of expression. Acquit me. Choose freedom.

Green ice bear insanity.

10 tons of English ice sent to Australia for emission reduction lesson.

While perusing the Andrew Bolt Blog, I thought someone was taking the piss out of him with his item, “Bearly sane.”

Andrew reported that a 10-ton block of ice was sent to Australia from England to be carved into a polar bear statue in order to demonstrate our need to curb our emissions and save the bears. I realize I have on occasions seemed a little skeptical as to the intellectual capacity of the Greens, but there comes a time when even I tend to think that no one could be that bloody stupid. I admit my mistake, they are.

From SMH:

If you want to see Sydney's newest endangered animal you'd better hurry - it's melting rapidly.

The two-meter polar bear has been carved from a 10-tonne block of ice outside Customs House at Circular Quay.

The block was frozen around a bronze skeleton in Britain before being sent to Australia where it was lifted by crane into Customs House Square.

Ok, so lets see if I have got this straight:

They claim polar bears are endangered because Arctic ice is melting, and:

This is caused by global warming through human emissions, and:

These emissions are caused by using too much fossil fuel, and:

There is a pressing need to make a gesture to get us to reduce said emissions, so:

Its somehow logical to freeze down 10 tons of water, fly or ship it to Australia, and carve a bloody statue out of it that will melt in a couple of days. I’m definitely missing something here. We may be descended from convicts and may not be as cool and sophisticated as Europeans, but hell, we have figured out how to make ice, and we even have freezers.

I guess though, that Pommy ice is the way to go if you are looking toward a pointless gesture to the point that common sense is precluded.

These stupid bastards need cutting before they start breeding. It should not be compulsory, and it needn’t be. Just tell them its for the planet, and they will stand in line.

Dishonest reporting on fracking.

H/t Town hall.

“Gasland” has created a new generation of dupes, convinced that the relatively common procedure of fracking to release gas from difficult formations is causing water from aquifers to become flammable. While it is reasonable to suggest that there can be leakage from poorly drilled or cased wells, evidence from fracking is marginal.

The documentary, like Gore’s ‘Inconvenient Truth’ leaves out the inconvenient facts that don’t back their case. For example the Markham’s who were featured had drilled their water well through four separate coal beds containing methane. Here Phelim McAleer, producer of Not Evil Just Wrong, asks director Josh Fox of Gasland a few inconvenient questions about the "facts" in the film:



Environmental damage should be addressed and fixed, but the sort of dishonesty displayed in this flick only serves to create hysteria in the short term, and causes people to become more cynical toward what may be serious threats in the future. Crying wolf may be profitable for the moment but has long term consequences.

A Bipartisan Nanny State

H/t Menzies House.

The Liberal Party has backed down on the idea of supporting intellectual property rights and has now agreed to support Labor's plain packaging laws for cigarettes. Labor has criticized Abbott over the Liberal Party taking donations from “big tobacco,” what ever the term might mean. In terms of the nanny state big is bad, small and unsuccessful is the beloved of the Lord, large and profitable is the Devils disciple.

Bob Menzies originally formed the Liberals with the idea of being a party based on the traditional principles of liberalism but with the exception of the small ‘ginger group’ essentially had no idea of classical liberal philosophy. They have long abandoned any commitment to any sort of genuinely liberal values and have for a long time been just another party of big government and the nanny state.

It is a long time since they have come up with a solution to anything that did not involve an expansion of government. This is the reason they are hoping and praying that Gillard continues to look bad, as that is their only chance of gaining power. They have no ideas that are markedly different to Labor. They oppose the Labor tax proposals for mining and carbon, but this is only out of opportunism, as with the alternatives they propose, they will have to increase revenue. This will have to involve tax increases by whatever name they think up to disguise them.

The Liberal Democrats are the only genuinely liberal party left in Australia.

Smokers already know cigarettes are unhealthy, but choose to smoke anyway. That will not change as a result of plain packaging. However, it will create a precedent for more government intrusion into areas where it thinks it knows better than adult Australians.

Cigarette companies have threatened to take the issue to the High Court, which will probably find the legislation unconstitutional or compel the government to pay billions in compensation for destroying the intellectual property (brands and trademarks) of the tobacco companies.

Spot swearing fines in bloody Victoria.

"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain.

Well, there is the old adage, “Nothing any good comes out of Victoria.” Now it seems that police there are being given the power, (which they love,) of fining people on the spot for swearing. There is at the moment no news regarding poor grammar and split infinitives. Legislators claim it will allow police to deal with it on the spot rather than clog up the court system.

This probably has more to do with revenue raising than keeping a bit of couth and decorum in the state, even though those Victorian bastards like to consider their bloody state to be the home of culture. Lets face it, the cost of taking it to court to fight it is probably more than the fine, even in the situation of a minimum wage earner who might barely take home that much in a week.

It is a really bad move for the justice system for these offences to be taken out of the court system. Courts provide a vital moderating influence because there is an independent arbiter to consider the facts of what in most cases happens in the heat of the moment. After proper consideration, a judge might in fact decide that the cop was in fact a cockhead or a f**kwit.

This places the average citizen at the mercy of whatever cop they get on the wrong side of. It is particularly bad news if he has had a bad day and feels like making a prick of himself, or missed out last night and is determined to make some poor bastard pay.