57
submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) by Davriellelouna@lemmy.world to c/australia@aussie.zone
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 2 points 5 days ago

Rudd

Rudd did it to himself by being pigheaded and refusing to go far enough.

Palaszczuk never really did anything stand-out brave. Her government lost because of the natural churn that comes with having been in power for 8 years, and because of global trends favouring oppositions.

Whitlam is definitely a good example. So would be Shorten, even though it was a bold platform from opposition that lost him a seemingly-unlosable election, rather than losing Government for bold actually-enacted policy.

I won't comment on Fyles. I'm not nearly familiar enough with NT politics to say anything intelligent.

[-] Tenderizer@aussie.zone 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Palaszczuk taxed the coal mining companies and balanced the state budget. And keep in mind this was in Queensland, the most conservative state in the country.

Rudd ... there is so much I could say. One of Gillard's first acts after replacing Rudd was to drop the taxes on mining, she then put in a carbon tax that even an idiot could come up with a scare campaign against, said carbon tax only lasted a few years and permanently poisoned the idea of a price on carbon. This is not even mentioning the CIA cables discussing whether they should replace Rudd with Gillard because Rudd didn't want to automatically join America in a war for Taiwan.

[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 2 points 5 days ago

Palaszczuk taxed the coal mining companies

Sure, but it wasn't an especially bold proposal. And it wasn't particularly central to either party's election campaign, compared to things like cost of living, the Olympics, and "youth crime".

she then put in a carbon tax

Not a carbon tax. A fixed-price period leading into a cap and trade scheme.

said carbon tax only lasted a few years

Still not a carbon tax. It lasted only a few years because the Government lost at the next election. Something that was greatly aided by the constant white-anting by Rudd after he lost the leadership.

Gillard's scheme was actually working. It was world-leading legislation that actually reduced emissions while it was in effect. If Rudd had just been willing to compromise and had delivered that exact policy in 2009 instead of trying to act the Big Tough Guy and insisting it was His Way or the Highway (despite the fact that "his way" would not have reduced emissions for another decade from today), turning it into the political football that brought down both his and Gillard's Governments.

[-] Tenderizer@aussie.zone 1 points 5 days ago

Sure, but it wasn’t an especially bold proposal.

Was enough to get her couped with a fake corruption scandal plastered all over the press. What are you expecting exactly, Whitlam levels of boldness?

Not a carbon tax.

Doesn't matter. You can say all you want that it's a lie to call it a "carbon tax" but does anyone in Australia know it by a different name?

It lasted only a few years because the Government lost at the next election. If Rudd had ... instead of ... that brought down both his and Gillard’s Governments.

Gillard was polling abysmally before Rudd took over. She was a terrible prime minster who nobody liked.

[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 5 days ago

Gillard was polling abysmally before Rudd took over

Yes. Because of relentless attack ads from the Murdoch media, and because Australians hate internal party division, and Rudd stoked that up every chance he got.

[-] Tenderizer@aussie.zone 1 points 5 days ago

So Gillard got couped too. Let's just leave it at that because I can't really be bothered.

[-] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Not a carbon tax. A fixed-price period leading into a cap and trade scheme.

What do you mean "leading into"?

Cap and trade? Isn't that an emissions trading scheme? She certainly didn't install ETS, she installed a carbon tax (and I don't consider tax a dirty word) aka carbon pricing.

[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 2 points 5 days ago
[-] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 days ago

OK so that's what you meant by "leading into". TIL. Thanks.

[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 2 points 5 days ago

Oh yes, sorry that wasn't clear. I've been talking about it for so long (even before the Gillard Government, I remember a fixed-price introductory period leading to a cap and trade scheme being what was described in my highschool econ classes as the best method for reducing emissions) I may have gotten lazy about explaining the terminology that's become so familiar to me.

[-] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Nah, that's fine. Most people don't want to know the details because they just want to be right about their entrenched view. The few serious ones will politely engage, and you then explained.

Maybe it is better in this sub but on Reddit it was usually ugly. Yay Lemmy!

this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2025
57 points (100.0% liked)

Australia

4476 readers
99 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS