Something new under the sun today from Newspoll, with The Australian ($) publishing the first set of aggregated breakdowns since the election. This would appear to be limited to the new-look poll that was launched last month, which has dropped its telephone component and is now conducted entirely online. Only two results have been published in that time, but there is evidently more behind this poll than that, as the survey period extends back to November 7 and the sample size of 4562 suggests three polling periods rather than two.
The results as published are of interest in providing never-before-seen breakdowns for education level (no tertiary, TAFE/technical or tertiary) and household income (up to $50,000, up to $100,000, up to $150,000, and beyond). Including the first of these as a weighting variable promises to address difficulties pollsters may have been having in over-representing those with good education and high levels of civic engagement. However, the poll gives with one hand and takes with the other, in that it limits the state breakdowns are limited to New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland. And it falls well short of the promised new age of pollster transparency, providing no detail on how the various sub-categories have been weighted.
The state breakdowns suggest either that Labor has recovered slightly in Queensland since the election, or that polling is still struggling to hit the mark there. The Coalition is credited with a two-party lead of 55-45, compared with 58.4-41.6 at the election. Their primary vote is 40%, down from 43.7%, with Labor up from 26.7% to 29%, One Nation up from 8.9% to 13%, and the Greens up from 10.3% to 12%. The Coalition lead in New South Wales is 51-49, compared with 51.8-48.2 at the election, from primary votes of Coalition 42% (42.5%), Labor 35% (34.6%) and Greens 10% (8.7%). Labor’s lead in Victoria is 53-47, barely different from the election result of 53.1-46.9, from primary votes of Coalition 40% (38.6%), Labor 38% (36.9%) and Greens 12% (11.9%).
Age breakdowns consist of four cohorts rather than the old three, and tell a globally familiar story of Labor dominating among the 18-to-34s with a lead of 57-43, while the 65-plus cohort goes 61-39 the other way. In between are a 50-50 from 35-49s and 51-49 to the Coalition among 50-64s. The primary votes are less radical than the recent findings of the Australian Election Study survey: the primary votes among the young cohort are Coalition 34%, Labor 35% and Greens 22%, compared with 37%, 23% and 28% respectively in the AES.
Reflecting polling in Britain, there is little distinction in the balance of major party support between the three education cohorts (UPDATE: actually not so – I was thinking of social class, education was associated with Labor support), contrary to the traditional expectation that the party of the working class would do best among those with no tertiary education. The Coalition instead leads 52-48 among both that cohort and the university-educated, with Labor leading 51-49 among those with TAFE or other technical qualifications. However, household income breakdowns are more in line with traditional expectation, with Labor leading 53-47 at the bottom end, the Coalition leading 51-49 in the lower-middle, and the Coalition leading 58-42 in both of the upper cohorts.
Leadership ratings turn up a few curiosities, such as Scott Morrison rating better in Victoria (46% on both approval and disapproval) than New South Wales (41% and 51%) and Queensland (43% and 51%). Conversely, Anthony Albanese is stronger in his home state of New South Wales (41% and 40%) than Victoria (37% and 42%) and Queensland (35% and 49%).
“Both of which militate strongly against the effective thermal coal for electricity market operating as a free market.”
I keep wondering why people keep using this term ‘free market’. There is no free market in anything. What operates as a free market anywhere?
Also, supply and demand exists without a free market. It’s pretty fundamental.
P1
Orrrrr –‘cock of the walk to coq au vin’
We are seeing the very worst of our scientific predictions come to pass in these bushfires
As a climate scientist I am wondering if the Earth system has now breached a tipping point
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/03/we-are-seeing-the-very-worst-of-our-scientific-predictions-come-to-pass-in-these-bushfires
Maybe, just maybe the halfwit should have stayed in Hawaii…
Astro
Indeed.
The right and left have both signed up to the myth of free market
The problem for progressives is that neo-classical beliefs have taken politics to the right
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/apr/15/the-right-and-left-have-both-signed-up-to-the-myth-of-free-market
Peg
The biggest thing for me is that there’s no free movement of labour. Given cost of labour is huge factor in production how can a market be free if you exclude free movement of labour.
‘Socrates says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 5:34 pm
Boerwar
Thanks for the useful context. I was aware of the defacto war between Iran and Israel, and its long history, and spillover in the Syrian civil war. I was not aware of the Israeli planes in the Caucasus!
Either way this seems a large escalation. The US is now taking steps the Israelis and Iranians have not done to each other. I assume the Saudis also have a large stake in this. But we do not! We should get all ADF personnel out of there ASAP. Albanese should not continue bipartisan support for US mid east policy if it involves extra-judicial killings not supported by the UN or anyone else. Australia should not be seen to support it.’
I support 100% Australia buggering off out of there.
I support ‘extra judicial’ killings of peeps like the leadership of Heshbollah. Legal alternatives simply do not exist.
Why are our regions so catastrophically dry ?
Longer droughts. Warmer temperatures.
What’s causing the longer droughts and warmer temperatures ?
Increase of dangerous GHG’s in the atmosphere.
What’s the most dangerous of GHG’s ?
CO2 from burning thermal coal.
Which country is one of the biggest suppliers of coal ?
Australia.
What’s the logical thing to do ?
Keep providing more coal.
Why ?
To win a few more seats in the regions.
But what about the greater number of affected voters who lose their jobs, property and lives due to climate change ?
Umm…. how about that idiot Trump eh ?
Boerwar
That dumb policy played a v. large part in the Israelis ending up with a “leadership of Hezbollah” on their hands. It has been noted numerous times that the continued assassination of leaders saw that leadership taken up by even more radical types and on it went.
Oh yes, if it doesn’t catch fire they’ll know by the little blob of melted yellow among the melted green plastic
Melissa Clarke
(@Clarke_Melissa)
RFS briefing in #Narooma also advising ppl who choose to stay & defend to put their yellow-lidded recycling bins out (weighted down) so fire crews know where people are.
Boerwar says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 4:18 pm
Astrobleme
Let’s do it a step at a time.
You wish to stop coal exports from Australia because you believe it will make a difference to the amount of CO2 emitted. If you do believe this, how would stopping coal exports have that effect?’
Astrobleme’s hypothetical answer would be something like this:
‘The reduction in Australian supply will cause an increase in price which will cause a decline in use of coal which will therefore cause a global reduction in CO2 emissions. Therefore Australia should stop exporting coal.’
This argument is basically a supply/demand equation based on the operation of a free market.
This theory is predicated on the assumption that the coal markets in China, India, Indonesia, Japan and Korea are free. That is to say there WILL be a change in price and the market will force coal use to fall.
It is also predicated on the assumption that the affected states can’t or won’t ramp up home production in response. The available evidence is that that is what these states will do.
Xi, Modi, Jae-in, Abe and Jokowi are all very active in subsidizing, manipulating, regulating and distorting investments in the energy space. One of the consistent patterns is that price/use is not allowed to over ride what is perceived as the national interest or the narrow political interest of the leaders.
Therefore the argument mounted by the Greens for ceasing Australia’s coal exports does not achieve the worthy objective they seek: which is a global reduction in CO2 emissions.
There IS a policy that would have an immediate and dramatic impact on global CO emissions: putting a tarriff on embedded emissions imports. I leave it to the observer to speculate on why this is not a popular policy for the Greens to give priority to.
Rex Douglas
says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 6:27 pm
Why are our regions so catastrophically dry ?
Longer droughts. Warmer temperatures.
What’s causing the longer droughts and warmer temperatures ?
Increase of dangerous GHG’s in the atmosphere.
__________________________
plundering groundwater that could recharge landscapes in a drought, or slow the effects down, is also a factor.
‘poroti says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 6:28 pm
Boerwar
I support ‘extra judicial’ killings of peeps like the leadership of Heshbollah.
That dumb policy played a v. large part in the Israelis ending up with a “leadership of Hezbollah” on their hands. It has been noted numerous times that the continued assassination of leaders saw that leadership taken up by even more radical types and on it went.’
I don’t believe it is that simple. There is a good argument that destabilizing and disorganizing by creating leadership vacuums in Heshbollah is worth it.
There is another issue. Why should mass murderers be free to roam around without the slightest payback?
nath
‘plundering groundwater that could recharge landscapes in a drought, or slow the effects down, is also a factor.’
Good lord. Next you’ll be saying that if every building had a water tank…..
Stay away from issues you clearly don’t know a thing about.
I have read a few interesting articles about Qasem Soleimani in the past. I don’t think there’s much doubt that he had blood on his hands, or that he was very good at his job. I also got the impression that he was a fairly pragmatic person and was involved in Iran moving closer to a rapprochement with the US prior to Bush’s axis of evil speech.
I personally think that his killing is a very dangerous escalation.
It’s interesting that the Pentagon are saying that they carried out the assassination on the President’s orders. Would they normally attribute such an act to an order by the President?
Some friends in just now. Their house is still up but it is in firing line overnight and tomorrow. They are quite resigned to the possibility of losing it.
Admirable sang froid, IMO.
Our house becomes their first respite base should the worst come to the worst.
Boerwar
If George Bush and Dick Cheney can then why not Nasrallah ?
‘bc says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 6:39 pm
I have read a few interesting articles about Qasem Soleimani in the past. I don’t think there’s much doubt that he had blood on his hands, or that he was very good at his job. I also got the impression that he was a fairly pragmatic person and was involved in Iran moving closer to a rapprochement with the US prior to Bush’s axis of evil speech.
I personally think that his killing is a very dangerous escalation.
It’s interesting that the Pentagon are saying that they carried out the assassination on the President’s orders. Would they normally attribute such an act to an order by the President?’
It all depends. Trump is not all that warlike but he may be wanting to give the impression of being one tough hombre, going into the next POTUS elections.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/abc-under-growing-cost-pressure-as-bushfire-emergency-broadcasts-surge-20200103-p53ohp.html
‘poroti says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 6:39 pm
Boerwar
If George Bush and Dick Cheney can then why not Nasrallah ?’
I would reverse that!
zoomster
says:
Good lord. Next you’ll be saying that if every building had a water tank…..
Stay away from issues you clearly don’t know a thing about.
__________________________________
Write to Professor Eamus and tell him the same:
The loss of groundwater stores poses serious threats to humans that need it to drink, crops that are irrigated with it, and natural ecosystems that rely on it for their survival….
The international study released by NASA showing declines in groundwater resources globally should alert us to the pressing need to manage groundwater resources sustainably. Australia is not immune to the challenges posed from declining groundwater resources.
Derek Eamus is Professor of Environmental Sciences at the University of Technology.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-18/eamus-declining-groundwater-is-a-big-problem-for-australia/6556586
@Boerwar at 6:34 pm
With both Japan and South Korea have little to no domestic coal reserves how are they going to increase production?
‘lizzie says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 6:35 pm
The Angry Goddess
@Bishop64
·
29m
#Morrison has told media to stop filming him only still photos,……..does he realise people can record on mobile phones? #ScottyfromMarketing #wuspol #AustraliaBurning’
Scoot is running from his own shadow.
‘Catprog says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 6:42 pm
@Boerwar at 6:34 pm
With both Japan and South Korea have little to no domestic coal reserves how are they going to increase production?’
Buy it from China, Indonesia and India.
Boerwar
You didn’t read the model did you?
I guess it must be nice living in your world where you just reclaim things and they’re true…
It’s a sad delusion to be sure.
It’s also really convenient. How convenient that you think anything Australia can do is irrelevant.
So convenient you keep mining coal and there’s no difference…
It’s not backed up by any analysis or evidence,which is why you’ve not provided any.
But hey you keep the right for Aussie coal. Keep fighting for money.
Boerwar
Buy from China and India? I guess no change in price? Because who “free market”
I mean why would anyone buy from Australia anyway?
This is the worst nonsense argument
Groundwater management in Australia is improving but could be much better.
Fortunately there is a fairly quick feedback loop: if you extract too much you have to lower your extraction pipes.
Where this is properly monitored on a regional basis groundwater can be managed.
An example is the extraction management in the Kooweerup area.
Prior to the management regime, saltwater inflows from WesternPort Bay were becoming a major problem.
With extraction limits this problem has been addressed.
Capping bores in the Great Artesian Basin has also been successful.
There is more to do and it varies from basin to basin.
But it is possible to do if there is a political will.
Zoomster
Do you know much about groundwater?
nath
Oh, so your wording was sh*t. Fair enough. Still demonstrates a poor grasp of the issue.
Astro
Anyone who tells you they know anything about anything to do with water management is deluded.
I think I know more than most but I’m probably wrong.
zoomster
says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 6:49 pm
nath
Oh, so your wording was sh*t. Fair enough. Still demonstrates a poor grasp of the issue.
_________________
Well groundwater is not my thing I admit. But for a Labor politician who thinks that Albanese is compromised by corruption for his Lebanese heritage. When he is not actually Lebanese is an astounding revelation of pig ignorance.
I’m astounded by how most people on this blog seem to think that a party should actually be honest in its policies before the election.
Just for the record: I think coal mining should end as soon as possible. There should be no new coal mines.
I also see no reason for a party in Australia to go into an election with those as explicit policies.
‘The reduction in Australian supply will cause an increase in price which will cause a decline in use of coal which will therefore cause a global reduction in CO2 emissions. Therefore Australia should stop exporting coal.’
This argument is basically a supply/demand equation based on the operation of a free market.
This theory is predicated on the assumption that the coal markets in China, India, Indonesia, Japan and Korea are free. That is to say there WILL be a change in price and the market will force coal use to fall.
It is also predicated on the assumption that the affected states can’t or won’t ramp up home production in response. The available evidence is that that is what these states will do.
Xi, Modi, Jae-in, Abe and Jokowi are all very active in subsidizing, manipulating, regulating and distorting investments in the energy space. One of the consistent patterns is that price/use is not allowed to over ride what is perceived as the national interest or the narrow political interest of the leaders.
Therefore the argument mounted by the Greens for ceasing Australia’s coal exports does not achieve the worthy objective they seek: which is a global reduction in CO2 emissions.
There IS a policy that would have an immediate and dramatic impact on global CO emissions: putting a tarriff on embedded emissions imports. I leave it to the observer to speculate on why this is not a popular policy for the Greens to give priority to.’
The notion that Indonesia will not develop its coal reserves and sell the coal to Japan and Korea and that Japan and Korea would refuse to buy Chinese, Indian, Indonesian or Russian coal is interesting.
Equally interesting is the notion that demand management by way of tariffs on embedded CO2 emissions imports to Australia won’t make a difference. Persistent silence on that one? The market only operates freely where you want it to?
Western Australia’s drying climate, combined with increasing groundwater use, has contributed to an escalated occurrence of peat fires in recent years.
Peat has a high carbon content and is naturally porous.
Therefore, once dry, peat areas are highly vulnerable to ignition and the resulting fires are almost impossible to extinguish without re-establishing natural groundwater levels.
https://healthywa.wa.gov.au/Articles/J_M/Minimising-the-impacts-of-peat-smoke
Well Zoomster I’ll tell myself that next time I advise a client…
nath
Yes, I am pig ignorant about a lot of matters, and I’m (nearly always, I am human) upfront about it.
You, however, will admit you’re wrong one day and then repeat the same mistruth the next.
….which indicates my credibility is better than yours.
zoomster
says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 6:54 pm
nath
Yes, I am pig ignorant about a lot of matters, and I’m (nearly always, I am human) upfront about it.
You, however, will admit you’re wrong one day and then repeat the same mistruth the next.
….which indicates my credibility is better than yours.
________________
I’m never wrong, just degrees of being right.
Boerwar
Still no analysis or evidence… Why do you think repeating yourself makes you right.
Boerwar @ #5812 Friday, January 3rd, 2020 – 6:34 pm
And I leave it to the observer to deduce that this policy enables us to export as much coal as we possibly can … and to draw the logical conclusion as to why people like Boerwar support it 🙁
I did some post grad studies on water management – mainly in relation to salinity management.
There are often significant unknowns, as Z points out.
Even now I can drive though new country and more or less automatically spot the signature signs of dryland salinity in the landscape. With that info I can also often predict what is happening underneath the surface.
Astro
Well, you might be one of the few who genuinely understand water issues. I’m an educated amateur. I’ve been priviledged enough to talk to a lot of people who do know what they’re talking about, but I tend to find that water issues are so huge and complicated that even experts are only experts in a small area.
Having dabbled in water policy, I’ve had to get a broadbrush view of these issues, but I’m always ready to admit I’m wrong about them, because I know how hugely complex it all is.
My son is now working in hydrology, so we have some interesting conversations.
zoomster
says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 6:56 pm
Having dabbled in water policy, I’ve had to get a broadbrush view of these issues, but I’m always ready to admit I’m wrong about them, because I know how hugely complex it all is.
_____________________
Yet you felt informed enough to dispute my simple statement that groundwater extraction played a role in landscape drying. strange.
nath
Yes – that’s how silly it was.
Yeah water management is complicated. Thankfully here is WA we don’t have water trading… I think that has helped a lot.
‘Player One says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 6:56 pm
Boerwar @ #5812 Friday, January 3rd, 2020 – 6:34 pm
There IS a policy that would have an immediate and dramatic impact on global CO emissions: putting a tarriff on embedded emissions imports. I leave it to the observer to speculate on why this is not a popular policy for the Greens to give priority to.
And I leave it to the observer to deduce that this policy enables us to export as much coal as we possibly can … and to draw the logical conclusion as to why people like Boerwar support it ‘
I support every country in the world putting a tariff on embedded emissions in the products they import. Australia should do it now. It can work as a stand alone policy. Or it can work with a suite of policies. It would have some immediate and beneficial impacts.
I am still not sure why some people are so resistant to even discussing this policy setting. It is not a trick. It is a good policy.
Further, it would force some countries, such as the UK from carrying on about how they are zero emissions because of renewable energy. When in fact they import 800 million tons worth of CO2 emissions, much of it coal-fired, from China, using Australian coal.
@Boerwar at 6:52pm
The best way to put a price on embed emissions is to put a price on the carbon when it is exported.
That way you don’t have to try and work out what the embedded emissions of each individual product is.
zoomster
says:
Friday, January 3, 2020 at 6:59 pm
nath
Yes – that’s how silly it was.
_________________
Ok so you dispute that groundwater extraction plays a role in landscape drying. Interesting position to hold.
Boerwar
Not sure why you think the Greens wouldn’t want to put a tariff (or tax) on the embedded emissions. That’s actually a carbon tax. I’m fine with that.