Sylvia Else

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...001021,00.html

"RMA Motoring and Services Director Graham Blight said taxpayers would
be appalled to learn that almost $10 billion in public funds went to
support the fossil fuel industry each year."

The figure of $10 billion appears to have come out of a Greenpeace
publication

http://www.isf.uts.edu.au/publicatio...7subsidies.pdf

in which the 'subsidies' were mostly subsidies for the consumers of
fossil fuels, which the sustainable fuels didn't receive (to the extent
that fossil fuels could be said to get them) simply because sustainable
fuels had not made themselves viable. In other words, the paper was
mostly sour grapes.

Why has the NRMA become a mouthpiece for the green movement, including
spouting its half-truth propaganda?

Sylvia.

John_H

Sylvia Else wrote:

>http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...001021,00.html
>
>"RMA Motoring and Services Director Graham Blight said taxpayers would
>be appalled to learn that almost $10 billion in public funds went to
>support the fossil fuel industry each year."
>
>The figure of $10 billion appears to have come out of a Greenpeace
>publication
>
>http://www.isf.uts.edu.au/publicatio...7subsidies.pdf
>
>in which the 'subsidies' were mostly subsidies for the consumers of
>fossil fuels, which the sustainable fuels didn't receive (to the extent
>that fossil fuels could be said to get them) simply because sustainable
>fuels had not made themselves viable. In other words, the paper was
>mostly sour grapes.
>
>Why has the NRMA become a mouthpiece for the green movement, including
>spouting its half-truth propaganda?

Opposite end of the political spectrum looking to embarrass GovCo more
likely!

Without reading the crap I'm willing to bet that the lion's share of
the "subsidies" is excise rebate to road transport.

Inflation is currently running at Keating era levels, for which Govco
will blame fuel prices (if it hasn't already). Remove the excise
rebate and inflation will be back to the Fraser era (if not
Whitlam)... albeit as a one off increase.

Even the present government isn't likely to be that stupid (though
sometimes you've gotta wonder)!

--
John H

Jason James

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:488c759d$0$1021$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
>
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...001021,00.html
>
> "RMA Motoring and Services Director Graham Blight said taxpayers would
> be appalled to learn that almost $10 billion in public funds went to
> support the fossil fuel industry each year."
>
> The figure of $10 billion appears to have come out of a Greenpeace
> publication
>
> http://www.isf.uts.edu.au/publicatio...7subsidies.pdf
>
> in which the 'subsidies' were mostly subsidies for the consumers of
> fossil fuels, which the sustainable fuels didn't receive (to the extent
> that fossil fuels could be said to get them) simply because sustainable
> fuels had not made themselves viable. In other words, the paper was
> mostly sour grapes.
>
> Why has the NRMA become a mouthpiece for the green movement, including
> spouting its half-truth propaganda?

Interesting,..it sounds like too much for a country like ours with our low
population and car-fleet.

Jason

Atheist Chaplain

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:488c759d$0$1021$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
> http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...001021,00.html
>
> "RMA Motoring and Services Director Graham Blight said taxpayers would be
> appalled to learn that almost $10 billion in public funds went to support
> the fossil fuel industry each year."
>
> The figure of $10 billion appears to have come out of a Greenpeace
> publication
>
> http://www.isf.uts.edu.au/publicatio...7subsidies.pdf
>
> in which the 'subsidies' were mostly subsidies for the consumers of fossil
> fuels, which the sustainable fuels didn't receive (to the extent that
> fossil fuels could be said to get them) simply because sustainable fuels
> had not made themselves viable. In other words, the paper was mostly sour
> grapes.
>
> Why has the NRMA become a mouthpiece for the green movement, including
> spouting its half-truth propaganda?
>
> Sylvia.

because "Being Green" is the flavour of the month at the moment, and
sustainable energy is all the rage, so anything they can find to give them a
green tinge will hopefully endear them to Joe Average.

--
"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."
Don Hirschberg

Jason James

"John_H" <john4721@inbox.com> wrote in message
news:1bvp84trgdp79rf9mjlmltgkkt1msffp0m@4ax.com...
> Sylvia Else wrote:
>
>
>http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...5001021,00.htm
l
> >
> >"RMA Motoring and Services Director Graham Blight said taxpayers would
> >be appalled to learn that almost $10 billion in public funds went to
> >support the fossil fuel industry each year."
> >
> >The figure of $10 billion appears to have come out of a Greenpeace
> >publication
> >
> >http://www.isf.uts.edu.au/publicatio...7subsidies.pdf
> >
> >in which the 'subsidies' were mostly subsidies for the consumers of
> >fossil fuels, which the sustainable fuels didn't receive (to the extent
> >that fossil fuels could be said to get them) simply because sustainable
> >fuels had not made themselves viable. In other words, the paper was
> >mostly sour grapes.
> >
> >Why has the NRMA become a mouthpiece for the green movement, including
> >spouting its half-truth propaganda?
>
> Opposite end of the political spectrum looking to embarrass GovCo more
> likely!
>
> Without reading the crap I'm willing to bet that the lion's share of
> the "subsidies" is excise rebate to road transport.
>
> Inflation is currently running at Keating era levels, for which Govco
> will blame fuel prices (if it hasn't already). Remove the excise
> rebate and inflation will be back to the Fraser era (if not
> Whitlam)... albeit as a one off increase.
>
> Even the present government isn't likely to be that stupid (though
> sometimes you've gotta wonder)!

The present gov seems to be in a permanent media block-out. Rudd doesn't
come on and give "state of the union" type addresses, he's made some
questionable decisions eg increase in mixed drink excise to stop youngsters
from buying them. Now they buy their own spirits and mix their own, and get
a lot more for their money.


Jason

atec77

Atheist Chaplain wrote:
> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message
> news:488c759d$0$1021$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
>> http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...001021,00.html
>>
>> "RMA Motoring and Services Director Graham Blight said taxpayers would be
>> appalled to learn that almost $10 billion in public funds went to support
>> the fossil fuel industry each year."
>>
>> The figure of $10 billion appears to have come out of a Greenpeace
>> publication
>>
>> http://www.isf.uts.edu.au/publicatio...7subsidies.pdf
>>
>> in which the 'subsidies' were mostly subsidies for the consumers of fossil
>> fuels, which the sustainable fuels didn't receive (to the extent that
>> fossil fuels could be said to get them) simply because sustainable fuels
>> had not made themselves viable. In other words, the paper was mostly sour
>> grapes.
>>
>> Why has the NRMA become a mouthpiece for the green movement, including
>> spouting its half-truth propaganda?
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> because "Being Green" is the flavour of the month at the moment, and
> sustainable energy is all the rage, so anything they can find to give them a
> green tinge will hopefully endear them to Joe Average.
>
Fit all motor vehicle's with Atmos
That will solve it

Daryl Walford

atec77 wrote:
> Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message
>> news:488c759d$0$1021$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
>>> http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...001021,00.html
>>>
>>>
>>> "RMA Motoring and Services Director Graham Blight said taxpayers
>>> would be appalled to learn that almost $10 billion in public funds
>>> went to support the fossil fuel industry each year."
>>>
>>> The figure of $10 billion appears to have come out of a Greenpeace
>>> publication
>>>
>>> http://www.isf.uts.edu.au/publicatio...7subsidies.pdf
>>>
>>> in which the 'subsidies' were mostly subsidies for the consumers of
>>> fossil fuels, which the sustainable fuels didn't receive (to the
>>> extent that fossil fuels could be said to get them) simply because
>>> sustainable fuels had not made themselves viable. In other words, the
>>> paper was mostly sour grapes.
>>>
>>> Why has the NRMA become a mouthpiece for the green movement,
>>> including spouting its half-truth propaganda?
>>>
>>> Sylvia.
>>
>> because "Being Green" is the flavour of the month at the moment, and
>> sustainable energy is all the rage, so anything they can find to give
>> them a green tinge will hopefully endear them to Joe Average.
>>
> Fit all motor vehicle's with Atmos
> That will solve it

Says Who:-)


Daryl