<<< Listen to the podcast >>>

Market Forces hits Rio Tinto

Shareholder activists Market Forces are taking their climate activism to Rio Tinto.

Read the AFR article ($$$) and the resolution that will go to shareholders in May.

This highlights the insanity of climate activism. Just read closely what scope 1, 2 and 3 mean.

Notice who Shorten sigles out for pay rises …

They’re the ‘noble’ workers (police, nurses etc) but they also share on more characteristic.

They’re mainly government workers.

PVO has not had a good 24 hours

First, there was this tweet which probably should have resulted in a correction:

It tough being a smart arse in the press gallery. He’s not cool like the others and just shouldn’t try.

Read the thread.

Basically, his geography was wrong. Which means his point was wrong. Which means he should apologise.

Don’t hold your breath.

And thern there was this article which … well … was obviously a mid-afternoon special, whipped off and published without someone looking over it.

Frankly, The Australian should do better than publish articles like this. Seriously, it’s not very good.

The fight over building new coal fired power stations — with or without government subsidies — highlights the problems within the conservative side of politics. It polarises opinions without points of reconciliation. Why? Because it’s all or nothing: you either support new coal fired power or you don’t. It’s nigh impossible to find a centre ground and appease both sides in the debate.

PVO is a professor in politics at the University of Western Australia and Griffith University. If your children go to either and study with PVO, you are being ripped off.

Trent Zimmerman explains what underwriting power actually means

And it’s not the same as ‘footing the bill”.

As he says, it is quite “hnuanced”.

Why shouldn’t the Logies be political?

It’s a circle jerk for entitled dingalings, so make it a showcase for virtue signalling as well?

Huawei takes on the US Government

Huawei says it has a constitutional right to win government contracts.

Whatever Huawei Technologies Co. is doing by suing the U.S. government and six cabinet officials, it isn’t trying to win in court. The legal arguments mounted in its brief aren’t based on existing precedent. Although the brief cites the Constitution, as written the arguments are barely legal at all.

The highly unusual lawsuit, filed last week in the Eastern District of Texas, reads more like a moral broadside directed at the U.S. Congress for naming Huawei as a Chinese-government affiliate and effectively blacklisting the company’s telecommunications equipment — and others who use it — from U.S. government contracts.

It’s a frivolous case, but that doesn’t mean it won’t succeed because if they win the judge will be a hero to the left for rubbing Trump’s nose in a Chinese success in US Courts.

Kenneally thinks this makes her case about franking credits

It makes a case, but not the one she wants.


But most retirees don’t have $1 million in shares.

As this chart from the ATO (via The Australian) attests. The average credit refunded in about $2500 a year.

That’s just $50 a week.

It looks like Labor is writing policy for the headline example that will make lots of people choke on their Weet-Bix rather than the common example which would make people question the policy.