Our education is the problem, not the climate

You know things have got to be bad when Zali Steggall OAM MP is launching The Australia Institute’s (TAI) ‘Climate of the Nation 2019‘ report which claims 81% of Aussies are concerned that climate change will impact droughts and flooding. Huh? The IPCC has already admitted, “available climate data do not show any increasing trend in extreme weather events (e.g. extreme precipitation, extreme drought, thunderstorms, winter blizzards) in any part of the world.”

Did TAI conduct the survey at the Australian Medical Association (AMA) which is now trying to dictate climate policy? Between the RBA, APRA and the AMA, we might need a beauty contest to see which of them takes over at the Department of Environment & Energy. CM is surprised that the AMA hasn’t demanded to take over the organization of the Royal Easter Show from the Royal Agricultural Society now they are experts in food security!

Why do people get so embroiled in talking about the “science being settled”. OK, let’s assume it is. We use all of the well publicized and peer-reviewed data scrapes from the IPCC reports, the EU’s in house statistics bureau, Eurostat, and the EIA.

We only need a basic Year 7 grasp of elementary mathematics to educate on the facts. The IPCC claim that CO2, as a proportion of the atmosphere, is 0.0415%. It also tells us that human-made CO2 is 3% of the total. 97% is natural. Australia for its sins is 1.08% of human-made global CO2 emissions.

So, 0.0415% x 3% x 1.08% = 0.00001345%. Let’s forget the science and say it was the interest earned on a 20-year compounding deposit of $10,000. If you doubled or halved the above percentage across that deposit you’d get virtually the exact same result in all three scenarios.

Farting cows are no different. Methane is an even smaller part of the atmosphere. 722 parts per billion. Animals (in total) make up 13% of the methane produced meaning that 0.00000939% of the atmosphere is down to animals. Angela Merkel was imploring Chinese don’t grow a meat habit so she can save the planet (aka justify a meat tax increase at home). By the way, Australia has 26mn cattle out of a total of 1 billion worldwide. So Australia is 2.6% of global head of cattle. So 2.6% x 0.00000939% = 0.00000024%. That is a disingenuous number because it doesn’t factor horses, ducks, sheep, household pets and budgies. Perhaps Africans need to educate lions to move to plant-based meat substitutes and leave water buffalo alone.

Do people realize that rice paddies account for more methane than cows? Where are the environmentalists and climate alarmists demanding that Asian nations, 40% of the global population, must cease eating rice? Better tell Mother Nature that she creates 45% of the methane out there through peat bogs and tundras.

How ironic that Zali Steggall, the Member for Warringah (home to the Northern Beaches Council (NBC)) is TAI’s champion. Did she read that NBC declared a climate emergency after having a sermon delivered by Tim Flannery, who has made countless dud predictions leading to the waste of billions of spending in desal plants?

In the  2017/18  NBC annual report it states the council saved 293 tons of CO2. Given that Australia produces around 561m tons, this amazing effort has meant a reduction of 0.0000522% of Australia’s total. Put it against Australia’s CO2 impact vs the entire atmosphere means that Northern Beaches have hammered home a mammoth 0.000000000699857% saving! Yes, 9 zeroes. C’mon Zali, you should be citing this impactless tokenism in your address. By the way, we’re still waiting for wind farms on Balmoral Beach.

The range of claims made in the TAI report speaks to little more than agenda based data gathering with leading questions.

For instance, if Labor was destroyed in the federal election over Adani, how could 73% of Queenslanders possibly want Australia’s coal-fired power stations phased out as soon as possible or gradually? Did the pollsters mistakenly manage to interview Bob Brown’s anti-Adani convoy which skewed the findings? If you want to get answers to questions that effectively make claims (climate change already causing) it is easy if it is written as though it is a fact to begin with,

“Melting of the Polar ice caps” (51%) – IPCC has already climbed down from such claims
“More heatwaves and extreme hot days” (48%) – no consistent data on this. 
“Destruction of the Great Barrier Reef” (44%) – it isn’t happening – just ask Peter Ridd or the Vice-Chancellor at James Cook University
“More droughts affecting crop production & food supply” (42%) – global crop yields growing
“More Bushfires” (36%) – fallen over time
“Water Shortages in the Cities” (30%) – haven’t experienced one 

Taking bushfires as an example. Facts from the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) show that 85% of bushfires are either deliberately, suspiciously or accidentally lit. The AIC sees that while the data is somewhat sketchy that the most common profile of arsonists was “white male, mid-20s, patchy employment record, often above average intelligence, but poor academic achievement and poor social development skills…56% of convicted structural arsonists and 37% of bushfire arsonists in NSW had a prior conviction for a previous offence. ”

In the US those figures are around 90%. A study in the journal Science determined the global burnt area from fires, rather than growing, had declined by roughly 25% from 1999 to 2017.

So do the stats support global warming or successful mainstream media coverage sensationalising the truth to feed narratives? Don’t get started on the Amazon fires. CM wrote about it here.

Energy source rank went Wind (76%), Solar (58%) & Hydro (39%) although nuclear power ranked above coal and gas. Surprise, surprise.  (p.11).

Apparently, 64% of Aussies want to be net-zero emissions by 2050. To do that we’d need to stop all mining, end farming and phase out all fossil-fuel power from transport to power generation. Just think of the UK’s plan to do this. Going to be a bit hard when 85% of British households rely on gas to heat their homes. Will the power grid hold up to a switch to electric heating?

On p.25, TAI makes reference to the Icelandic glacier, Ok, that lost its status 5 years ago. According to the UN Chronicle, “The sudden surging of glaciers is not related to climatic fluctuations, and surges can take place even at times when glaciers retreat. This is the usual behaviour of some glaciers and can not be evidence of an impending surge… unfortunately, direct observations of a change in the movement of a glacier at the onset of a surge are still very rare, and the causes for surges are not yet clear…It should be emphasized that the problem of climate change is extremely difficult to understand, and it has still not been possible to know what factors in the past decades — natural or anthropogenic — have caused the warming. There are still many uncertainties in solving this problem. IPCC estimates are rather wide in their range of accuracy and, therefore, cannot predict with confidence…at least not in the coming decades and centuries.”

Maybe we just need to accept that China produces more GHG in two weeks than we do in a year. At the rate it is going, by 2030 it will likely be closer to one week. Once again folks, education seems a bigger problem than climate change. Basic fractions are more valuable than deep knowledge of climate science. Even using numbers supplied by the organisations they constantly espouse as the oracle, the minuscule impacts we can have are never mentioned. Tokenism is somehow virtuous.

Banker Buster?


Before the GFC in 2008, bank shares across the globe were flying. Financial engineering promised a new paradigm of wealth creation and abundant profitability. They were unstoppable.

However 12 years later, many banks look mere shadows of their former selves. We are told by our political class to believe that our economies are robust and that a low-interest rate environment will keep things tickety-boo indefinitely. After all the wheels of the economy have always been greased by the financial sector.

If that were true, why does Europe’s largest economy have two of its major banks more than 90% off the peak? Commerz has shrunk so far that it has been thrown out of the DAX. Surely, Japan’s banks should be prospering under Abenomics so why are the shares between 65% and 80% below 2007 levels?

Ahh, but take a look at those Aussie beauties! How is it they have bucked the global trend? How can Commonwealth Bank be worth 6x Deutsche Bank?

Although we shouldn’t look at the Aussie banks with rose-tinted glasses they have mortgage debt up to the eyeballs. Mortgages to total loans exceed 62% in Australia. The next is daylight, followed by Norway at 40%. Japanese banks, before the bubble collapsed, were in the 40% range. CM wrote a comparo here. There is a real risk that these Aussie banks will require bailouts if the housing market craps out. It carries so many similarities to Japan and when anyone ever mentions stress tests – start running for the hills.

If you own Aussie banks in your superannuation portfolio, it is high time you dumped them. Franked dividends might be an ample reason to hold them, but things in finance turn on a dime and this time Australia doesn’t have a China to rescue us like it did in 2008-09. More details contained in the link in the paragraph above.

In closing, Milton Friedman said it best with respect to the ability of central banks to control outcomes,

“… we are in danger of assigning to monetary policy a larger role than it can perform, in danger of asking it to accomplish tasks that it cannot achieve, and as a result, in danger of preventing it from making the contribution that it is capable of making.


Brexit – No Deal is a No Brainer

Brexit 1.pngAs BoJo signs up more future FTA deals with the likes of America, Australia and Japan at the G7, where does Project Fear come from? What manner of spurious schoolyard bullying makes anyone think Britain will be thrown back into the stone age? Surely the exploits of Ben Stokes at Edgbaston shows only too well how the lion can roar when pushed into a corner. Plucky Brits indeed.

Looking at the latest trade stats between the EU and Britain it is simple. EU members make up 7 of the Top 10 British export markets accounting for 37.4% of all trade. Top 10 accounts for 65.9% of trade. Trump acccounts for £54.9bn vs £36.5bn from Merkel.

Brexit 2 Imp.png
On the Import side, the UK matters much more to the likes of Germany £68bn. The Dutch at £42bn and France at £28bn.

In short of the UK ‘s Top 10 importing nations, 8 are EU members. The Top 10 account for 65.7% of total. Those 8 EU nations make up 48.1%. 7.13% of Germany‘s exports end up in Blighty. One might argue that 10% of UK exports ending up in Germany is reason enough to back down. Yet why would either seek to make their position worse off. Germany is the UK’s #1 importer and Germany is the #2 destination for British exports. For Germany the UK ranks #11 importer and #3 export nation.

By all means play hard ball Brussels. Something tells me you’ll put the Brits at the front of the queue to do any trade deal. Especially Mrs Merkel. The trade surplus she runs with the UK is the equaivalent of 1% of GDP. Hardly something she will go out of her way to jeopardize given her economy went backwards last quarter.

No Deal is the best outcome. Start with a fresh slate. As soon as we start negotiating back stops and all manner of political trickery the disappointment will come thick and fast.

It is unlikely BoJo can get his Oct 31 deal done. It will take a partnership with Farage to do this. The lack of proportional represntation in British politics plays into the hands of Corbyn so there is a real necessity to ensure Brexit Party & Tory votes aren’t split like wthat experienced in the Peterborough by-election.

More stats to follow.

Thank God China has clarified the Pacific Island claims with action

One would think China is channeling the former Iraqi Ministry of Information.

China’s Special Envoy to the Pacific, Ambassador Wang Xuefeng, told the Pacific Island Forum in Tuvalu,

“As the largest developing country in the world, China always attaches great importance to the special concerns and legitimate demands of small island countries in combating climate change…Developed countries should earnestly carry out their obligations set out in the (UN Climate Change) Convention and the (Paris) Agreement, including providing sufficient support in terms of finance, technology and capacity-building to small island countries and other developing countries to help them increase their capacities in combating climate change.”

What he should have added was,

We intend to belch as much CO2 as we please until 2030. We know we’re already 29.3% of global CO2 emissions. We’re not sure why but until the Extinction Rebellion Beijing chapter starts we figure it mustn’t be a concern in China. ”

Perhaps the most laughable part of it was to say all countries, big or small, are equal in China’s eyes. Except HK, Taiwan, Paracelsus, Spratly and Senkaku Islands.

It wasn’t so long ago that CM was covering machinery stocks and local Chinese governments preferred industry polluted because it meant fines that filled up their coffers. The industry obliged because it was cheaper to produce by paying the fines.

Perhaps China will open its doors to all these climate refugees when whole villages are forced to move to mountain tops.

We should expect that Ambassador Wang will travel by sailing boat to future summits. It’s for the planet you know.

Jacinda, time to deal with fects


NZ PM Jacinda Ardern! You may be the high priestess of wokeness but sadly you need to have a better grasp of numbers. CM already detailed that Australia is more generous by a considerable currency-adjusted per capita margin than your Wellness Budget. Look at the ratio of Kiwis living in Aus vs Aussies living in NZ. 570,000 plays 37,000.

Sledging Aussie PM Scott Morrison may win brownie points with the left (and the global mainstream media cheerleading squad will find you faultless) but here are some facts you might consider before you speak:

  1. China is 45% of global coal powergen. China has over 1,000 coal plants in operation. A further 126 are under construction and another 72 are in the planning stage. Australia has only 2 in the pipeline.
  2. China has grown CO2 emissions from 10.6% of the global total atmosphere in 1990 to 29.3% today. Australia has slipped from 1.21% to 1.08% respectively. You are but a spec.
  3. Since 1990, Australia’s CO2 emissions per capita have risen by 1.8%. NZ has grown by 10.8%. Yes, we emit more CO2 per capita in gross terms because we have a monster mining industry that you don’t. Australia’s impact on global CO2 is 0.0000134% of the total atmosphere. Yours is 0.00000124%. Nothing. So no matter what we do, our impact via virtue signalling will account for zero. Feel free to flash those pearly whites to the adoration of the sheep that think you should lead a global government. No thanks.

The NZ PM’s Wellness Budget has received lots of accolades. A true leader! Champagne socialist Sir Richard Branson also praised her saying other countries should take note. Despite owning an airline…

The idea that a budget should be solely based on economics is not progressive and more should be directed at “well-being”. That is not to say this budget is not “well-intentioned”. However, the statistics compared to across the ditch do not fare well in relative terms.

Comparing her newest policies versus Australia reveals the kangaroos get better access to social services than the kiwis. How surprising that none of the mainstream media bothered to look at the budget numbers on a like for like basis? Just praise her because she represents their ideal version of a socialist leader.  CM has looked through both budgets and adjusted for currency to make for easier like-for-like comparisons.

When it comes to health spending per capita (currency-adjusted), Australia is expected to climb from A$3,324 in 2019 to A$3,568 in 2022. NZ is expected to go up slightly from A$3,516 to A$3,561 respectively.

On social security and welfare, Australia is expected to pay out A$7,322 per capita in 2019, growing to A$7,977. NZ, on the other hand, is forecast to go from A$5,573 per head to A$6,489.

On mental health, Australia forked out around A$9.1bn exclusively on these services reaching 4.2m citizens last year. NZ is planning on spending A$45.1m in 2019 with a total of A$428m by 2023/24 to hit 325,000 people on frontline services for mental health. While the move is a positive one, NZ will allocate A$1.78bn to mental health as a whole over 5 years. On an annualised basis, Australia will still allocate 5x the NZ amount to mental health per capita. So much for wellbeing.

On education, NZ plans to increase per capita spending 7.9% between 2019 and 2022 whereas Australia will lift it 12.5% over the same period. NZ spends around 2x Australia per capita on education although PISA scores between 2006 and 2015 are virtually identical (and both heading south)

On public housing, Ardern can claim a victory. Australia is expected to cut spending per capita from A$240 in 2019 to A$194 in 2022 when NZ will go from A$137 to A$282. Although let’s hope Ardern has more success than her KiwiBuild policy. The Australian’s Judith Sloanrightly pointed out,

“Ardern also has stumbled with other policies, most notably KiwiBuild. The pledge was to build 100,000 additional affordable homes by 2028.

It has since been modified to facili­tation by the government to help build new homes. Moreover, the definition of afford­ability has been altered from between $NZ350,000 ($340,000) and $NZ450,000 to $NZ650,000.

What started off as an ill-considered public housing project has turned out to be an extremely unsuccessful private real estate scam. The government estimated that there would be 1000 homes built last year under KiwiBuild; it turned out to be 47.”

Good news KiwiBuild has made it to 250.


A tip against the Pacific gratuity


If we are to be realistic,  $500m doesn’t buy us a thing in the Pacific Islands. No political influence. No loyalty. No defence against China. Apart from the fact that Australia’s emissions add up to 0.0000134% of global CO2, our ability to prevent sea levels rising (which aren’t happening anyway – refer CM report here) is absolutely zero. If Australia offered the islands a fraction of the $9.5bn we spend on renewables annually in return for all the coal-fired power we wanted, these islands would be silly to refuse the deal. Most likely they wouldn’t.

In September 2018, Australia was beaten over the head for not helping the Pacific Islands cope with the dangers of climate change. What better way for PNG to have averted the climate emergency by using part of the $150mn in aid money from Australia to buy 40 gas-guzzling Maserati sports limousines from Italy?

Actions not words. The $500m reminds CM of those investment banks that only partially invested in their franchises. They all failed. If there is no strategy, best not spending a cent. $500m is pointless and that won’t be lost on the Pacific Island governments. If PM Morrison wants to buy influence, he needs to think beyond this measly gratuity.

What have these Island nations said to China? China makes up 45% of global coal power gen capacity. Australia 1.6%. China has another 100+ currently under construction and another 76 yet to break ground. So why haven’t they raised hell in Beijing? Because Australia fold to this ridiculous pandering.

Bernie plagiarizes Stalin in real Russian collusion

Bernie Sanders has been accused of plagiarizing Stalin’s 1936 Economic Bill of Rights. Zerohedge published an amusing take down of the issue here.

Of course we will all be reassured by the left that socialism just hasn’t been instituted properly before in the multiple times it has been tried. Bernie is harking to finish off what FDR started.

Does plagiarism constitute as collusion?