Hey Alex you are trying hard but unfortunately it is a bit like king Canute fighting the rising tide, not much luck here either I am afraid. generally as you have concluded you won't get a reasonable response, when you try and drill down into it you will just get glib remarks or taunts. People fall into categories. The risk takers are in the speculative side of the market they invest in the explorers looking for rare earths ,copper ,nickel etc. in most cases (not all) they are gung ho about decarbonisation, electrification and renewable energy, because they hope their company will multi bag if they make a tier 1 discovery.
Then we have those that mostly look for security and invest in previously proven good dividend paying stocks with sound ongoing financials. They don't like risk or change if they feel they are secure in their investments and life in general. The catastrophic worldwide events that occur with increasing regularity are dismissed quickly with the reference that it has all happened before and that it is normal for this to occur, until they are affected themselves then the crowd of deniers seems to dwindle somewhat, although a few still persist. It is ironic that those that really are very risk averse are quite willing to adamantly deny the science of climate change, they will doggedly agree with some outspoken denier that gets air time and get angry when called out, suggesting that the person who has investigated the science and expresses a concern about climate change is only accepting an opinion ,when this is what they are doing themselves, so when you and I believe that we are facing the greatest risk that mankind has ever faced, they treat it as a joke and are willing to risk themselves and the rest of the planet on no factual info, yet they are extremely risk averse in nature.
My comment to them is if we believe the science and the scientists are right then we may be able to do something that creates a better existence for everyone with a cleaner less polluted environment. if the science is wrong and the deniers are right then we still get a cleaner less polluted environment. if we believe the deniers and not the science and do nothing and the deniers are wrong then we are all f----d
I will still buy WHC as part of a dividend play, because fossil fuel is still needed even more now for the initial energy to build the renewables, we can't set dates to turn everything off until alternatives are in place to supply the general public and industry. The Green party have no plan that I can see to guarantee that we won't need more gas or coal for some time well into the future. I don't think we can deny shipping the bulk overseas because the relevant companies would probably go broke just supplying Australia. I think Australia has an opportunity to show how to use renewables effectively rather than just for reduction of emissions here in Australia, we could show other countries how to do it, we could also be at the forefront of mining and refining and possibly ( heaven forbid ) even manufacturing and so supply other countries with the components to change for the better. Reality has to take charge though and if the push into renewables is done without due diligence it will only create more harm than good and reinforce the deniers
Expand
(20min delay)