Climate Change, page-1011

It's an investment in the future of Australia, creates jobs, security, innovation, creates future cashflow etc etc. If we create/build/research/develop these things ourselves, we are less reliant on foreign imports. Take for example the supply chain issues resulting from the pandemic. Well, if we created those products here in Australia, guess what? We dont have as big as a supply chain issue than if we have to import products from overseas.

Of all the ideological claptrap purveyed on here by you, that above paragraph is an absolute clanger:

Your ilk is blissfully unaware of the scarcity phenomenon that exists in the world and naively think governments are a source of a bottomless pit of money.

Of the investment in the future of Australia, who is to say renewables result in more "job creation, national security, innovation and future cash flow" than other potential national interest alternatives; for example, computing technology, biotechnology, aerospace, medical specialisation, agricultural research, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, synthetic biology etc.

"Take for example the supply chain issues resulting from the pandemic. Well, if we created those products here in Australia, guess what? We dont have as big as a supply chain issue than if we have to import products from overseas."

So, you reckon we need to set up manufacturing base to supply products in case there is an international supply side shock, such as a global pandemic?

Gosh, as you really that dumb?

Because after that supply side shock has passed and competitive imports are able to resume, what happens to that domestic manufacturing base?

Does it get shuttered in, awaiting the next pandemic or similar supply shock, or is it kept alive courtesy of the taxpayer teat?

.