NT5224

3 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

Hi Alan, My post was totally a sarcastic smartass comment, intended to lighten up the thread. I apologise, as I didn't intend to ruffle anyone's feathers.

 

Besides, if everybody drank all that sweet rainwater instead of letting it run off into the lungs of our world, Australia's beer industry would surely collapse!

Hi Pete!

My apologies... My bad. I didn't spot the sarcasm.🤣

Sad thing is there are many people who actually say stuff like that and (even worse) do that...

The next property to mine has started growing cotton! 😱

Its just crazy. Investors and shareholders will do well in the short term  and other properties along the river will jump on board -and it'll be the next Darling. 

As I said I'm not a greenie, just somebody with the capacity to learn from past mistakes and current policy settings up here break my heart. The polies and corporates reap short term rewards but know they'll be long  gone by the  time the wheels fall off and it'll be somebody else's problem.  But we'll still be here and our blackfella neighbours

Rant over.

Sorry for jumping on that comment!

Alan

On 15/09/2021 at 3:58 PM, nomadpete said:

NT, there is clearly nowhere near enough people living "up there".

 

Well, not enough to drink all that nice fresh, free tropical rainwater they get. Every wet season I see pictures of vast amounts of wasted water lying around in swamps at Kakadu on the news.

Hi Pete!

I'm sorry but I don't agree with you. The water that flows in northern big rivers irrigates the woodlands and Savannah's that photosynthesise the oxygen that people in southern states breath, and scrubs the carbon from the industries and pollutants produced there. The north is the lungs and life support of Australia.

Native vegetation has been largely cleared in the southern states. Thats contributes to drought, high ambient temperatures and water scarcity as well as many other environmental problems. The 'developed' southern states are net producers of GHG.

The value of the  ecological services the north provides to the rest of the country and globally is many times that of the formal economy. It is priceless.  In fact, Our lives and those of our grandchildren rely upon them.

I am not a hippy tree hugger. But I own a property and know how things go in the Top End. We live with nature, like our blackfella neighbours, not try to change and mold the environment to our short term profit. How did that work out  in the Murray Darling?

Politicians and developers in the south are hungry to develop the north for short term economic benefit, for votes or whatever, and its convenient for people down south to buy into that vision.

For the sake of Australia, the world and our grandkids I hope that doesn't happen.

Cheers

Alan

3 hours ago, Yenn said:

Why should a water crisis occur in other places. Australias water supply is not up to supplying any more than it is doing now.

Our local dam has had no inflow this year. A few years ago they wanted to bring water from the Fitzroy  river which feeds Rockhampton. Then they decided to rise the dam and to get the money they got help from the Biloela area, but to get that they had to pump water over into the Dawson catchment to top up their irrigation aquifer. The Dawson runs into the Fitzroy, upstream of Rockhampton. That is what they call perpetual water motiion.

Seriously we are facing a shortage of water in most of Australia. Only the tropical North has enough. They built the Ord River dam to catch water and use it for irrigation in North of West Australia. Good move and the ducks loved it when the rice was grown. Hardly anyone lives up there and there is no great irrigation scheme, although it is increasing with the growth of crops such as mangoes. They tried sugar, but it brought disease in from Indonesia and had to stop before it decimated the Eastern Seaboard sugar crop.

Hardly anybody lives up there?  🤔

I with OME on this and take a very dim view of our governments priorities.

I had an even worse view of Boris Johnson over in UKstan who at least had the courage (or stupidity) to publicly state his intent to go the herd immunity route to protect the economy (the 'economy' being his big business chums, financiers, bankers and company directors).

Now of course he has been forced to change track under the weight of public pressure. But contrary to independent WHO advice, the UK deliberately stalled the application of strict containment measures for about 2 weeks, thus exacerbating the spread. What awful political judgement! In a few weeks from now, people will start dying in UK who contracted Covid 19 during that period while its leaders were swayed by the pressure to 'keep the economy running'.

Scomo is obviously subject to similar pressures as Johnson, with those who want to see as little disruption to the economy as possible. Lets hope our political masters can find the moral courage to do the right thing.

I heard that Tassie is lifting up the drawbridge to better manage its Covid 19 problem.

I wonder why the Territory doesn't do the same? At present there are no confirmed cases yet (although this may be because the government refuses to test anybody but overseas arrivals). They don't want acknowledgement that Covid 19 is in the community because that will push them to a more draconian response -and further expense. Also whats the exit strategy? Is a quarantine just postponing the inevitable? When I think of the risks of Covid 19 hereabouts Im really worried about the vulnerability of our Indigenous Territorians who might be very severely impacted...

Alan

Yesterday I spoke with my sister by phone. She is a school teacher in UK with a chronic heart condition, living in a high density area. She also has a teenage daughter of her own and delivers supplies to my elderly parents both in their nineties... The poor woman was almost on the verge of panic. My wife and I spoke with her for about an hour to try and reassure her.

Boris's decision to keep the schools open is clearly motivated to preserve as much of the economy as possible and some would argue favours the interests of big business and finance over the people he was elected to protect.

My sister said everybody at the schools was expecting the schools to close, but the UK government has said that if a student falls ill with the virus they have to go home for seven days. There will be no longer be 'cleanup' efforts at schools after infected pupils are removed, as too many cases are now expected. The pandemic is expected to run rife through the schools and teachers are expected to go in to school and teach, with the result that they too will contract the virus, with no option to self isolate. My sister was in tears telling me that that her daughter and our parents depended on her and she couldn't afford to get sick herself, no least because she feared for her own life.

While she does have a disposition towards panic, I thought that Boris Johnson's policy made no moral or medical sense even before I spoke with her.

Bizarre times folks!

Alan

I took a break from circuits in the C172 yesterday and ducked into closest woolies.

Place had taken a beating. While shopping for fruit a woman in the next isle started coughing. I noticed everbody in the store glared daggers at the poor woman who became totally self concious and immediately just left, almost in tears.

We apparently don’t have Whu Flu up in the Top End just yet, but the atmosphere in the store when the poor woman coughed was toxic. I felt

awful and appalled that we Aussies are now treating each other in such an un-matey way.

I would have followed her out but needed to get back to flying.

Anybody getting a sniffle these days can expect to be ostrichcised ( is that the right word?) OME?

Alan

The $1000 just made the govt look stingy and only cares about money not citizens. Which appears true. 

 

It created a lot of stress for the evacuees and made us look churlish. So much the advice was changed to cover their ass. 

 

The rest of the world acted quickly is NZ and we argued and squandered days before getting a  plane in the air. Just like the fire response.

 

If they absolutely had too they could have billed later.

 

As per usual grab defeat from a potential victory.

 

I think the evacuation from Wuhan was quite a complex issue.

Many of the evacuees were not expats in the traditional sense, but dual nationals (Chinese holding Australian passports). Their normal place of work and residence was actually China, but they took the opportunity to leave Wuhan under the evacuation deal to escape the lockdown enforced there. Which is fine, they're still our fellow citizens.  

But many are also citizens of China, and DFAT must have pushed hard and expended political capital to relax the restrictions on their movement to get them out.

Usually dual nationals  when resident in a country of one their nationalities are unambiguously subject to that countries laws and regulations.   For example, if Im an Aussie dual national from Nunavut, and Im living over there and get forcibly drafted into the military, or jailed for being homosexual (neither of which is likely to happen in Nunavut!)  then DFAT are not going to challenge  this given my local citizenship and being subject to local regulations, even if  these local laws and regulations are inconsistent with those in Australia.  But in this instance Australia has pushed hard to get dual nationals out from Wuhan in defiance of the local travel ban. 

Alan     

Why's there no ACCA DACCA on here yet?  Im not really a fan,  but they certainly brought a dose Aussie attitude to the world.

But does anybody remember an old combo called Sebastian Hardy? I saw them live once.

Four plucky Aussies who back in the 1970s went toe to toe with Poms and the Krauts with their symphonic rock noodlings. Admittedly not very Australian, but  quite extraordinarily accomplished  music. 

Alan   

Great looking English pub that!

Id go for running one of them any day over nuclear site engineering or banking. You obvious know your wines and your Yorkshire puds.

Alan  

@NT5224, I wonder exactly what Nigel Farage has to gain by leaving the EU.. I don't know what his personal interests are, but surely, if he simply resigned or stood down at the last MEP election, he could have retired blissfully on his pension even if the UK stayed in the EU.

 

I think the argument to stay in or leave the EU were fought on philosophical and ideological lines rather than any rationality. For example, no one could adequately quantify a simple question - what is the monetary cost to be in the EU verusus the monetary benefit and arrive at a net position. Of course, it is more ocmplicated than that, but once one understands the net cost or surplus, they can then talk about the other non-monetary obligations and rights/benefits.

 

The reality, much more damage to the UK economy has been done by the dithering of the previous PM.. Investment has been virtually on hold as has been any of the value-add employment (yes, less skilled labour market has been buoyant). I have seen not only more skilled positions come to the market, but the rates are up slightly as well..

 

With respect to Brexit playing to a small group of players - I think it is fair to say being in the EU felt like that, too. The CAP being the main exception, although it feels like that was to placate a small set of key agri-players in France and Italy rather than anything for the common good. Almost all political/regulatory developments from Europe were more selfserving of the EU Eurocrats/powerbase than actually for the greaster good. As mentioned earlier, literally billions had been spent by industries to conform to lofty and undecipherable regulations and directives - and there is still differences across the Union that make it not a level playing field.

 

BTW - it has been the EU's own actions, coupled with a sensationalistic press that have brought it upon themselves. Take EASA under Patrick Gordoux - a madman left unaccountable for 10 years despite UK protestations that he was wrecking the private side of GA with his harmonisation of regulating that sector of the industry to the same levels of CAT (RPT). Tjis highlighted how unaccountable the Eurocracy is - of course, until it awoke France who at the first hint of opposition, the EU announced a review - to be le by DGAC. Well, a lot of pilots who pown businesses that sell into or are integrated with business of the EU voted to leave - sometimes there is more than money at stake.

 

What are the downsides to leaving the EU? No doubt, EU imports will become more expensive as even if the government didn't want to tax imports, they will need to in order to pay for some of their promises. There will be job losses in manufacturing over the next 2 - 5 years as EU based companies repatriate their bases.. ALthough, if the £ takes another hit and with the already more flexible labour laws, there may be an incentive to keep them in the UK, so maybe not the job losses feared. The financial industry will be somewhat hit; although if as predicted by the nay-sayers, it would mean that the EU has to positively and blatantly discriminate against British institutions compared to other third country institutions.

 

And although I berate the level and complexity of regulation, there are higher standards for environmental, labour, cosumer and human rights than most other countries - although not all countries in the EU seem to really have to abide by all of them. Take the Eastern states and human rights or areas such as basic democracy (political independence of the judiciary in Poland I think, was one issue). It seems that money talks in all regimes...

 

What are the upsides? Well, we will have to wait and see. Sovereignty (which we already had) does not equal power. And a FTA with Australia won't compensate for a WTO arrangement with the EU. However, there have already been decisions taken that are in the face of current EU regulation, which one could aregue pursue British interests... Flybe has been subsidised to keep its regional routes open (although there is criticism as it may be that it is supporting poor commercial management, however, it is to ensure at least in the short term, people travelling regionally are not disadvantaged). Personally, I think that innovation can be better incubated, althought don't hold one's breath.. And of course, we have an extra c. £320m to £360m per week to play with.. I may go down to the casino tonight... The benefits will greatly depend on the way the conomy is managed privately and publicly.

 

Re BoJo's liar qualities, the words of many American friends of mine... Oh, Please! Are you telling me politicians don't lie for their own purposes? And also are you telling me politicians aren't self-serving oafs in it for their own aspirations of power, but are in it for unequivocal commitment to the masses? His private life is riddled with controversial relationships and probably kids he doesn't know he was.. But, as a politician, he has promised one thing... and delivered it when it looked like Westminster was paralysed - Brexit. That was his whole campaign.. "Get Brexit Done".. When asked what his policy was with respect to any subject, such as, improving the standard of living for destitude and battered women, his response would have been, as it was to everything else now, "This is not a time to talk about that.. People want me to GET BREXIT DONE." He is as polarising as Marmite (can't use vegemite as they don't have the same ad slogan): You love him or hate him... Well, actually.. I don't love or hate BoJo.. But then, I don't love or hate Marmite..

 

My concern is that all of this is happening against a backdrop of rising prejudice throughout the world, but also Europe.. particulalry more blatant popularism anf facism, racial abuse and anti-semetism.. Shades of the 30s are appearing again... and this is worrying...

 

Jerry_Atrick

Thanks for that clear exposition. You're  over in UK,   so I defer to your better informed insight of the Brexit issue. 

Im no fan of Mr Farrage as you can tell. I agree had he resigned before the latest elections he could have walked away with his EU life pension. But I consider it gross hypocrisy that he constantly criticized the institution and agitated against it it on account of its lavish spending and cost to the British tax payer, when he then walks away at considerable cost to that same taxpayer on the EU purse.   His pension alone will account for a part of sum within the terms of settlement the UK pays to the EU for its departure. Was any of this interest declared prior to his campaigning against the EU?  Mr Farrages contribution  to  the EU was essentially disruptive at best and I believe there were questions raised about him claiming EU expenses to orchestrate campaigns against it.  Will  Mr Farrage be renouncing the priviledges of EU (German) citizenship for his own children, given  he is so ardently against the EU? I find the blatant  hypocrisy astounding, even in todays world when our expectations of those in public life are already so low.

I agree that the long term outcomes and cost benefits of EU departure will take several years to become evident, but unfortunately by then it will be too late to do anything about. Application of the precautionary principle would have suggested the need for a better informed decision before the  decision was made.

What was the quality of information available to the decision-making public in UK prior to the referendum? Remember this was a decision of monumental social, economic,  and strategic importance to the UK and at the time the public voted there was no knowledge of what Brexit would cost, what it would look like, and how it could be implemented. Three years later these things are still unknown and yet Brexit has occurred  -in the absence of any knowledge.  That to me says it all about the calibre of Britains political leaders.

History will judge.

Alan

I understand what old man emu is saying, regarding the definition as relating to lawmakers and not law enforcers. If our system works as intended with the separation of powers, the police remain solely as enforcers of legislation.

 

The question is not really whether this or any other country could be termed a police state, but rather at what point they or we become one. It's always an incremental thing unless you go to sleep in 1972 and suddenly wake up in 2040. As time goes on, more laws are made and a certain amount of them will reduce freedoms. Due to population increases and growing crime, there will always be a place for new laws. And as long as all our bums point to the ground, the day will never come when legislators announce that we now have enough laws and we can start reducing the number of legislators and bureaucrats.

 

Let's think about parliament for a minute. Why are they there? Are they there to have non-partisan debates about what to do to fix the country. That would be nice, but unfortunately as much chance as me winning the lotto. The reality is, that apart from trying to score blows on their opposition, most of their work involves formulating, debating and legislating new laws. If they didn't have laws to pass, they would all sit around staring at each other like the drongos they are. Let's say theoretically, 1,000 new laws or regulations come into force every year. That will happen every year of every generation's life and the rate will possibly multiply by a factor.

 

So that's my opinion on it. It's when, not if. It's incremental and will never stop. Having said that, a certain amount of new laws are good laws and I think overall, good laws still outnumber bad or unjust laws.

 

`This is a good point and well put. Gave me cause for thought. 

I agree completely that politicians will always want to 'do stuff' to make themselves feel important and leave their mark,  and adding to regulation is often what they do. 

However in passing legislation,  I believe it is not uncommon  for an act to  stipulate that it repeals or replaces earlier legislation, or at least clarify how it aligns with what is already there. Otherwise, there'd be conflicting bits of legislation everywhere.  Bush lawyers would have a field day!

But we are certainly  becoming over-regulated. Like many rationale Aussies I totally support regulation (of sensible things). Its the non sensible that gripes me. I am all for  income taxation and would happily pay even higher taxes if that money was spent on causes that I consider worthwhile for our society: Health, education and public welfare. These things make our society happier healthier and more equitable.  I am more dubious about bankrolling politicians' personal expense accounts,  or investing billions on  leaky diesel powered submarines.

Surely our number one strategic threat in Australia is now climate change and associated impacts. That's where the money should be going, not to our security apparatus. Less the  'Police' state, more the 'Firefighter' state?   

 Alan 

 Hi Folks!

A few points to stir the hornets nest...

Personally I've been appalled by this Brexit mess over in UK. I think its madness, the Brits have slit their own throats at the bidding of their demagogues.

Was reading the other day how their poster boy Mr Farrage used his final EU parliamentary speech to attack and lambast the institution as corrupt and venial. He will now gracefully retire on a lifelong pension from the institution he had decried as corrupt, to be paid by the British Taxpayer as part of the EU severance package. He has defended this pension and his intention to claim it in multiple media interviews.  I find it quite astonishing  that the British public could be so blindly conned by somebody  who clearly had so much to personally gain by Brexit.

Mr Boris de Pfeffel comes across as the most unscrupulous and least trustworthy politician in a profession known for such vices.  He has been caught abjectly lying to further his own agenda on multiple occasions in his career and private life.  The guiding  principle of his life seems to have been the pursuit of personal power. Im dumbfounded as to why  the electorate vote for such people?  Have the standards of public life fallen so low? Wouldn't a voter expect even a modicum of trust in their politicians? 

I suspect the Brexit campaign has played directly into the hands of a small group of economic brokers who will assume dominant roles  in import and export transactions across a range of commodities and services. I've seen this time and again around the world in countries which operate  outside of frameworks regulating international trade and commerce. And guess who benefits?

The next obvious stage the saga will be Scotzit. Five years ago  when the Scottish independence referendum was held I felt the best interests of Scotland lay within the UK ( not that the views of a bushman in the Northern Territory counted for much in that debate!). Now my view has completely changed. The Scots have as much a right to their own referendum and as much respect should be given to the result as Mr Johnson  insisted was given to the  very narrow and ambiguous Brexit referendum.  Of course Scotlands territorial North Sea oil  will be a major sticking point.  Brexit is also going to open huge issues in Northern Ireland and threatens to unravel  all the progress made under successive peace agreements.

So the legacy  of Mr Johnson's lust for power may well be the dissolution  of the United Kingdom.  I think this is really sad.

I hope he's worth it.

Alan

Hi folks!

Sorry but Im going to call busllshit on some of you cossetted darlings shreiking 'Police State".  Thats strong language. 

Im basically apolitical, (although slightly left leaning) and have to say while it has its faults, liberal democracies like Australia are among the best places on this planet to live and we're all bloody lucky to do so. Much as we ridicule and lament our home grown politicians, the apparatus of state,  and the bumbling incompetence of our  executive and bureaucracy,  they are nothing on the horrors people in other regions have to endure. 

So lets guard against the erosion of our freedoms and liberties and the growth of ever pervasive surveillance in our lives. Lets resist against  the senseless culture of  airport security which lines the pockets of well connected security contractors and has no  genuine security value. And lets turn the spotlight on  political and judicial abuses where they occur, and reign in the appalling powers of the ATO, and hold  it and its executives to account like the rest of us.

A healthy democracy should be constantly challenging and checking itself. Discussions like this one are part of the process. But at least we are free to have the conversation and ask the questions

Alan

Wow!

That dashcam video was absolutely terrifying! I cringed just watching it. Stupid woman will doubtless carry the consequences of her recklessness for the rest of her life. Drinking and driving is ill-disciplined and selfish, and I really dont have a great deal of sympathy for those who are caught.

I own up to driving of those nasty ladder chassis 4WD's but am uttlerly unrepentent. 

But other than other outback residents and farmers, I'll agree most of the weekend warriors and recreational users of such vehicles are idiots..  I spend a lot of time and money fixing  the fences that they cut to break into my property, collecting their rubbish they leave their campsites and fighting the fires they light.  And occasionally rescuing them when they get bogged and dig huge impassable holes in my tracks. 

Alan