Jerry_Atrick

Thought it was too easy

Jeez, I'd be happy if one of my team took my job.. they get to have the fun.

All star time?

Indeed a rip off.. a little over 15% to withdraw your money. These are private operators who pay network fees, cash carrying charges and the like.. thought they would have all gone bust by now.. Can't you get your money fee free from any bank's ATM regardless of who you bank with?

Who wants life to pass them by?

Isn't that a plus - to extend the gene pool... 2 heads and all of that?

Well, if that is the case, then pollies and/or science has let us down... and to be quite frank, I know which genre lets us down far more often.

Fair call... But that article claims it is 800 a year; not sure if it is just in the region or for a station, or Australia wide. But the fisherman in the article is laying the blame of the take on the station owners not managing their cattle properly, so I am guessing this could be avoided. But even if it were 8,000 per year Australia wide, at $2K/head (and not all of them are worth that), we are looking at $16m/year.. still not a huge amount for the size of the industry. And some of these stations hold thousands of head of cattle, and still doubt it adds that much to the food bill at the check out.. But, if it makes sense to cull, they should be. Sometimes, I am argumentative SoB

This was a ruling back in May: https://tax.thomsonreuters.com/blog/u-s-court-of-international-trade-rules-certain-emergency-tariffs-illegal-what-businesses-need-to-know/ Here is an article in June where a federal appeals court granted an injunction on the tarrifs: https://www.dentons.com/en/insights/newsletters/2025/june/2/trump-2-0-navigating-change-in-canada/appeals-court-halts-united-states There is nothing on the CNN website front page or recent US stories that I can find that talks about it.. Doing a search on the court of international trade on CNN gives this page: https://edition.cnn.com/search?q=court+of+international+trade&from=0&size=10&page=1&sort=newest&types=all&section=, whin at the time of the search goes back to July 16 on the first page, and there is no news of this on there, either. A Youtuber looks to have put up some old news to get clicks.

Part of the reason I am questioning is that I recently stumbled across the importance dingos provide the the biodiversity, and ultimately, the economic performance of agriculture in Australia, yet they are still baited and culled. Here's one example where a pastoralist sees the economic benefits for cattle farming: Of course, it may be a different story for a sheep farmer in terms of pedation rates, so there may have to be some more innovation of managing flocks with dingos, but clearly, it it can be managed without culling, the farmers will be much better off and more productive. Which is why evidence based policy in this area (as with any) will lead us to inversting the resources in activities that will really solve the problems - not the gut reactions that can make it worse for us

You raise a good point, Nev. Crocs do play an important part of the ecosystem: https://chatgpt.com/share/688464ca-87e8-8008-91e9-a7cb5f702e72 But feral pigs and waterbuffalo are also on their diet and they help keep the numbers down. Feral cattle may also be taken. So, it helps keep at least some of that population in check. Yeah, crocs are a threat to humans. But there are a lot more humans than crocs, and a lot of humans do frequent where crocs live. Yet, very few are taken. Of course, a croc isn't that fussy an eater and will take people, but people are normally very adept at living in their environment, which contributes to what appears to be an extremely low rate of fatalities. So, if we are going to invest in control of animals, it may be better for Australia's environment and food production to invest in control of the feral species, while maintaining investment in education and safety of the public. Also, I am not saying a cull isn't on the cards.. Over-population of any species should really be kept in check and if the apex predator is not taking care of its own numbers through territorial fighting, etc, but I would liketo see an evidence based approach rather than anecdotal based approach. I am not suggesting Chat GPT is accurate either.. If there's a case to supportit, it should be supported with the requisite quota in place to ensure no overculling. Would also like the controls in place to ensure there is no overvulling and leaving carcasses in situ to avoid detection.

Depends on who he ate, I guess 😉

I accidentally hit save and by the time I got the rest of the response in, my time was up, so here is the rest: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-30/fact-check-does-a-crocodile-kill-someone-every-three-months-/9202902 I checked how many head of cattle per year are taken by crocs, and it is estimated to be around 100: https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2017-01-17/crocodiles-snapping-up-more-than-100-cattle-a-year/8187352. In the biullions of dollars that the Aussie beef industry is worth, I would expect that to be tuppance. Yep, those in affected areas have to spend a bit keeping their herds safe, but if it were not economic, they would get out of it. I wouold have thought snakes were more of an issue, but apparently not or there is little evidence, anyway. BTW. googleing current price for middle wight steers for beef in Australia yielded about $1900/head. That makes it less than $190K per year out of a multi-billion dollar industry. Say there are 500 farms/stations affected and they need to each spend 100K per year protecting their herds, that is $50m/year in a multi billion dollar industry.. I think it doesn't add that much to the price you pay in the supermarket or butcher. I couldn't find any information on the amount of food crocs take in Australia that would deprive humans of their food. I would wager that societal inequities are probably a far bigger contributor to malnutrition in Australia than the croc's diet. I have no idea if the above is accurate - there is very little to go on, but as humans, we adapt to changes in our environment are able to exert influences on our enviromnment more effectively than any other species.. Maybe we can lear to live with them - or maybe we already have?

I have no idea of the subject, but as always, I like to turn to facts. Suprisingly, when I key historical rate of crocodile fatalities in Australia into Mr Google, there really is scant info, but this did turn up, and was quoted in an ABC fact check that labelled as false Katter's claim a person is torn to shreds every three months by crocodiles in QLD alone: https://aussieanimals.com/reptiles/fatal-crocodile-attacks-australia-timeline/

I think you may have misunderstood my point. While I agree with it, the question or thought is why are people so afraid to talk about money; It is the thing that determines the quality of their life, yet most people shy away fom discussing it, learning about it, and the like You'e right - health is far more imporant, but on the socio-economic ladder, richer people are in general healthier and live longer lives (with better quality of life) than poorer people. I wasn't referring to greed, etc; and objectifying the wealthy v poor... That is a different topic altogether. This is sort of my point - and this probably stems from an aversion to talk about it. Somehow, as a society, we have become almost scared of it. We shouldn't be; being ipen about it will help bridge the gap. Can I borrow your SWMBO to deal with a couple of builders? 😉