octave

Here is one of several options for apartment dweller's Community Solar Programs If rooftop solar isn’t an option, residents can buy into a community solar project, where an external solar farm generates energy for subscribers. This works well when: The building can’t support solar panels. Residents want solar benefits without dealing with strata approvals.

As I posted earlier balcony solar is coming. There are also schemes where residents can buy into an off-site solar facility. I also imagine that in the near future apartment buildings will be built with rooftop solar

I used to take a HTV from every party so as not to signal my intentions. I haven't done this now for many years. My next stage where I used to live was because I knew the local school where the polling booth was, I was able to enter from a direction that avoided the people handing out HTVs Fir the last few years I have mostly voted by mail and therefore have done my research about who to vote for online. I did vote in person at the last election so I researched online, came up with a voting strategy and wrote it down so I wouldn't forget. My area is a very safe seat so I usually vote for a smaller party or independent knowing who will win anyway.

The Victorian and South Australian Electoral Commissions regularly analyse ballot papers and have determined that around 40% of major party voters complete their ballot paper with their preferred party’s HTV preference sequence. The proportion following HTVs is even lower for minor parties and independents. The difference in follow rate is largely related to the proportion of voters who receive the HTV for a particular party or candidate. Obviously the probability of a voter copying a HTV recommendation is higher if they receive a HTV than if they don’t.

Just jumping back to the first past the post voting systems. Here are the countries that have that system. I can't really see a trend here as to whether these countries are better or worse to live in. First Past the Post (FPTP) is a majoritarian electoral system where the candidate with the most votes in a constituency wins, even without an absolute majority. As of May 2026, roughly 68 countries and territories use this system for their national legislatures, many of which are former British colonies. Electoral Reform Society +2 Countries Using FPTP for National Legislatures This list includes major nations and representative examples across different regions: The Americas & Caribbean United States Canada Belize The Bahamas Barbados Jamaica Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Dominica, Grenada, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, and Trinidad and Tobago Europe & Central Asia United Kingdom (for House of Commons only) Belarus (House of Representatives) Azerbaijan Electoral Reform Society +3 Asia India (Lok Sabha) Pakistan Bangladesh Malaysia Nepal (Note: Nepal uses a mixed system, but the plurality component is significant) Laos Africa Botswana Ethiopia Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Uganda, and Zambia Zimbabwe Oceania Cook Island Country Cook Islands Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Samoa, Solomon Islands, and Tonga Key Characteristics Plurality-Based: A candidate only needs one more vote than their nearest rival to win. Single-Member Districts: Voters typically elect one representative for their local area. Direct Result: It often leads to a "winner-takes-all" outcome, frequently resulting in two-party dominance.

I was referring to interest rates and I got those figure slightly wrong, typed over a boozy lunch. Just referring to inflation we have 3.3 compared to 4.6. this means that a $100 item in the US would be $103.30 after one year whilst in Australia that item would cost $104.60. This is quite a similar inflation rate. It doesn't really scream great financial management compared to atrocious financial management. Different countries have different strengths and weaknesses such as the size of the market.

Why are most Uber drivers ethnic? I don't believe Uber recruits on ethnicity. I am sure they don't give a toss about the ethnicity of the people who make money for them.

I believe Australia is 4.35 percent and the US is 4.35 percent. Not a huge difference.

Is this government responsible for high interest rates? Being a logical rational person I ask if high interest rates are only in this country. The US has quite a right wing government and high interest rates. Inflation and interest rates are high everywhere.

Channel 7? Their recent hatchet job on batteries was disgusting. Sure make your case but don't lie.

Immigrants are also taxpayers. My son's partner (who I guess you wouldn't approve of) is a high flyer and pays loads of tax. The immigrants that some people think are stealing their jobs are also paying tax.

I haven't looked into this however if true does not bother me. At this point I don't own an EV but the the more of these vehicles on the road the better for everyone. As a regular cyclist I can say that I would rather be waiting at the traffic lights behind an EV than a car spewing fumes in my face We know the kids who live near major highways have more respiratory issues. My son recently spent time in Beijing. He was expecting the air to be thick with car fumes however the air was surprisingly clear thanks to the uptake of EVs. Thus benefits all of society.

The thing with preferential voting is that I can send a signal. My seat is a safe seat, it has not changed hands in decades. Whilst I know my vote will flow through to the least worst of the 2 major candidates. If the winning candidate only just scrapes in then post election analysis may pus a party right or left depending on where the preferences are coming from. A strong One Nation vote is a signal for the major parties to the right and a strong flow from the Greens may signal something different. No system is perfect.

I am not sure that more than 50 percent of voters follow how to vote cards I am the go today so I have not thoroughly read this article but here is a link. https://antonygreen.com.au/do-how-to-votes-matter-evidence-from-the-2022-sa-election/ The Victorian and South Australian Electoral Commissions regularly analyse ballot papers and have determined that around 40% of major party voters complete their ballot paper with their preferred party’s HTV preference sequence. The proportion following HTVs is even lower for minor parties and independents. The difference in follow rate is largely related to the proportion of voters who receive the HTV for a particular party or candidate. Obviously the probability of a voter copying a HTV recommendation is higher if they receive a HTV than if they don’t.

This presupposes that we are the only country attempting to cut CO2. Yes, our share is small, but all of the countries that contribute under 2% make cuts adds up to 30% (I am happy to back that figure up) How are these actions abhorrent? When you say you don't accept the science, are you saying that CSIRO is incompetent or part of the malicious conspiracy that you alluded to? I approach climate science like any other area. I have had people tell me that vaccination doesn't work or causes autism, etc. I reject this because I can see what CSIRO says. Being extra cautious, I can cross-check this with other respected sources. This seems to me to be a solid method of determining what the likely "truth" is. If you believe this is a flawed method, then suggest a better method. If the outliers in climate science are right, then why not the outliers in medical science or any other field? Vaccine sceptics also tend to cite "grand conspiracies."