turboplanner

You're just digging a deeper grave.

They don't do immigration though, that's a Federal task.

Have a look at your own post #23, spelling and all.

Better get out and look around FH, your party has also recognised the problem. This has nothing to do with refugees, there are unscrupulous Australians trading in cheap labour. As part of a Planning matter where I was working in conjunction with an investigating journalist, my sources uncovered a fifty million dollar purchase of land by a certain ethnic group who had made good money in a certain line of business. We then managed to find out who was organising the new ethnic group members to come in on student visas, and we tracked their income to a certain industry, and we tracked the employment organisers to one family in that industry. On that occasion, as often happens, the group withdrew their threat, the minister changed direction, and the story never emerged. We never found out exactly how many of that ethnic group got into Melbourne, but it was probably around a thousand, and they have been flowing in for years, none being students and never returning home. If you look at that case, the ABF could certainly stroll around looking a people of that ethnic group, and would be successful in deporting most of them, so the idea wasn't all wrong.

The mistake was all in the wording of the press release. A logical thinker would realise that interviewing around three million people in Melbourne would not be a very productive way of catching the few thousand illegal immigrants. How the Prime Minister could be blamed for this when the ABF commander already has taken responsibility for the concept and strategy of this operation, consigned it to the dustbin, and will do better in the future says a lot about how up to speed some people are. There are some streams of people being brought in to the country using methods such as student visas, and employed as cheap labour, and particularly in Melbourne you can see the population bulging in vocations like taxis, restaurants etc, so there is a definite need for border checking. The British do it well.

Bit of a problem if you work as a stone caster though. Slow start to each day.

Has evolved into what? What has been built in recent years is all the same concept and it appears it will never be commercially viable.

The tidal/wave machines failed long before the Abbott government was elected. I don't think we are going to get anything useful out of this thread. Even after I pointed out that domestic tariffs are increased by electricity suppliers in Melbourne (none of them owned by Tony Abbott), and after I pointed out coal is the only power source that can produce enough electricity in our peaks, you somehow think one man is responsible for this. I'll leave you to your thoughts.

The tidal and wave power machines all failed, which is why you don't hear to much about them these days; perhaps someone will come along with a better desdign, but right now no one seems to be interested. How did Abbott get into this discussion? The government certainly has decided not to waste our money on wind farms, because all of them came from the same suppliers, all had the same problems, none showed any promise of evolving into profitable generation, so it was inappropriate to waste taxpayers' money. Not surprisingly, but they are becoming less and less affordable, so there are opportunities for practical solutions.

These are the emission reductions since 1992, roughly to scale. You can then compare then to online EPA recorders. EMISSION - GRAPH2.pdf EMISSION - GRAPH2.pdf

Used to FT, used to. For the past few years, new motor vehicle emissions have been lower that ambient in urban areas, therefore cleaning up the air they drive in, and in rural areas they are so massively outnumbered by grazing animals, that they are negligible. Give is another ten years and the car park will have virtually turned over to the point where 90+% will clean the air as they drive, so will be a valuable asset.......and still running on oil.

Other than solar what are the renewables you are talking about? You're not up with the latest, it's all gone belly up. In Melbourne, if you have some solar power generation your electricity tariff INCREASES. Not surprisingly no one is all that keen on installing solar any more. Nor can you reasonably sell power back to the grid. That's as much a shock to me as it is to anyone else, but apparently the only generation method we have in Australia to cope with the major demand variations we use, is coal, and for very practical reasons. I'm not saying this is good and I'm not saying we don't need to take urgent action, but the family tariff bill in the cities is so much that the lower income demographic is in financial trouble, in the hundreds of thousands. So they aren't about to go out and borrow $6,000.00 to see their tariff go UP. In addition to that, there are now hundreds of thousands of "smart" meters which are smart enough to know when the air conditioning or heaters are on, and slug the consumer by the hour for the extra power they draw. And not one single company has made a profit out of wind farms, which of course don't provide power in the high demand periods. Oops!, sorry, they have all been making profits, but with the money us taxpayers have been giving them because wind power is such a good idea. We've made the Chinese manufacturers rich, we've made the wind farm, owners rich, but it's been like raising the Titantic for luxury cruises by operating a battery of pumps running full time. Good work, our house is based on solar design award ideas, and they work well, saving a lot in heating cost in the winter.

What are they?

Would they be from that University of Melbourne Octave?

and you'll be waiting until I get interested and get enough time to do the research it deserves - doesn't alter its validity.

Five points for you to rebut, and you went to water.

You don't engage either (#2505), and this piece of fiction looks very much like an atheist rant against believers with a bit of Miss Marples thrown in at the end.

Not when you're producing such funny and lightweight stuff.

Agreed

http://www.pressreader.com/australia/herald-sun/20150804/282359743423884/TextView

No

Told you not to get excited about the TPP (and Winsor gave me a creative for it). http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tpp-talks-break-down-but-trade-minister-andrew-robb-insists-deal-is-close-20150801-gipdjj.html Have a look at what Andrew Robb is saying. I've known him for a lot of years and he's a genuine heavyweight for good.

I have a few friends who are Muslims Bex, and the women make their choice. I've seen them without their religious dress many times, and they tend to put it on when they are going out, or at formal occasions. So they do have a choice.

These are some of the issues the last government of Victoria started to grapple with. Thousands of people complained about multiple speed limits on short stretches of the same road, and in some cases, this is where cameras were sited. Vicroads solved this by phasing out the 70 and 90 limits, and guess what, these sections dropped 10 km/hr to 60 and 80. What the Napthine government were starting to do was look at examples like the ones you are giving and lift the speed limits including the current 110 open freeway limit to 130. The main incentive for statutory speed limits relates to the high cost, and nuisance factor, for police to gather bulletproof evidence and prosecute offenders who were driving unsafely. Once the law was based on fixed speed limits, and the could use technology to measure or photograph the offence, then proof became automatic, and the whole circus moved to where we are today when non-police do the entrapment. There certainly needs to be a safe speed for a particular section of road, traffic density and weather, and traffic needs to be grouped closely around this speed to avoid bad judgements and frustration, and in most cases, when traffic is measured the section of road tends to produce a mean speed set by the motorists good judgement. However, what is glaringly obvious is that when traffic density intermittently increases or decreases or when the weather is bad, the speed limit is inappropriate. Just recently a UK writer carried out a study on areas of heavy pedestrian density, such as shopping strips, where the speed limit has been reduced in recent years (Australian regulators go to these conferences and pick up these ideas, and have reduced the limits in these areas from 60 to 50 t0 40) He found that in a study of fatalities from 0 to 40 kmh (two or three people in the study had fallen on a stopped car and been killed), around 97 per cent of the drivers involved had been driving within the speed limit. His hypothesis was that those who WERE speeding had a higher concentration level and avoided these accidents. Another factor when you dumb down to speed limits in these areas is that unskilled, and uninterested people just use the limit as their "safe" guideline, so on a wet day through your shopping strip they may be sitting on 40 km/hr while you are on 20. In the automotive and transport industries, we have the advantage that every single fatal is logged by the federal government and is available for anyone to check many details such as alleged cause, time of day, weather, make of car, alcohol level, drug level, estimated speed, road condition etc. With that information, some very interesting facts come out. In one case, what looked like a fatal caused by a car load of drunken hoons turned out to be four people, sober, misjudging a corner, sliding across the road, and sliding up an uprotected end of a roadside cable barrier which acted like a stunt ramp and rotated the car roof first into trees, killing the occupants. The investigation showed the car was not exceeding the speed limit.

I drove an ACCO Refrigerated Meat Van around it once that drop at the top just about sent the ACCO into truck heaven. Two cops got me coming out of Orange, one who sneaked inside my mirrors in the town, and another who sat back where I could see him. He turned off, I picked up speed, and instantly, out came the other one.