Suggestion - It's Just Not Cricket...

There's been a lot of bluster RE: the looming tour of Australia to Zimbabwe. Apart from the fact that the tour shouldn't be going ahead, what peeves me about this is how the Australian Government seems to want to defer blame onto Cricket Australia than wear any criticism themselves.

If I'm reading the tea leaves correctly, the argument goes like this. The Government is trying to convince Cricket Australia to withdraw from the tour (ABC News Article) however, but pulling out unilaterally, CA is likely to incur a $2m fine, possible sanction from other cricket countries (affecting future income) and likely lawsuits for losses. In response, the government has said it will pay the $2m fine.

However, if I'm reading what CA are saying, if they are unable to tour because of the actions taken by a third party (i.e. if the Australian Government imposes sanctions and stops them from going), then they'll be liable for NOTHING! Jack squat! Nix!

So, what we're seeing here is the government trying to play politics through a sporting organisation because it itself is too weak wristed to take action!!!

In my mind, it's easy to work out who the bad guys are here...

EDIT (4/6): And as we've now worked it, this is exactly what the ACB was eluding to and, to their credit, Howard's lot have seen fit to intervene and ban the Aussie team from touring.

How About: Fair Pay?

With much of Howard's "fair pay" rehetoric ringing foul in many's ears, how about we follow the Norwegian model of publishing everyone's taxable income each year (see BBC Article)?

This would allow workers to compare income with their colleagues and to stop the mushroom syndrome from being applied to the wage bargaining process. What a way to stop driving income to the bottom. Make it public information!!!

Edit (4/6): And we see it again in today's article RE: Women being affected by AWA's (story on Radio National's "Life Matter's" this morning). Folks, let just make it all be public (the AWA's) and all this will go away!!!

Equality?

I sometimes wonder whether the Feminism movement would be better to strive for "Equality" as much as they do for "women only" rights. From my perspective, much of what they're asking for are equally valid goals for many men (okay, some of us) as it is women.

I crave an environment where, as parents, we can access affordable childcare or, if we so wish, offer "parental" leave so EITHER parent can choose to stay at home for a period. Surely it comes to the circumstances of the individual? In our case, I'm firmly entrenched in a career - so if I opt out for a period, the impact is unlikely to be severe. However, my wife is breaking into a new career where every foothold is important. So why can't I take "paternity leave" and care for the children so my wife can continue to bolster her career? Taking a one-side only view on things is going to alienate many men - because they feel like they're being left out.

The same now applies to wages. I'd like to see more transparency to wages generally as, in this day and age, we're all equally screwed. In fact, I'd LOVE to see the Norwegian (or was it some other scandinavian country?) system brought in whereby ALL incomes are made public available. That way you can check what your colleague is getting and thus you have a leg to stand on asking for more.

Economic Rationalism & Competition Policy vs Reality

I've long argued against some of the idiocy that arose from Howard's "Competition Policy" - a lot of it stank of economic rationalism for the sake of idology - the market knows best.

Classic case in point was the Dairy Industry. Now deregulated, many once prosperous dairy regions (Malanda, Mackay, Sunshine Coast, etc) were left at the mercy of supposedly "efficient" Victorian farmers. So we now are flooded by cheap Victorian milk whilst the local suppliers struggle to survive.

Yet this decision alone smacked of hypocracy. The so called "efficiency" these farmers gain have come from MASSIVE water subsidies whereby incredibly cheap water is supplied into regions where previously dairy was not viable.

However, my biggest concern was one of staking too much in one hand. Whilst it may be great we can get cheap milk from one region to supply Australia, it also means that one major disaster has the power to throw milk supplies into jeopardy. The obvious one would be an outbreak of a disease like Foot & Mouth. With thousands of head of Cattle having to be destroyed, the milk market would go into meltdown. An unlikely scenario, but with similar outbreaks in the UK, it seemed like it could happen.

Well, we've now apparently got armageddon looming. We've been told that, unless there is significant rain in the catchments of the Murray Darling basin within 6-8 weeks, the draw of water for irrigation will stop. That means all that lovely cheap milk production will likely come to an end.

Let's hope that Malanda haven't been savaged too badly by Howard's disasterous policies!!!

Prediction - YouTube = Google's Demise

I've been meaning to post this one for a while...

I have to say that I was stunned by Google's idiocy buying YouTube for an astronomical amount of money (what was it? $2b?). Is this a sign that the money hungry been counters are now in charge?

Google has always inspired because of it's ability to create wonderful web applications out of nothing: Gmail, Google Earth, Writely, etc. Yet it went out to market and purchased YouTube - why the sudden change of direction? Worse, it's hardly a unique idea - proven by the vast number of competitors in the market - and worse, it's vapourware. YouTube is only fashionable - it's not going to be a long-term product. What happens when the next YouTube hits the market? Google will be left with a $2b dead duck around its neck.

Worse, it now appears to have become a target because now there's someone to blame. Previously, valuing YouTube was difficult so there was really no-one to sue. Now Viacom et al have an easy target - one of the biggest tech stocks in the market!!!

So, will this really bring Google to its knees? Time will tell I suppose...

What The? Same Survey - Two Interpretations?

I'm a little staggered to work out how this happened:

BBC - Pessimism 'growing among Iraqis' vs The OZ: It's better than Saddam, say hopeful Iraqis

How can the same survey be seen in completely different ways? "Lies, damned lies and statistics" I suppose?

Double Speak - Telstra's "NowWeAreTalking.com.au"

Ah, the nerve of the biggest monopoly in the country!

We received a brochure from Telstra today regarding their propaganda site www.nowwearetalking.com.au which is arguing for regulation to be removed so Telstra can provide proper Broadband for "Australian's".

And how does it propose that Telstra should be "unshackled"? By regulating the price of ULL so they can fuck off all the leaches stealing their cream in the capitals. What a load of old shit!

Don't you love it? It's called competition Telstra - you guys bought into this shit, now wear it. They use language like "our competitors like cherry picking" and "they make good profits from the city customers" and then argue this is reducing their ability to meet the obligations of the Universal Service Obligation.

They even have a whole section arguing that Telstra shareholders are subsiding 90% of the USO! Fuck you idiots - it was hardly a fucking secret when you took this on!

They also complain of having to "hand over" the ULL to their competitors. Look you idiots, the network is a national monopoly - if you don't like this responsibility, then sell the network back to the government and let them run it. You can stay in shitty services because that's about all your good for.

God they pricks have some gaul!!! Made worse by all these "notable Australian's" (all of whom have significant stakeholdings in Telstra) arguing the case for reduced regulation.

So, here's my spin on what will happen. If Howard is returned, the regulation will evaporate. We're already seeing an outright, government sanctioned attack on ISPs so stripping back the regs will be next. Once Telstra have anchored themselves and won back their monopoly, just watch how quickly they stick out their hands for regional/rural service provision. "Oh, it costs shareholders too much still" or "if you want national coverage, it should be paid for by the nation".

Oh, and I'm still waiting for Countrywide to be shutdown - my guess it will come once the regs are removed...

Suggestion - Parity Pricing Road vs Rail

Why is it that the Rail industry is only group seemingly forced to pay for "Externalities"?

• For example, the UK govt agrees to push up Lorry Tares to 40tonnes. The knock on, every bridge in the UK needs to be strengthened. Who pays? The trucking industry? No, the Rail industry!
• In Qld, a ruling is made that QR must fence railway lines to "protect children" (or some rot). As a consequence, QR has outlaid MILLIONS on fencing throughout the state. Yet these same fences often run along side busy roadways - you guessed it - that are UNFENCED!

We see this sort of bullshit time and time again and then there's the right wing mantra - full cost recovery - viz, the railway must pay its own way. Yeah, like the truck industry "pays its own way" - the whole lot is massively subsidised.

But I have a solution. Whilst road users continue to enjoy toll free roads, the rail users should enjoy the same privileges. What I suggest is a simple flat "vehicle" registration charge so that the more a "vehicle" is used, the more profitable it is - which is exactly the same logic that sees trucks plying our roads everyday. If EVERY truck journey incurred the same horrendous costs that rail users are levied, watch them clear the roads faster than you can imagine.

So, lets stop the imbalance and lets:

• Open Rail to FULL Competition (operators)
• The only charge on rails should be a per vehicle charge
• Make the State fund the contruction, maintenance and care of the railway network (rails and signals) but get out of operations (i.e. sell off the bit of QR that drives and operates trains).

And then sit back, watch rail prosper and watch the trucks leave the roads in the thousands!!!

What The: Australia Post Advertising?

Okay, what's going on here?

Over the last week, we've had a barrage of ads for Australia Post - a different ad for every day of the week. They're pretty good ads (as far as ads go) but what the bloody hell are they for?

Aussie Post have a monopoly (well, they currently do), so why the need to advertise? My guess is as follows:

a) Howard is about to strip Aussie Post of its monopoly and "deregulate" the postal system in OZ. Tony (Blair) did it in Blighty, so it must be good for us.
b) Howard is about to sell off Aussie Post.
c) Both the above is going to happen.

Is this going to slip in undetected? Time will tell...

EDIT (4/6): Oh, why am I not surprised to see this ...???

Why: Airports don't have clocks?

Why is it that anywhere you really need a clock, none can be found?

Case in point - Airports. You regularly hear reports of folks not arriving at a depature gate "in time" for a flight. Yet, have you ever tried to determine the time in an Airport? I cannot find a normal clock ANYWHERE in ANY airport that I've ever visited. Sure, there are clocks, but only if you are standing in front of the departures or arrivals screens.

But who does that? Most folk are sitting down watching the world go by - and where there is never a clock in sight.

Idea - Ministry vs Department

It's long bothered me how, at every invokation of government or cabinet reshuffle, the powers that be see fit to rebrand every department - DEVETIR becomes DITR becomes DETIR becomes DEVTR becomes ... as the mix of Departments keeps changing.

But why? Why do we waste thousands on new logo's, new letter head, new everything just to reflect a new political expediency?

My suggestion - why not leave the departments unchanged unless there really is going to be a true amalgumation. So leave them at their bear minimums. The Department of:

• Employment
• Training
• Education
• Main Roads
• Police
• etc

And then simply create political ministries that link them together:

• Ministry of Employment, Training & Industrial Relations
• Ministry of Police & Corrective Services

That way only the politicial paperwork changes but the Departmental stuff doesn't have to. From a business or citizen perspective, we don't care if the government of the day sees fit to amalgumate functions, we still want to deal with the Department.

Yes, it may not always be the case and there may be good reason for joining functions - but if that's the case then perhaps the belong together - but I think it could save us a small fortune in renaming costs.

Prediction - The Disguise of the 99-Year Lease

A quick one - these 99-year leases the libs are touting as the solution to all of Aboriginal Australia's problems.

The argument goes that by allowing 99-year leases, suddenly banks will borrow money to people living on the Dole so they can build a house.

Who are they kidding?

My guess - it's all about land rights and tenure to the land. I reckon they've had legal opinion that if the traditional owners relinguish the land via a lease, then they'll end up loosing their land rights.

Just my prediction anyhow...

Thoughts - Work "Choices"

I'm really amazed at the stupidity of people who are throwing away allowances for short-term gain. You know the deal, drop penalty rates, over-time, etc for a sizeable increase in salary.

It looks really nice upfront - until you get burnt.

I know of a recent example where exactly this occurred in a MAJOR (ASX100) employer. A bunch of IT support staff accepted a $4000 increase in salary in leui of overtime, penalty rates and on-call allowances to provide 24x7 IT support. Up front it looked fantastic.

Problem was, they received no further increases in Salary for nearly 5 years!

See the problem? That $4000 is now a $0 increase thanks to inflation - and they no longer have any penalties, overtime or on-call provisions.

People - OPEN YOUR EYES - stop looking at the short term and think long term. What appears good on paper today could well bite you in the arse in a few years time!

Howard must be laughing all the way to the polls!!!!

Suggestion - Abrams M1A1 in Queensland...

I was interested to read a letter to the editor today from Major General Ian Gordon, Deputy Chief of Army, arguing that the Abrams M1A1 was the right choice of replacement tank for the army (the fact they're second hand, too heavy and too wide).

One of his arguments is that they can be transported by rail from Darwin to other parts of the country. But lets see what that means in Queensland:

Let's compare the two beasts:

M1A1	w3.64 m	l 7.92 m	h 2.43 m	63.0 tonnes
Leopard	w3.37 m	l 9.54 m	h 2.62 m	42.5 tonnes

The concern here is the additional width (nearly 30cm) and weight (nearly 20 tonnes). In Queensland, the Leopard tanks can be moved by rail around the country - seeing a stand of flatbeds outside of the area north of Rocky is not uncommon - but with an additional 30cm to cater for, I suspect this will be too big for our loading gauge.

Which means they'll need to be moved by road - which will mean significant inconvenience on our lovely narrow highways - let alone the damage caused by the additional 20 tonnes rolling overhead.

Good idea? Not in Queensland I suspect.

Suggestion - Why's the Military on the Nose...

Much has been made recently of Mr Howard's greasy attempt to lure folk into military service. His new "gap year", "try before you buy" is nothing more than a half arsed attempt to bring National Service back in. You can see the approach - start by making it voluntary - of course, no one will sign up - then, following an electoral win, they'll tie it to the Dole, then it'll be compulsary for anyone 18-20 on a "random" selection.

Yet, I'm staggered the government is unable to see the obvious reason why military service is on the nose - namely, the politicisation of the ADF. It's been going on for a while now - firstly Tampa, then Children Overboard - both used by an encumbent government to retain power and knowingly corrupted the ADF to its end by distorting the facts and forcing them to stay quiet.

Now of course we have the Iraq debacle - sent into a completely partisan fight to suck up to Bush on a campaign clearly NOTHING to sdo with the watr on terror - resulting of course in taking the eyes of Afghanistan which is another looming basket case. Had they held their will against Bush and sent our troops into campaigns with a TRUE moral agenda, then perhaps it wouldn't be so "on the nose".

Aussie troops have long prided themselves on their humanitarian position, by befriending the locals which in turn helps to defeat the enemy combatitans. Without that, who are your friends?

So, Mr Howard, pull us out of Iraq, reaffirm our commitment in Afghanistan and pledge to commit to a fight where we have a moral position, and perhaps the ADF will have a future.

Question - The Rush to Conflict?

I'm amazed at the astounding certainty that our political leaders have regarding North Korea's recent "alledged" nuclear tests. There's been suggestion for days that it wasn't a nuclear bomb, yet from the rhetoric surrounding the event, you'd never know.

Yet, we have conflicting comments like this from the BBC which claims that "US scientists found that there were traces of radioactive gas in the air near the site of last Monday's alleged nuclear test." So, here we have the most secretative country in the world, where we're repeatedly told that no-one can get inside the country to find out what's going on, yet we can sample the air near the bomb site!

I'm not trying to argue that the event didn't occur - in fact, I'd be surprised if it didn't - but I worry at the "call to arms" that the media has jumped on a la "WMD in Iraq" or "Children Overboard". No questioning, no doubts, all certainty. When will we learn from our mistakes?

Thoughts - Who's Cashing In???

In the rash of reports (here and here) of people "cashing in" on Steve Irwin's death, and particularly on his rememberance service, I'm staggered that no-one has yet pointed to the fairly blatant "cashing in" that the Irwin empire is staging.

Despite original plans to have the service at Lang Park (or Suncorp Stadium) where it could easily accommodate the "greiving masses", it was decided (apparently at Terri's request) to hold it at Australia Zoo. Why is this "cashing in"? Well, if there were to sell memorabilia or merchandising at Lang Park it would have been "tacky" and most likely have been an outcry. Whereas, if they sell truckloads of shit at Australia Zoo, it can be done under the guise of "running a business".

I wonder if anyone will have the guts in the media to say it???

Prediction - Energy Efficiency & Sustainable Products in Housing

I recently went to an investment seminar and subsequent followup meetings. In this I was told that I should built a stock "executive, 4 bedroom" house and make a killing.

This really bugged me because I'm so tired of seeing these crap buildings (especially in our climate) because it's the current fashion in Melbourne or Sydney.

I object to this on two counts:

1. It's foul for our climate - shit, we're building low ceiling, besser block houses with no eaves and black roofs - this in a climate where Summer temps typically exceed 32 degrees! Who's the idiots building this shit?

2. It's going to be economic suicide - with the price of energy expect to rise sharply in coming years (Peak Oil, Climate Change, Carbon Taxes, etc), then it seems idiocy to be building a "stock" house made for current fashions.

On #2 alone, it would make much more sense economically to be building low impact, sustainable and energy efficient houses NOW so you can cash in when the prices start to rise. Think how much easier it will be to rent a property when you can offer a tenant SIGNIFICANT savings on expenses!

Confirmed: Israel Bombed First...

As confirmed on Democracy Now (July 14 interview with Noam Chomsky), my recollection WAS correct. Following the kidnap of the Israeli soldiers by Hezbolla, Israel conducted massive bombing in retaliation resulting in the death of some 60 people. At this point, Hezbolla retaliated - yet they are copping the blame.

Shame on us, shame on Israel, shame on the media for allowing the reverse to be peddled as truth every day...

Observation - Expensive Training = Lower Aussie Wages

We're seeing an increasing trend at the moment.

The right are pushing to fuck up the national training strategy (e.g. high Uni fees, stuff up TAFE, etc) and then pay scant regard to providing future trained resources. This is happening now.

The downstream impact of this is that we have a huge skills crisis in this country. So how are we fixing this? Are we providing more training? Are we subsidising areas requiring skills development? No (well, except for Doctors but that's thanks to radical Unionism (AMA)), instead we bring in skilled resources from overseas.

Why - obviously this is a planned strategy to force down wages across the board.

On ya Johhny - fuck the unions, fuck up Uni's and then start fucking with us ... you bastards!