| Gambling Reform |
[May. 23rd, 2012|08:24 am] |
Listening to Xenophon this morning I'm a little concerned about his dedication to policy as opposed to his own re-election (courtesy of Liberal preferences).
First, his 'threshold' plan. Yes, the carbon tax has a lot of turnover of money. And it may cause electricity prices to rise. But isn't that the point? You want not only industry but also consumers to face a financial incentive to reduce carbon emissions.
On the government reforms, they (and I) thought that mandatory pre-commitment were the way to go. This may indeed be shown to be correct (you nor I have done the sociological experiment) but to change path completely would look completely stupid to the public.
So they have to go with a trial because most people who attend these clubs are idiots. I think Wilkie is doing a great job using his position to leverage the legislation, and now I want the Greens to offer support as well.
The leak to Queanbeyan should not be too much of an issue, or at least it will be very interesting to see difference in gambling take between North and South Canberra. If its consistent, we can be sure that people don't travel to gamble. If the South experiences a larger drop in take, then we can assume that Queanbeyan (much closer) is the beneficiary.
This will all be confirmed when the data from Queanbeyan is secured by court order at some later date. If the managers of these clubs do not keep accurate records in anticipation, they can go to jail. |
|
|
| Craig Thompson |
[May. 21st, 2012|12:49 pm] |
Well well well, phone cloning is indeed possible.
As to the rest, he paints a plausible picture.
Why was video footage from brothels not pursued?
The Fair Work investigation seems an embarrassment. Interview only two of four financial officers in four years. Kathy Jackson's husband is the deputy of Fair Work.
Kathy Jackson's salary doubled just after she took over Thompson's role.
Apparently letters from Thompson detailed threats to 'destroy his political career.'
I'd probably be asking some harsh questions of the Fair Work report author.
--------------------
UPDATE
All he had to do was paint a plausible picture of possible innocence. That's it.
But no. He also wanted to convince his wife, his staff, his electorate, and possibly himself, who knows.
So he over-extended into immediately falsifiable claims.
No, Craig, tapes aren't kept for 6 years, and many brothels do not have cameras.
No, Craig, YOU refused to answer questions after your first interview with Fair Work.
You may have been a victim of a corrupt system, you may have been a positive change agent in the union movement, but this is all undermined by your foolishness.
The independents have no choice but to allow you to be investigated for your lies to parliament.
And, BTW, now we truly know that this guy has been let go by Labor. He has obviously been operating in a cone of delusion for some time now. Pity, a little bit of support and advice might have been wise. |
|
|
| New Abstract |
[May. 16th, 2012|02:56 pm] |
So I've been hard at work developing my collaboration model.
The previous paper (which has been accepted) will need to be rewritten completely.
Here is the abstract I've just supplied...
( abstract )
Europeans, please hold off panicking for a month until I get this thesis out. |
|
|
| My Thoughts on Feminism and Rape |
[May. 11th, 2012|09:15 am] |
What follows is a comment made in response to this article, also stimulated by this one.
--------------------
I am a 'nice person' not a chauvinist or misogynist. I posted a comment in response to a FB post about women's birth control and rights to their bodies etc. It is described below, but it caused me to be 'unfriended' by a feminist - without any debate or consideration of the points I was raising. This seems to me indicative of a wider malaise with women not willing to extend patience or courtesy to men they do not see immediate advantage, socially or sexually, in knowing. In the end, this collectively harms women as much as the 'loser' men...
Now I agree that women are not given power over for their own reproduction, in fact I strongly agree they should be given consideration for a burden that is both unfair and unavoidable. What I have a problem with is women who look for men who can manipulate their emotions (good salesmen) rather than then those who are less confident and less forward - or 'losers.'
Now I understand that confidence is sexy, and women like to be swept into the arms of a strong man, but where does that leave all the guys who lack a little confidence?
I think if women as a group want to be treated better, they should endeavour to take pity on hopeless guys and take them home and give them an education. Try to broaden out the pool of confident guys with those who have not been so since their boyhood.
As things stand, 10% of the guys get 90% of the hookups. They become arrogant and expect sex, and will rape if they don't get it.
The other 90% would treat the woman better, and then themselves become more confident and increase the ranks of 'nice guys who can pick up.' If that 90% continue to never 'pick up' they remain frustrated and desperate, which is no use to them nor attractive to women. If however they occasionally 'score,' and perhaps maintain a friendship with the lady, then they can be taught to have some confidence AND to respect women who are willing to respect THEM.
At the same time, women are not LOSING control by drinking and acting slutty so that they have the confidence to approach the CONFIDENT GUY, or at least not be blamed for doing so because they are drunk.
NO! They are instead staying (relatively) sober and deliberately choosing a nice, shy guy to take home and educate.
That way, women take some power and responsibility for the whole scene, and so improve it.
We are beyond the days of the Alpha Male and women have to take control of their instincts so that all men can grow beyond their childhood sexuality or their alpha-male arrogance. |
|
|
| Q and A |
[May. 10th, 2012|09:00 am] |
I would like the Q and A panel to be filled with experts who aren't famous, but who can speak and think clearly.
By experts, I include those in 'real life.' Business people and employees with long experience.
By experts I also mean theoreticians and senior bureaucrats.
Basically, those with knowledge but without leadership of certain lobby group.
We need people to talk from factual and theoretical understanding, not speak in code designed to shore up a political support base.
People who can debate issues on their merits and without fear of losing prestige in their particular lobby group. |
|
|
| Downloads |
[May. 4th, 2012|12:23 pm] |
Why not make a $5 download of Game of Thrones available BEFORE it gets broadcasted?
It would create a buzz in early adopters, and terrestial broadcasters could be made sources of the (geographically-limited) download.
In the ad break, insert 30sec bits showing cut-aways of incidental activity of characters. These can be added to the legal download, but won't appear in the illegal version as ad breaks are cut out automatically.
Finally, try to synchronise world-wide release so people have some incentive to watch it. |
|
|
| The Jones Brothers |
[May. 2nd, 2012|10:04 am] |
So, both Alan Jones and Jim Jones take/took advantage of the stupid, disenfranchised and (notably) elderly.
Bad for democracy? Terrible.
Who is the least informed? The young.
Who is the least able to apply critical reasoning? The elderly.
Who has the most at stake? Middle aged with families, mortgages, work responsibilities and businesses.
My solution would be to give young and old people less of a vote. Maybe allow voting from 16 (when parents can enroll them).
16 - 18: 0.2
18 - 20: 0.4
20 - 22: 0.6
22 - 24: 0.8
24 - 54: 1
54 - 60: 0.8
64 - 68: 0.6
68 - 72: 0.4
72 - 74: 0.2
Of course, if any one person cares enough, they can apply to have their vote made '1.' I imagine this would involve sitting a knowledge test on current government and opposition policies (not the effect, just the policies).
It would give the lazy-ass electoral commission something to do in between elections, anyway. |
|
|
| unions |
[May. 1st, 2012|10:57 am] |
I think I've figured out what should be done with unions.
Basically, the problem is a lack of responsibility. They have lots of power, but no real responsibilities (apart from OH&S).
They tend to want to interfere in management decisions because they otherwise have too little to do.
Yet there is a huge need for facilitators to help get unemployed into work, and to also coordinate education and training with workplace needs.
Unions are ideally situated to do this.
Yet at the moment, their incentive is to LIMIT the numbers of new entrants to as to maintain upward pressure on wages. This can be offset by giving them formal responsibility (paid for by the taxpayer) to get new workers trained up and on the books.
See you don't want unemployment facilitators to be PART of the WELFARE system (social workers) you want them to be part of the EMPLOYMENT system.
All contact with such people is then targetted at getting back to work - the unemployed person just needs to specify which industry/union they want to find work within.
The offshoot is that making unions part of a formal government contract, they get some oversight. In diversifying their role away from protecting wages and conditions, they get a more comprehensive operational premise, and more systemically-knowledgeable staff.
Good? Yeah?
(Obviously I'll have to test all this with my thesis, but I can't see too many problems right now) |
|
|
| Combet |
[May. 1st, 2012|10:30 am] |
I've just read that Shorten does not support increasing the dole.
Well that's just dumb. People should be able to leave poor workplaces easily. I just had a bad boss, and staying longer than is good for you is not advisable on mental health grounds.
I think the dole should be increased, but also monitored more carefully. Drug testing for instance. Rent money taken out. Savings taken out. Budget advice given. Make it intrusive - many need the help.
Also, I've been thinking about Combet. I think his deliberate and sincere approach would stand the test of 'custodian' until the next election.
If he is voted in, and hits his stride, great. Thing is, we can't have Abbott in charge. The man is dangerous.
I like Shorten, I think he's tough and decisive, but don't trust his policy mix FOR disability but AGAINST a different approach to unemployment.
While Combet has never worked outside the union movement (*sigh*) he seems less tarred with the brush of power broker. |
|
|
| Gillard |
[Apr. 30th, 2012|08:25 am] |
I thought that if Gillard showed 'strength' things would improve.
I thought that she didn't need to explain herself because people don't care anyway.
I was wrong.
People don't like her. They don't like her voice. They don't like her condescension.
I don't like her condescension.
I give my blessing for someone to take over.
I like Bill Shorten for the role. He at least has long experience dealing with 'typical' people.
I'd like Gillard to be given a prominent position that can use her superior negotiation skills - COAG?
Sadly, even should my thesis prove an absolute winner, its not going to percolate down to the masses before the next election. And if any policy is made on the back of it, it will look 'crazy' since no one knows where it comes from. Much like the Carbon Tax or Rudd's Mining Tax.
Sorry Julia. You did your best, but your lawyer training continued to dog your presentation.
You were never able to learn that WE are not a JURY. JURY'S can be treated like imbeciles and fooled in the hot-house atmosphere of the court room. The PUBLIC don't like being spoken to that way in the first place... |
|
|
| My Future's So Dim I Gotta Use a Nightscope |
[Apr. 24th, 2012|11:44 am] |
I'm going to see job application as an amusing sideline now.
I have no useable skills and my work experience is a dog's breakfast.
I'll finish the thesis, then begin writing opinion and policy pieces for websites like ABC online, Crikey and New Matilda.
Maybe try publishing if there seems like some likelihood of success.
Stay on welfare and hope that one day it begins to pay.
I guess this is the journey I began all those years ago. |
|
|
| refuse to cooperate |
[Apr. 23rd, 2012|11:21 am] |
Victims of crime who refuse to cooperate should be billed for the cost of the investigation and treatment
They want to be outside social norms, they can pay for social services. |
|
|
| Labour Shortage MY ASS |
[Apr. 17th, 2012|12:26 pm] |
Just went for a job interview with a local company that wants a 2-day a week delivery driver.
He had 200 calls on the first two days, and then stopped counting and told everyone it had been taken.
The bloke I spoke to waiting to be interviewed after me was charming and intelligent.
And our mining industry reckons there's a labour shortage? What there is is a union conspiracy to keep their paws involved in training, and lazy employers who don't want to train people, but would rather pressure governments for cheap foreign labour.
ALL the mining jobs in the paper (the net jobs are bullshit) are for skilled engineers and trades. Where are the traineeships?
Our university/tafe system should be revamped. No placement without sponsorship from business or public service.
That would FORCE businesses to take their training responsibilities seriously, while getting rid of all the stupid, useless HUMANITIES wastes of money.
University is a crock. It arose from the rich elites sending their kids to somewhere after private school. Its now become some answer to a modern 'knowledge economy.'
Well its not. Its an expensive boondoggle that creates more problems than it solves. Reams and reams of lawyers, economists, artists and sociologists that need to be given jobs.
More often than not on the taxpayer's dollar. We pay for their useless education, and pay for their employment to avoid a rump of educated graduates that would REVEAL the uselessness of the system.
Well done everyone!!!!
-----------------------
People should learn Critical Thinking in schools. Yes, and Systems Modelling too!
These are truly UNIVERSAL and basic thinking skills. |
|
|
| drugs and teen pregnancy |
[Apr. 13th, 2012|10:35 pm] |
Making drugs illegal has the same effect as promoting abstinence as birth control.
Both deny the pleasurable temptation, surround the activity with allure and ultimately take responsibility away from the ill-informed individual.
A recipe for disaster. |
|
|
| taxing the rich |
[Apr. 13th, 2012|09:34 pm] |
The reason why high levels of taxation for high income earners go hand in hand with high economic growth are three fold.
First people strive to be COMPARATIVELY rich. That is, richer than the man who is now richer than them. It s a competitive process. More tax does not change their comparative wealth.
Second with more money sloshing around in the welfare system, services and infrastructure projects there is more of a honey pot of consumers and govt contracts aim for. That otherwise others will get, triggering anticipatory investment.
Third, a happier, healthier and less stressed workforce are more productive.
All this is especially true in a recession, when rich people know that those leaping to invest will likely fail amid low spending. So preserving ones place in the wealth 'league table' becomes a game of patience and finding 'sure things' to bet on. These generally involve, if not breaking laws then certainly bending them. Insider trading a, environmental degredation and corruption become attractive options when honest investmebts become too risky - even when given super low interest rates. This is why in the US Republican candidates will be swamped with cash as rich people try to gain further advantage in an investment poor environment.
Trouble is, the very richest (koch bros etc.) certainly don't want the rules to change cause right now thet're winning. And wealth is comparative.
---------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/17/business/for-economists-saez-and-piketty-the-buffett-rule-is-just-a-start.html?hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/17/us/politics/buffett-rule-debate-blocked-by-republicans.html?_r=1&hp |
|
|
| Changes |
[Mar. 22nd, 2012|11:23 am] |
Well I've just quit my job.
Universe, please find me another one.
BTW the link to my paper was broken before. This one should work... |
|
|
| syria |
[Mar. 15th, 2012|01:13 pm] |
Yeah good work obama. Fantastic.
Help these people take charge now please.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=925253&f=110
------------
And all the cocks who said 'assads time is limited' well its fucking not. Not unless america does something
Twitter aint that powerful.
------------
Btw iran has no problem getting involved. http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=925661&f=110.
And the fucking delusional Jews support Assad too? Dogs fucking breakfast.
My paper will be ready sunday. Hopefully it will make you more comfortable with 'chaos.' |
|
|
| Iran |
[Mar. 3rd, 2012|09:53 am] |
You want to stop Iran spiralling out of control? You must go through Syria.
And for those that decry the non-democratic outcomes of the Arab Spring, think for a second.
How hard is it to change the opinion of one person? How hard is it to change the structure of an entire society.
Look at East Timor. Over a decade after Australia helped free it, the country is still finding its feet.
These things take time, but the first steps must continue to be taken. Syria must be intervened in.
The wave must continue. |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.1){kind=small}
invig's journal