Yesterday the Oz ran this editorial.
As they so politely observed, drought relief simply props up unviable
farms. What they failed to remark upon was that farmers seem to be a
special class of australians. Other sectors of the Oz economy are expected
to survive without massive subsidies whenever circumstances change, yet
farmers are apparently only part of the economy when there isn’t an
election coming on.
Another aspect of this saga is the whole question of land use in general.
By and large oz agricultural practices have been ill-suited to the
environment. We have continued to ignore substantial scientific evidence
and opinions that suggest our european based farming practices are totally
unsuitable for this country and its climate. The massive landclearing that
has occurred since white man invaded is a heritage that will haunt future
generations long after the farmers leave their unprofitable farms.
Adding to this disaster is the looming challenges of climate change. There
can be no doubt that chunks of australia that were once marginally useful
for farming in the old days will become dustbowls. As our rivers dry up
and our crops fail, we will have the very serious issue of basic food
production to consider anew. Little johnny’s handout to his mates and
their constituency will do nothing to address the problems of the future.
It won’t even get him re-elected, but we can certainly expect to see more
of the same type of generosity in days to come.
I wonder if he will apply a similar kindness to workers who are displaced
as other industries adjust to changing times.
Its pretty gloomy in the power business if you believe that a.
burning coal is not viable long term since we will make the world
pretty much a hot house disaster and b. using uranium to power
fission reactors today is only slightly less risky than just having a
thermonuclear war tomorrow. But there is always hope eternal that the
money currently waxing fat on conventional power plants will see the
light of day and turn to the most obvious solution, solar.
Its abundant. It everywhere. Its free, and therein lies the problem.
No-one has a vested interest in sunshine, its not owned by microsoft
or general motors or GE. Governments can’t tax it, people can’t
package it up in neat little boxes and sell it, other than as a
holiday destination which doesn’t count because most people shouldn’t
have time for holidays in the sun. So no-one other than a few mad
scientists have really bothered to get interested in solar because to
date, there’s been no money in it. Coal’s been cheap, nuclear has
been a path to government subsidiaries so who is going to bother with
alternatives. The problem is, neither of the big money power
generation schemes are viable long term, and the longer we go on the
more apparent are their shortcomings.
Perhaps some enlightened souls have seen this which might explain why
E7F2-99DF-3253ADDFDBEC8D41&chanID=sa001" onclick="javascript:urchinTracker('/outbound/www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=1FC8E87E-_br_/_E7F2-99DF-3253ADDFDBEC8D41_amp_chanID=sa001');">this article is getting
exposure. On the other hand it might be just another hot air balloon
being floated, more “let’s talk a lot about solar (since talk is
cheap) - but put keep putting our money into coal and nukes”. It’s
been done before.
Certainly they aspire to great heights. For the uneducated, Macquarie Bank
already own Broadcast Australia, the company that provides transmitter
facilities for the bulk of the local tv and radio industry, including no
less, your ABC. Of course, the provision of a service for a fee is what
business is all about, nonetheless taking a huge slab of taxpayer provided
funds and handing them to a highly profitable merchant banker is
questionable behaviour.
But not content with taking a couple of hundred million bucks for
transmitter services off the ABC, MacBank has come up with a few more ways
of milking the ABC cash cow. There is a little contract to supply audio
hardware and support (in the form of APT codecs) which form the basis of
our national radio network, their subsidiary, the Australian Captions Centre provides text captioning for the ABC and now they seem to fishing for our MCR facilities as well.
Of course Red Bee and the ABC have not committed to anything publicly, but
rumors have been circulating for some time about hiving off ABC’s master
control facilities, and there is obviously already in place a degree of
linkage that many regard as unhealthy. As the saying goes, if it smells
like a rat and looks like a rat, it probably is a rat.
–
http://www.qednet.biz
My dog seems to spend an inordinate amount of time scratching and no
he doesn’t have fleas. He wakes up and the first thing he does is
have a scratch. He is walking along, its a nice day and lo and behold
its time for scratch. He is also keen about licking, and with a
tongue the size of a large cat, licking is quite an event.
He doesn’t seem to mind when or where, its lick and scratch whenever
the mood takes him. So I usually take the first dozen or so episodes
with good grace, after all he is a dog and all. After that he gets
banished. Its for everyone’s sanity. Otherwise I’d have to get a cat
and the only thing they are good for is cleaning toilets.
See!
well it wasn’t really a surprise
was it? You have to admire the way the truth makes it into the public
domain sometimes. The lies and deception that are foisted onto the
general public & that form the basis for politics are remarkably
audacious. Only a drover’s dog would have believed that the western
allies didn’t invade Iraq for oil, yet despite admissions by our defence
minister, Brendan Nelson that “oil
was among the reasons to keep troops in Iraq.” little johnny insists
that it is all about fighting terrorism.
This is all about manipulating public debate. If you deny what is
obvious then a lot of energy is dissipated just getting the truth to the
surface. Later the truth for some historical act can come out, usually
when there is a larger lie dominating the agenda. If our political
leaders continue to act in such a cynical and morally bankrupt fashion
there really is little hope for the west.
Imagine if you can, all the energy and effort employed to drive a
consumer society to profit the economy, instead harnessed to address
something like global warming.
Such a good name, wish I had thought of it. Not only do they get the
name right, they are spot on with the nomination of Chas Licciardello
from the Chaser as Aussie
of the Year.
The Chaser team have their day in court on October 4 in Sydney. What
will the “authorities” do? Slap their wrists or make an example of
them? Oh dear what a dilemma.
The interesting thing is how this situation highlights the extent of
the right wing power base in this country, with a total absence of
leading public figures prepared to stand up and call the stunt for
what it was, harmless fun at the expense of the police. It is
certainly funnier than seeing iraqis blow themselves up on a daily
basis or americans waxing fat on imported crude.
Did you, my fellow aussies, sit comfortably in your armchairs as
little johnny and his co-conspirator morris iemma congratulated the
nsw police for their role in securing the APEC meeting? Is Iemma’s
comment in particular of “a job well done” not just a little
concerning? Do the police make any apologies?
www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/09/10/2028084.htm" onclick="javascript:urchinTracker('/outbound/br_/_www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/09/10/2028084.htm');"> According to
little johnny, the disruptions and unprecedented application of
force were all the fault of, naturally, the PROTESTORS.
I saw several members of the press attacked by the police as they
went about their business of reporting on the protests, and of course
one man was attacked by police for walking in front of a motorcade.
Police claim he assaulted them.
The chilling news is this. The cops got away with it. Morris Iemma
says “a debrief will be carried out to ensure the lessons learned
from APEC can be applied when other major events are held”. Perhaps
they will just shoot protesters next time.
These are good times. The economy is booming (whatever that means) &
life is pretty cushy in Oz. Little johnny claims it is all his good
work, which is of course total crap however politicians like to clam
credit for good things. But what does the economic good fortune
translate to?
It would seem the only real answer is not very much. Yes people have
jobs. Good thing. Keeps them off the streets for one (and in the case
of the APEC protesters in Sydney, away for the action and prying
eyes). Another bonus is people working don’t need welfare since they
can be expected to look after themselves, which they do and whilst
they are at it, they can pick up some stuff to take with them.
Has the economy translated to any long term significant goal for this
country? Do we have better societies, are we making progress on land
degradation, is there any real hope that the country won’t fall over
when oil becomes unaffordable? Nup. Instead what has happened is a
sustained attack on the publicly owned infrastructure of this
country, a campaign against unionism, an inhumane closure of our
borders to refugees and a very dangerous expansion of our uranium
industry. All in the name of the economy.
This little johnny’s legacy. It’s almost criminal, the only saving
grace is that we aren’t in america and we don’t have george w’s legacy.
OK, here’s a thought. Corporate IT departments are preventing the
adoption of new technologies. It’s not my idea, although I have good
reasons to agree, the idea comes from
www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?
command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9034898" onclick="javascript:urchinTracker('/outbound/br_/_www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?_br_/_command=viewArticleBasic_amp_articleId=9034898');">Computerworld, a well
regarded source if there is such a thing.
If you think about corporate structures for a minute then the idea
shouldn’t really surprise. After all most corporations are self
serving entities and a key component of corporate governance is
managing risk. One strategy that often seems to prevail is adopting
change management policies, yet this strategy when coupled with an
inflexible internal structure (ie no movement of management personel)
is ultimately counter-productive. Inevitably managers will slow the
rate of change down to one they can comfortably handle. Changes that
are evolutionary become preferred since that is more easily managed,
changes that have a more revolutionary impact have a much more
difficult path.
The bottom line seems to be this, no one really likes a lot of
change. IT departments are no exception. People who are comfortable
with a changing environment or who are change agents themselves are
the very people most unlikely to be in managing positions. The larger
the organisation, the more likely they are to resist change.
Microsoft is a good example. They produce stuff which doesn’t really
challenge the IT world, they wait for good ideas to gather some
acceptance before they adopt them as their own and they make a
bucketload of money out of selling you essentially the same idea time
and time again. Sure there are some bright people and some clever
ideas inside the organisation, but it is a huge corporation running
along fairly conventional lines.
You do have to wonder about some of the other IT heavyweights such as
google. Are they simply replicating the microsoft model with a
different skin?