Litespeed

What is the big need in the Kimberly's for dams? The Ord river scheme has not been a huge success. What are the dams for?

The example of the irrigation in the USA is not relevant as they have far more available water. However they too have suffered water shortages and it is all not a rosy picture. Any scheme to divert water west has been studied at length and found to be a fail on economic and environmental grounds. The costs and eventual flows available to use can not justify the expense. Anyone arguing for such a scheme is diverting attention elsewhere. A case of look that way.

I think it was a lot closer than 10 years and he went from the board to a MP. The deal was not for land just the flood water allocation. Labour suggested a buy of all water allocation and the actual farm. That is a huge difference. The tax haven use is a separate but relevant matter. The price has no reflection on the market as no tender was issued at all. So that is a red flag to start with. Even if the decision was a good one, we can have no confidence in it as the prescribed process was not followed and no transparentcy in the deal. When you were in energex, did you have a CEO job? Did you start the company? Did you leave and join parliament? Did you become involved in dealings with big government money deals to Energex? Was a fully transparent process followed and was a open tender done? That is all revelant Information. It would not matter who was involved the principles are the same.

Yes, I read that article and thought it must have been a guest from the IPA or LNP doing a comment piece. I agree that seemed extremely biased and dissmissive of any concerns. How can they say nothing dodgy about someone creating a water company then resigning and get elected to a position of power that makes a decision that benefits the same company? And Barnyard screaming he is not responsible as minister for a decision he had direct control over. And actually approved? If it was labour that did this we would not hear anything but wall to wall press screaming from the right wing press. Alas the LNP seem Teflon coated. Barnaby could burn down your house and would blame labour or the greens.

I have spent the last week at Nepean with my son. He had a bike accident, home now doing well. I meet many who were there for surgery and were cancelled repeatedly due to emergency needs. Fair enough but some have cancer and that should not have to wait ever. But you can bet a private patient could get a private bed and operation even if it was not urgent. Maybe not at nepean but somewhere in the system. We have a public system that supports the private patient through big subsidies to private health funds and grants/ loans to private hospitals. It is a joke, just like education, a two their system that benefits the well off. No federal or state funds or grants or loans should available. It should all go to the public system. The choice argument is just a lie to justify the largesse to private profits. Then people have a choice, the free government system or user pays. If surgeons or specialists wont do public operations etc they should be excluded from any public funding.that is called choice.

At first glance you would think the yanks had a similar car in production. They did not. The commodore was fairly unique in the GM world. Most US cars were either front wheel drive or big hulking truck like rear wheel drive. A lot of yank cop cars we're ancient designs that were only sold as cop cars and had no public market. The commodore was vastly superior as a cop car and faster. The yanks had stopped making a equivilant car, so wanted ours. Just like the Comaro was based on a commodore. The commodore has never been related to any US model until models were developed from the actual commodore. Engine excluded.

I prefer the compulsory vote over voluntary systems. They have a inherent trap for actual democracy. They are easy to manipulate by making sections of the community disenfranchised from the right of a vote to the privilege of a vote. Millions in the US have no ability to vote because of a previous conviction or no fixed address or lots of other manipulations to remove voters that don't vote for a Dominant party. Then you get a media baron helping push a particular view that alienates the majorities faith in politics. So they are less likely to vote. That's how we get silly elections where only a small proportion of adult citizens actually vote. And that cohort have a disproportionate number if people venting on the propaganda of conservative Murdoch press or their equivalent. Just look to the US and be glad we have to vote so are forced to actually think about the government we want rather than let the loudest barking dog whistle win.

That is some scary rail in Ohio. The rest is just funny.

I can see your logic Bruce but it would be a tad excessive solution and might prove a bit off a problem. Given our current pollies love for privatisation. They would jump at the chance to contract out our defences. Welcome to Serco been paid the same as our defence budget to protect and service said nukes. But naturally as commercial on confidence, and no oversight or responsibility. Finding the 200 high speed drones to deliver them could also be a issue, at least ones that could be trusted not to be hacked and used to drop it on us instead or even to not become lost nukes. And then our only response to any problem with be hit it with a nuclear hammer. Throwing rocks at other country's will be the war after that.

They I respectively suggest the Gold mine is a exception.

Yes I know, all carparks have entry and exit points.

We do not need nor can we afford nuclear power. No country has ever made a nuclear plant that did not involve massive subsidies, incredible cost over runs and leave a incredibly expensive mess for the public purse to pay for cleanup afterwards. It is not free power nor even cheap and you are stuck with it for at least 40 years. No plant has ever been built without a government indemnity for any damage it may cause, so no matter what happens the company is not responsible for it. The only reason Japan has Tepco help pay for the disaster is it is a government owned operator. Besides these problems, where would we build it? They need huge amounts of water for cooling and must be located near the user to save transmission losses. Which coastal city is willing to have a bunch of them in their backyard? It is estimated the only way they can get enough water is either take it from farmers or the environmental flows needed to keep river systems alive or build super large sized desalination plants which wreck the ocean at the outfall point and use huge amounts of power. It is never going to happen even on economic grounds forgetting all the problems it comes with. Just like a new coal power plant, no bank would lend for it unless the government pays big time, and contracts a high power price for 40 years, forcing the consumer into forever expensive power. About as practical as a bridge to Tasmania.

What a genius idea, build a 22 lane carpark and I bet it will be a private job with the public paying huge fees forever.

As someone older than 45 but with kids, I would agree. Anyone who blindly says we must build new coal mines or power stations claiming they are clean, and no viable options exist would be either...... Blinded by ideology... A environmental vandal... Prepared to impoverish the future for the present... Have a extremely poor understanding of economics, even if just free market capitalism. Or to paraphrase, Evil. Sorry mate but that's the way I see and the facts standup. No bank, even ones just pure profit driven is prepared to lend to build a new coal mine or power station. Why? They know a station is a 30-40 year investment. Coal power is now the dearest energy we have and that is with plants that are already paid off. Other renewable power is now cheaper installed including new storage systems. Why would a bank lend for a asset they know will never make a return, they consider them a stranded asset. Ie, a soon to be extinct power source. On pure economic grounds it is a bad idea. On environmental and social grounds a disaster. The only way it can happen is if the government lends or gives away the money and forces the public to buy the power at high cost for 40 years. That would be a public subsidy including excess power cost of a minimum $100 billion over the life of the station. So in reality it would be the most expensive power plant in the history of the country if not the world. And that is without the environmental costs of the mine to dig it up and burn it. So if you think its a great idea, you better get a used to been called names by others.

I would not expect the NRMA to give you anything unless they see it as a way to rip you off blind as a member. Membership is to them just a way to have a captive market. Any discount you get is a small fraction of what they overcharge. Since it corporatized over 20 years ago it is only about profit at any cost to the public and members.

There is nothing about the labour plan that is unreasonable for 2030. It is for 50% of new sales in 2030. By this time you will be hard pressed finding a new car for sale that is not EV or hybrid EV. The market is rapidly heading that way, most euro makers have plans for this by 2023. There is plenty of time to put in the charge points. No one said petrol stations can't also do charging. They update servos every 10 years or less anyway. It is all just a big scare campaign from the LNP.

And another side effect of mining is the hollowing out of the economy local to the mines. They suffer hyperinflation as competition for staff and accommodation play havoc. Some communities found they could no longer afford to live there as demand for rentals pushed prices to waterfront view levels in mining areas. What was a $200,000 house now was a $ million, rents went from $250 a week to $2000 or more. Investors rushed in, the locals could not afford to have a roof over their head. Local business found it could not find employees, as they needed super high wages just to pay rent. Naturally a cafe or butcher etc can't pay so are on a spiral downwards. All while the economy is apparently booming around them. The politicians happily create a two speed ecomomy, a very few in fast coward and most in idle or reverse. Then things slow prices wise for the commodity and the mine lays off its workforce and destroys the local economy already hollowed out. As soon as super profits slow, the miners shift to somewhere else. The community bares all the real costs, and the mining companies scream for even more gov help. Contrast that to the car industry which invest long term and is sustainable to for the ups and down in the market. A car design is a 5-10 year process to start making for sale and planned to sell for 7-10 year cycles or more. Mining is a example of market failure in economics when all true costs are accounted for. In most cases our economic and social health is far more harmed than any benefits gained. We would be a better country if we left most of the stuff in the ground.

Nomadpete, only a tiny fraction of any profits generated from the industry ever left the country even under foreign ownership. They made real money by making a profit on the products exported and the design work creating parts and vehicles to be made elsewhere eg Mustang, Comaro etc. All foriegn capital essential uses another country to generate profits. That is modern economics. If we refused to allow foreign owned companies or capital we would be in serious trouble, just as any economy would be. The vast majority of the benefits from the car industry stayed in country. We got a great deal. Mining/resource extraction is the exact opposite, most of the capital outlays for engineering is made overseas by foreign companies. They often import labour to build the mining infrastructure claiming we don't have the skills. They don't pay taxes here for that labour or follow our pay rules. They get massive subsidies from government of 10's billions a year for r and d, don't pay diesel taxes. They take our gas, coal, oil etc and pay a pittance in royalties - which is a bullshirt term and call it a tax. It is not a tax, it is a cost of production for the resource they take from us. They make massive environmental damage and rarely ever clean it up. We the people are left with the cost and we give them massive amounts of water for free worth billions a year. Water our environment clearly can't afford to loose nor can farmers who get polluted water or a trickle. And they get the best tax deal on the planet, they rarely ever pay and tax on massive profits and artificially shift costs onshore and profits offshore. A example is Chevron with the gas, they sell it dirt cheap to world markets but we now have some of the highest gas prices in the world. It is our gas. This makes power and heat for manufacturing artificially expensive and uncompetitive. It is estimated that due to deals done by Howard, Chevron will not have to pay us anything in royalties and taxes for at least 20 years and maybe never. What a clever country we are. A good analogy for the mining game is this- You invite a really dodgy character with a long criminal record into your home as a babysitter. He molests your wife and kids, burns down your home, steals all your stuff, leaves a toxic hole and actually you pay him a massive wage to do it. He promised it was good deal, so you pay him even more to keep coming to your new homes and families. Someone complains so you change the rules to make complaints irrelevant, make law to allow him to do anything he wants and must pay him to keep coming over. Then you help him destroy your wife's reputation in the media because she said it was not fair and the bad guy should stop. She says you should have employed the qualified child care worker who is a union member and government regulated for a mere fraction of the wage and kept the family safe. So you slander your wife, throw her out of the home and threaten anyone considering a child care qualification or business with ruin. You make laws to outlaw unions from complaining about the treatment of your wife and kids. Now you invite all the criminals mates over and give them anything they want. Now you go to the pub and celebrate how great a dad you are with all you mates. You all get really shitfaced and go around burning down childcare centres. You invite friendly press to take pictures and they report it as a fire started by childcare workers. Substitute mother for Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd or anyone really. Babysitting for industry policy. Home for our country.. Qualified child carers etc for a unionised car manufacturing industry. Kids for the future. And Naturally the career criminal is mining. Government regulation for the changes Labour wanted on mining taxes. Can you guess who the father is? Who is it who keeps paying the crimes with our money? What about the Grandfather? And the mad uncle who cheers whilst the abuse happens? Abbott, Costello, Howard and Joyce. I wish this analogy was wrong but it isn't.

I think a bit of perspective is needed about the car industry. All developed countries that have a car industry provide some form of incentives either direct or indirect. Even Germany. They understand that the industrial capacity, technologies , research and development, and associated industries provide significant strategic advantage to a country for its people and economy. It provides considerable jobs in allied industries such as parts makers, exports and taxation receipts. For every one job making cars their can be 20 hitech exportable market jobs created. Even car makers that do not make a taxable profit generate considerable productive wealth for the country and taxation in Gst, wages taxes, superannuation and direct r&d, payroll taxes and so on. This is a economic sustainable model even when the subsidies might be considered. The economic multiplier effect is considerable and the best investment for industry assistance a country can generally do. A car industry is also considered vital in times of war as it allows the fast turnover into a war materials production facility. That alone makes industry assistance a very cheap military investment. Our investment was one of the smallest in the world and we got back considerable benefit. The ongoing planned assistance was planned to be well under a billion a year and steadily decreasing under the last labour government. It all came to a crashing heap when the new policy was announced and Abbott did everything possible to make sure the industry new it would be not supported in any way under his government. He campaigned in the Murdoch press how red tape and ridiculous union wages made it uncompetitive to make cars here and all the money was just a gift to foreign Car makers. At the time the world heads of GM, Ford and Toyota were in Australia to sign off on future car development and manufacture plans including many billions in investment over the long term. These included export plans for parts, engines, research and development centres for their world car products- including for models not to be made here. At the time besides making stuff for our market,...... Holden was selling cop cars in the USA, plus Monaro and Commodore and to the middle east with the Caprice as well. . and the UK was happily buying the GTS. Its HSV group was also exporting. The Current Camaro was actually developed here in Australia. Holden was considered the design center of excellence for GM and had a very big future developing cars for world markets. Ford, pretty much locally based but also a design centre for global car development hence the current Mustang was developed here. It was also a exporter to NZ and world wide for design and engines sales. Toyota besides making Camry and Corolla was the biggest exporter of Camry's for Toyota to the middle east and some other markets. It had expansion plans to double then triple production for export. All the car Chiefs said Abbott was lying and red tape, wages and such were internationally competitive and world class for overall quality and production output. Abbott made it clear he would not support manufacturing at all but would throw many billion a year to mining which rapes the environment, rarely if ever pays any tax and is going robotic. And naturally are mostly foreign owned. So Abbott killed the car industry and created a decline in the manufacturing sector on purpose. When all the data and advice was ignored and he created facts to suit his ideology. Makes a two year old look mature. So unemployment jumps, businesses close, exports are lost, skills and intellectual capital is trashed. We loose all the taxes collected and have to pay billions in restructure assistance and welfare benefits. The wages if those displaced drop for most to low skill low pay jobs. Real estate and local economies fall and everyone loses. Oh except some miners and Abbott.

You can bet Clinton would not have proposed her daughter to run the Federal Reserve. And I bet she would not insist on vetoing the "making rape in war by soldiers a war crime". Trump did yesterday because it offered to support those who are raped to get a abortion if requested. The UN were gobsmacked he even lobbied China and Russia to veto as well. Both countries that support reproductive rights. Let's not forget saying the land Israel stole from Palestine, is now recognised as sovereign Israeli land. He has already started a trade war with Europe, Canada, China, human rights. Women's rights, kicked NATO in the balls and refuses to accept international law, treaties and anything the UN agrees with. Oh and kissed Putin's are and the Nth Korean mutters balls. What could possibly go wrong?

Red, Yes your local member has provided funding for some local things over his time in power. But that is a very poor metric to celebrate, it is after all his job. Only those with a seat can do that and generally only with the party in power. What has his mob done for the country and your local area that is better than the others might be able to do is the question? Promises made by a incumbent pollie are worth less than an oppositions, ie why havent they already done it. I notice most of their policies are for spending two or three elections away. So they say trust us to do in 10 years time when they have had two terms and done little but argue and knife eachother

Dick flddler is always a good time in book, radio or film.

Exactly the same as any ute with petrol, except when you get the shires there is no petrol to burn the bugger

I think he is referring to the paternalism of the idea. In that if we get them counselled the couple should stay together and the victim is further victimised.

Hot water jackets and coils are a godsend in the cold but beware. The water is very hot and can even create superheated steam which can be extremely dangerous. The same precautions of a electric or gas boiler apply but your potential heat is much higher. It must be done with proper design and relief valves that can be accessed and serviced. Getting good natural circulation is the key, hence most have a tank in the ceiling for sufficient gravity draw and temp differential. Long term a copper tank is by far the best. Don't be scared to do it, just be sensible and use best practice. As a side note, a runaway boiler of any type can destroy a home when it explodes and goes off like a actual rocket. Good example on mythbusters.