Litespeed

For those uneducated heathens, A Guzzi has very proud jugs and you buggers keep your eyes and grubby mittens off.

Old k, I could have a fondle of your wife's v50 if you like. I am in Sydney.

Like all proper bike men, I am a Guzziologist. All types of cycle medicine, but I prefer to work on those with big jugs sticking out proudly.

I have a intensive care ward waiting for your Guzzi. I can guarantee quality care and much throttle abuse. All Guzzi's get free lifetime care at my retirement home and include visitations for the owner.

Yes, Classic rego has a few rules that are easy to follow and still use your steed. Join a few mates and start a classic bike and or car club. Rules are simple and you can still do some extended journeys without needing the club along for every ride.

Its OK Jerry, That counts as old enough for me. A fine motorcycle and worthy of a place in the shed. Keep in mind bikes over 30 years so, 1989 and older are now 'classic' rego . That means no huge rego rip off just a small fee to enjoy your riding. Bargain riding if you ask me.

I don't think there is much relevance between Bill and Barnaby in the affair stakes. Bill was honest from the start and did not make up excuses, misstruths and run about slandering even his girlfriend by saying it might not be his child. Barnaby even used the press to make money from it but refused to speak with payment. Barnaby was sleeping with a employee paid by the taxpayer. He was only months earlier campaigning on family values and the same sex marriage debate, at the same time as his affair. It was these values he said was the difference between him and the rest. He was found to be a hypocrite.

No one is asking you to freeze, stay in the dark or starve. The metric of change is Not in the normal range nor within normal time scales.

Guys, We can debate as much as you want but at the end that is just a masturbate, and only makes us feel good. It helps nothing. We have a existential problem and it must be dealt with. Not just for our kids but for us living today. The effects are real and been felt today, they will only increase. We are the frog, put us in a saucespan and by the time it starts to boil it is too late, we thought it was just a warming bath. There is no possible metric where doing something to help can be the wrong thing. Even if we don't believe, the world's economic masters do, so the only profitable way forward is to change. If we are wrong we will get a nicer environment, cheaper decentralized power, and more jobs that don't really on over industrialized power hungry products. We win anyway. To do nothing- will at best lead to a economic deadend. At worst...........life as we know becomes very difficult.

That would be the deluxe brexit edition. White gold exterior and gold interior.

And don't forget Palmer gets a preference deal for his divided Australia party.

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.

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.