Jerry_Atrick

That is a bummer.. hope you're better soon

Of course, I will offset a gripe anth a positive. Daughter is working at Hinkley Point C, the new build nuke and in a couplefo short weeks has matured immensly...

Gripe of the week. Petulant children. Not the garden variety type that you see in the school ground .. the ones that are very well paid at work. Mental illness excepted, jeez some people can act like spollt litte brats. We have two teams at work; one is mine and, obviously, one is someone elses. And both teams are relatively new.. but we have to work together. Well, something kicked off at work and these two mid-level managers were just doing the "he said, she said" routine and brought up old bygones. It was the Zoom equivalent of them crossing their arms, Hmmmphing, and turning their chairs to they sat back to back. Quite extraordinary when I consider how much they are paid, and their level in teh company. They are paid to escalate real issues, not antsie pantsie rubbish. So, I had to ecuse myself from a fairly serious meeting to deal with a couple of petulant children. If it keeps up, at least one is going to get fired (and I let him know, too). Where's Wolfie.. I need his counsel at a time like this!!!

We've stopped talking about Pootin.... Another win for hin thanks to Trump... But, here is a sneak preview of his plans: https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-belarus-strategy-document-230035184.html Wonder if Lukashenko is still thinking about being a good buddy.

We know for sure that the US has submarines trawling international waters. As do many other countries. There is nothing illegal about China parking its boats off our international waters and listening in on us. It's not nice, but Australia (and I would think the US as well) has jamming and/or tracking equipment and they are likely to know what is going on. What the US doesn't do is drop flares from planes in a dangerous what that China has been doing lately. I haven't read this article, but if live fire means what it should, the US doesn't really do that in international waters - at least not that I am aware of, without notice (again, I have not read the article). Chinas has been pissing off Japan and I think the Phillipines as well. It's unlawful expansion into the South China sea (hmmm.. how come people aren't making a big fuss about that) and extension of its soveriegn waters when it had no such claim has to be provocative, especially since they established a pretty decent military base on one of the man made islands. China is getting aggressive. Thankfully Australia is not easy to take.

Will Robonurse do home visits looking like this? If so, and everything else is a realistic simulation, I will be too old to worry about that fact it will be living in a virtual world

Well, it is lunch time on a Friday and I am working from home. Expecting my mate to join me anytime soon!

Here's some interesting data on Trump's first 100 days in office: https://on.ft.com/3EPHxmU

There are times when you have to be diplomatic; there are times where you have to stand up for what is right and work on mitigating the consequences. Ultimatelum it is a personal decision based on personal values. The problem Albo has is that when he reacts, he has to not only take into account his personal values, but judge the personal values os almost 30m people. When Trumpenstien decided to turn the tables on Zelensky, that was when I personally would have been happy for Albo to say enough is enough, pull your head in and get real.. You can be assertive and diplomatic at the same time, but many western leaders came out and affirmed that Trumps view of the events were incorrect. Of course, others may not agree that is the right thing to do when tarrifs are in the balance. But, we survived China stuffing us about, and thy are a bigger trading partner than the US. Even Nigel Farage called him out explicitly for it. Yes, like Albo, he is the opposition (the coneraties will prbably some third to Reform, here).

Immediately after Trump came out with his rhetoric on Ukraine, I took a look at European defence and weapons contractors' share prices and kicked myself ffor not being more forwad thinking. He is da King, but here is an interesting graph: Since he took over the reigns.. Vey nice for Europe. One of the positives in all of this ship show, is tha Europe, the UK, Canada, and hopefully Australia, are starting to put into place policies to wean themselves off the USA. It will mean the USA will have less influene over time. It was bad enough becoming over reliant on China for cheap manufacturing; it is proving to be much worse to be over reliant on the US for the world order. Trump will succeed in isolationism and nationalism, but it will come at a big cost to the USA.

I think a lot of what you say is imagined or exaggerated."? Don't you mean, it is imagined and exaggerated - certainly when one looks at the facts. Interestingly, the coalition is hard line on immigration, yet they preside over the higher levels of "mass" migration. I find it interesting people get all worked up over migration. It is, and has been a human trait since the dawn of humanity. Europe resulted from a migration from Africa (well, the world's population is thought to have). Modern Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the USA's population is the result of mass migration from Europe. Yes, some of it was to conquer, but people who came out willingly did so to seek a better life. We talk about migration in a global border context, but when you move from, say Melbourne to Sydney or vice versa, you are migrating. The distance is longer than migrating between some European counties, for example. And even within a country, there can be a clash of cultures. When I grew up in Melbourne, there was nary a rugby ground in the state. Now there's a stadium in the middle of Melbourne. In Sydney and Brisbane, there are now AFL stadiums where it owuld have been laughed out of the cities in the old days. Also, with the declinign birth rates, who is going to care for you and perform the public and private services we rely on? Who is going to be working the resources of the land to keep the money flowing to pay for all of this? Yep, it's going to be migrants. Oh, but the right wing will save is from all that, won't they? Well, look at the numbers when they are in power. They shift massive amounts of wealth from the population to large corporates and high net worth individuals who happen to pay no tax nor any real royalites for the resources they extract. That means there is less money for the younger population to affford houses and chldren, and given the relative state of life expectancy and the shift to urbanisation, there isn't the natural imperative to make kids as there used to be. Yet, if you return the money to the population so they can afford things., which is what a more progressive government is at least philosophically about even if they do not achieve it, then suddenly things become more affordable, they can have their kids, and there is less longer-term need for migrants. GON - you are right about one thing; progressive politics seems to failed to have delivered on their politics precisely because of the grip that the hidden and concentrated power of money has over democracy - which is an aim of the right-leaning side of politics. Taxes, which are largely paid by the middle and lower-miiddle classes are higher and there is a squeeze on disposable income. The public services those taxes are eroding because of their expense (another right-wing thing - privatisation - doesn't seem to work out as good as it promised to be; and remember, it was Hawke and Keating that seemed to preside over the rise on privatisation); they are being disenfranchised and voting right. Often, it is because for them, neither side is offering anything, but "at least Trump (or whoever we are speaking about) does what he says he's gonna do". The fact that what they say they're going to do is going to end up in tears is of little consequence to these people; they are already crying. The ALP in Aus, and Labour here have had a real opportunity to right the wong. They are so heholden to hidden power, they they take tepid steps and people are more disillusioned with them. Those people decide stuff it, it can't be worse. The mentality of the voter has shifted from voting in the one you want to get the job done, to the one you least dislike.

"I think a lot of what you say is imagined or exaggerated."? Don't you mean, it is imagined and exaggerated - certainly when one looks at the facts. Interestingly, the coalition is hard line on immigration, yet they preside over the higher levels of "mass" migration. I find it interesting people get all worked up over migration. It is, and has been a human trait since the dawn of humanity. Europe resulted from a migration from Africa (well, the world's population is thought to have). Modern Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the USA's population is the result of mass migration from Europe. Yes, some of it was to conquer, but people who came out willingly did so to seek a better life. We talk about migration in a global border context, but when you move from, say Melbourne to Sydney or vice versa, you are migrating. The distance is longer than migrating between some European counties, for example. And even within a country, there can be a clash of cultures. When I grew up in Melbourne, there was nary a rugby ground in the state. Now there's a stadium in the middle of Melbourne. In Sydney and Brisbane, there are now AFL stadiums where it owuld have been laughed out of the cities in the old days. Also, with the declinign birth rates, who is going to care for you and perform the public and private services we rely on? Who is going to be working the resources of the land to keep the money flowing to pay for all of this? Yep, it's going to be migrants. Oh, but the right wing will save is from all that, won't they? Well, look at the numbers when they are in power. They shift massive amounts of wealth from the population to large corporates and high net worth individuals who happen to pay no tax nor any real royalites for the resources they extract. That means there is less money for the younger population to affford houses and chldren, and given the relative state of life expectancy and the shift to urbanisation, there isn't the natural imperative to make kids as there used to be. Yet, if you return the money to the population so they can afford things., which is what a more progressive government is at least philosophically about even if they do not achieve it, then suddenly things become more affordable, they can have their kids, and there is less longer-term need for migrants. GON - you are right about one thing; progressive politics seems to failed to have delivered on their politics precisely because of the grip that the hidden and concentrated power of money has over democracy - which is an aim of the right-leaning side of politics. Taxes, which are largely paid by the middle and lower-miiddle classes are higher and there is a squeeze on disposable income. The public services those taxes are eroding because of their expense (another right-wing thing - privatisation - doesn't seem to work out as good as it promised to be; and remember, it was Hawke and Keating that seemed to preside over the rise on privatisation); they are being disenfranchised and voting right. Often, it is because for them, neither side is offering anything, but "at least Trump (or whoever we are speaking about) does what he says he's gonna do". The fact that what they say they're going to do is going to end up in tears is of little consequence to these people; they are already crying. The ALP in Aus, and Labour here have had a real opportunity to right the wong. They are so heholden to hidden power, they they take tepid steps and people are more disillusioned with them. Those people decide stuff it, it can't be worse. The mentality of the voter has shifted from voting in the one you want to get the job done, to the one you least dislike.

"I think a lot of what you say is imagined or exaggerated."? Don't you mean, it is imagined and exaggerated - certainly when one looks at the facts. Interestingly, the coalition is hard line on immigration, yet they preside over the higher levels of "mass" migration. I find it interesting people get all worked up over migration. It is, and has been a human trait since the dawn of humanity. Europe resulted from a migration from Africa (well, the world's population is thought to have). Modern Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the USA's population is the result of mass migration from Europe. Yes, some of it was to conquer, but people who came out willingly did so to seek a better life. We talk about migration in a global border context, but when you move from, say Melbourne to Sydney or vice versa, you are migrating. The distance is longer than migrating between some European counties, for example. And even within a country, there can be a clash of cultures. When I grew up in Melbourne, there was nary a rugby ground in the state. Now there's a stadium in the middle of Melbourne. In Sydney and Brisbane, there are now AFL stadiums where it owuld have been laughed out of the cities in the old days. Also, with the declinign birth rates, who is going to care for you and perform the public and private services we rely on? Who is going to be working the resources of the land to keep the money flowing to pay for all of this? Yep, it's going to be migrants. Oh, but the right wing will save is from all that, won't they? Well, look at the numbers when they are in power. They shift massive amounts of wealth from the population to large corporates and high net worth individuals who happen to pay no tax nor any real royalites for the resources they extract. That means there is less money for the younger population to affford houses and chldren, and given the relative state of life expectancy and the shift to urbanisation, there isn't the natural imperative to make kids as there used to be. Yet, if you return the money to the population so they can afford things., which is what a more progressive government is at least philosophically about even if they do not achieve it, then suddenly things become more affordable, they can have their kids, and there is less longer-term need for migrants. GON - you are right about one thing; progressive politics seems to failed to have delivered on their politics precisely because of the grip that the hidden and concentrated power of money has over democracy - which is an aim of the right-leaning side of politics. Taxes, which are largely paid by the middle and lower-miiddle classes are higher and there is a squeeze on disposable income. The public services those taxes are eroding because of their expense (another right-wing thing - privatisation - doesn't seem to work out as good as it promised to be; and remember, it was Hawke and Keating that seemed to preside over the rise on privatisation); they are being disenfranchised and voting right. Often, it is because for them, neither side is offering anything, but "at least Trump (or whoever we are speaking about) does what he says he's gonna do". The fact that what they say they're going to do is going to end up in tears is of little consequence to these people; they are already crying. The ALP in Aus, and Labour here have had a real opportunity to right the wong. They are so heholden to hidden power, they they take tepid steps and people are more disillusioned with them. Those people decide stuff it, it can't be worse. The mentality of the voter has shifted from voting in the one you want to get the job done, to the one you least dislike.

Trump is not only looking to seel out Ukraine, but also looking to rewrite history: And wants to invute Russia back to the G7. Insane.. but probably pay back for the election interfering.

Remember, when he was last president he tried to get Zelensky to dig up some dirt on Huner Biden to counteract all the impeachments he was going through. Zelensky, a man of integrty apparently, refused, despite some threat of Trumps. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/25/trump-asked-ukraine-president-if-you-can-look-into-biden-and-his-son-in-phone-call.html You can bet Trump hasn't forgot. (I haven't looked at the vids yet, so apols if it was covered in these).

First of all, the far right is not fighting back. If you think about the people who tend to gravitate to the far right, it is because the progressive governments have sort of "failed" and properly implementing their progressive policies. Most of the people who gravitate to the far right are usually of the lower socio-economic demographic with not much prospects for the future. Progressive policies are not hand outs to immigration, etc. Let's look at some of those right wing agendas that seem to give GON a warm, fuzzy feeling. Immigration. Australia had a conservative government from 2009 to 2022. Take a look at this net migration graph for Australia: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SM.POP.NETM?locations=AU Notive anything unusual? Net migration came down in the first year and then steeply climbed back up. In fact, the conservative government actively promoted met migration on those 412 (or whatever they were) visas, which were designed to allow unskilled workers into the country and drive down wages (and the tax take as a result to provide things like services you rely 0n). There is a sharp drop towards the end of their reign thanks to the lock down of the country. Despite the claimed meteroric rise under Albo, it was a backlog lof already approved migrants that came once the doors openeed. In the time since, it has stabilised at levels well below that of the cconservative. But, the right wing are against migrationj, right? Nope they aren't; they actively pursued policies that would allow unskileld cheap labour in, while blocking high end professionals. The economy: Have a look at ths graph: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=AU. Australia's economy has been in decline for some time, but during the Conservative's reign the median declined steepened despite a sustained resources boom that should have led to a steep increase in the economic activity of the country. There was a steep decline during covid, followed by a bounce back. Now, despite global headwinds and a cost of living crisis, those darned lefties with their socialist and communist agendas (although you haven't yet given and concrete examples of what they are), preiding over a higher level of output than pre-covid, despite a slight reversal after the initial bounce from coming out of Covid. Those horrible taxes: The Australian Tax to GDP ratio has not changed much since 2000. But there was a noticeable drop in 2007.: https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/topics/policy-sub-issues/global-tax-revenues/revenue-statistics-australia.pdf. Remind me who was in government in 2007? I'll save you looking it up.. It was Kevin Rudd. Yeah, another leftie communist massive increase in taxes to supoort their woke agenda. It has had a slight increase lately, but someone has to pay for the debt, right. Money Managers: https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/australia/national-government-debt. Aggain, those pesky lefties... the national debt kept on climbing at an increasing rate since 2013 (and what is to show for it), until COVID, when it spiked, and yeah you can't blame them for that.. but their coorproate welfare handouts and other wastage certainly didn't help. And now, those pesky lefties have started to get a grip on it and have started nrining it down. @Grumpy Old NashoNothing you say adds up to a left wing agenda - in fact, you have been hoodwinked - like most of the population by listening to sound bytes from a MSM media hell bent in getting governments that do their advertisers' bidding and stuff you.. The old adage is that you should be careful what you ask for - you may get it. I would counsel you to take heed of that adage.

What a load of tosh

If anyone thinks this is about saving money; it ain't. It is about privatisation by stealth. What better way to get lucrative government contracts than by torching the government and have someone come in to fill the void for a fee of course. And who is going to be more loyal than young impressionable employees. Yeah, there is an element of sticking in some republican loyalists because they know even in a change of government, the Democrats won't torch the system. But for the likes of Musk,nit is about the money. As Franklin Roosevelt said, there are no accidents in politics; if it happened, you can bet it was planned to happen.

We all react to the public side of what we see, and unfortunately, we publicly see a lot of had stuff with politicians. What we don't see is how tirelessly *some* to work for their constituents or particular issues. I used to live next to Joan Child, the first femal speak of the House of Representatives. And I would occasionally pop into her electoral offices to say hello, and despite her seniority in the parliament, both her and her team worked tirelessly for local people and issues. Part of the problem is the system. It is designed to be a big road block to progress and upsetting the apple cart. In addition, the system seems to reward incompetence and bluster - just look at parlaiment's question time.. What is the ratio of har air to anything useful being done - I really wonder what that would look like. The reality, it appears, that to get to the top, generally, you have to, at least publicly, be prepared to compromise many qualities seem as postive traits in humanity.

In the words of the late and great George Carlin, do you think pollies fell from the sky? Who put them there? I have always found it ironically funny that if pollies proposes something stupid, they are castigated for it, and when they realise the folly of their ways and do a U turn, they are castigated for that, too.. In a democracy, we put them there.. You don't have to vote the way you always have.

Well, they do like the Vichyssoise, I guess.

Yeah... theHawks came good when they weren't supposed too.. and there were others that also flipped their form in the second half of the season. In the end, it only cost me £50, but if I measure the losses like trading desks do, it cost me over £350 as it was around there that my peak profit was. I am never sure I will bet one season to the next. I don't have time to follow the form of all clubs, so I wait ans see for the first 3 or 4 rounds before I make my mind up. If I can't see clear patterns (no matter how unreliable they can be), I just enjoy the game.

There certainly is a lot of AI in politics these days.