Jerry_Atrick

Yep.. trick was not to look for a black one... (Oops.. did I give it away).

No, I didn't miss your point.. I was reflecting on how the major parties also lack real substance, often are petulant and will vote (or not, as the case may be) with the other no matter how stupid to do so. The Greens get called out more by the press for it, that's all. Let's look at some examples - virtually the whole of the LNP (maybe Simon Birmingham excepted),, you're telling me they are better and have more substance and less grandstanding than the Greens? Yet, they still win the most of the primary vote, which, if people really cared about lack of substance and being petulant/grandstanding and predalling BS policies, they would probably be behind the Greens. Even Albanese duing the Voice referendum would not allow debaete on a private members bill to ban lying in political advertising (to my knowledge, under comsumer law in Aus, it is not allowed for commerical advertising). You know, wouldn't want to vote for something to make the debate.. fair and even politics more fair?. Self-destruction? Well, lets not forget Keating v Hawke - what saved them in the end was Hewson as the leader of the LNP; nor the Rudd --> Gillard --> Rudd debacle.. Oh, and for letting loonies in to the party - don't recall Latham in ALP? Not even as the leader of the party (thankfully) in opposition? He has turned out to be a very safe pair of hands, hasn't he? On the LNP side, wherre do you stop? The Greens had one notable one recently, and a few over the years. Again, on that metric, the LNP would be last to get votes, then the ALP.. I think you're missing my point. I would invite you to read their policies and implementation plans they had at the last federal election - all seemed pretty well thought through and costed. I don't agree entirely with all of it, but it was the amateurish muck-raking and rabble rousing the press likes to make the Greens out to be probably has more to do with them not getting into power than their real conduct or policies, or ability. As to whether or not they have the depth or comeptenece to do it - how is that different to either of the majors today, though I will put Labor ahead of the LNP, in either case, the bar is not that high. They Greens, when you peel away the BS, don't seem to be less competent than the others.. They just don't have as many members, and they get even worse coverage in terms of media bias (IMHO) than the majors, or really, than the ALP. That is my point - yes as a minority party and yes they get to throw stones. But they are no worse than the others with whom we falsely credit more responsibility and ability, so why not vote for them? If I were in Aus at the last election, they would have got my #1 on both the senate and HR tickets.

And, that makes them worse than the others? Like Labor's HAFF idea, which, assuming it would have met investment returns, after handing Costello a juicy fee, would have returned wweet FA against what is required? Call me cynical, but that was probably to pay for less unfavourable commentary in Costello's news. er, entertainement empire. Oh, and like the LNP didn't finally self-destruct, nor the ALP has no history of doing so? The Greens, like all political parties, have their (fractious) factions, and eventually, they all self-destruct. Personally, I don't mind Adam Brandt, for example; he has passion. The young housing fella, who's name I can't recall, has passion.. and has riled the PM on a number of occasions for showing up Labor's plans for what they were.. crap. Sadly, we are not a direct democracy - meaning we don't get to vote directly on laws or policy (I think Sweden is); but we are a representative democracy - we get who we vote for.. and I am amazed at how many people around the world keep voting for numpties, and then call the other ones they didn't vote for numpties. Mind you, any party that has welcomed a pollie into their ranks who has no problems with having an argument with a strip club owner at two in the morning after being thrown out of there, let alone just being seen in one (for other than research purposes, of course), has to get my vote. [hint, that last bit was a touch of sarcasm]

It was broke well before then. Oh. I thought you wrote "Ruining it".. Even Tory MPs are wanting to be put out of their misery and calling for him to call an early election. Otherwise, I think we are stuck until March 2025

This country is as good as broke..

I am guessing one of the actors on Friends... ?

@mods, maybe move the above posts to the new thread if possible?

Had no idea it is on next week.. Mainstream papers didn't have much on it, and the Mercury is a bit light on it. But, this YT vid brought it into sharp focus: F! Not even ScoMo could hit some of those figures, despite trying hard. Tassie will always have some structural challenges to overcome, but things seem pretty dire down there. But, the Libs are awy ahead according to this: https://theconversation.com/dire-polls-for-labor-in-tasmania-and-queensland-with-elections-upcoming-225455 Well, it would seem they are not offering much of a change to the Libs.. Is there a desire for change down there? That youth offenders instituion is a disgrace, but apart from the press trying to beat it up, it did not seem to get much traction. Do people know the level of homelessness and poverty? 25% of the latter seemed pretty thrid world to me. And those foreign ag companies effectively being subsidised by the taxpayer.. WTF.. @Marty_d; @nomadpete - what is going on down there... Or was that some domesday vid to keep the mainlanders out? (BTW, I have to start work at 5:30am on election day - will go for a couple of hours.. look forward to the election telecast on ABC, or does that also get nobbled?)

Even if that were true, most reputable scientists would label it a hypothesis and conduct expierments to prove it is likely, then publish their results in reputable journals that would be peer revieed (crtiqued) before being accepted. They will be very clear about what is a hypothesis, results of expirements/studies, and peer accepted. There are always exceptions, but the scientific coimmunity will normally be very vocal when one goes feral and tries to claim science before it has gone through the process. Of course, those that make unilateral announcements of Sky News and the like don't generally fall into the reputable scientist category.

Actually, I take this back.. I was thinking od non-linear risks, which I don't think a straght number of fatalities per working hour falls into.

Maybe I am reading this wrong, but I am not sure I follow. If we are measuring the occurence of an event per quantum of a measure, surely it is the measure that we need a statistically valid populatioon of the measure (in this case, series of hours worked) and not the event itself? In the case of deaths per hours worked (presumably under standard conditions of the industry as it is comparing industries.. And to be a proper staticstical analysis, there would have to be some scaling, as, for example, if in agriculture there was an aggregate of say 3m hours/year worked but in mining there was only 3,000, an absolute comparision would not necessarily be accurate. Of course, a better comaprison would include a hsitogram or simolar to plot the relative safety over a period of time, noting a standard deviation over that period of time. I am not sure we would wait for a number of occurencesa deaths to occur before determining the realitve safety between industry - since we are working out the rates of death over a series (in this case hours worked).

Hi Ian, Delayed response - but have been most of the week away from home. Really sad to hear this and from reading it my thoughts have been with you and your family; another life needlessly lost. Can't blame the police on this; as OME says they were presented with a scenario and had to act. One of the failings of humanity is that despite the immense wealth our societies have, we still can't seen to band together as a community and offer the professional interventions needed when the issues first present, and that you were prepared to do so speaks volumes. May she rest in peace.

Yeah - but it only takes one side to fire the first bullet.

If you are a professional who truly believes in what our ideology is based on fact or just grounded, one's expressions are usually not of discomfort

Ther's surrogacy, adoption, and this: "Interestingly", Stephen Fry has something positive to say about gay parenting:

An interesting news feed., the West (at least Europe) may slowly be waking up: https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-updates-poland-wont-rule-out-nato-force-in-ukraine/live-68479837?mobileApp=true

His responses are one of someone who knows they are on the wrong side of history

Even when I worked it out the brain was flipping it back

I nevre watched Star Wars.. nor *uck Rogers..

Would that not create an eternal (and in the ase of this place, and infernal) loop?

"I like big butts and I cannot lie" Is the second line, "When I embark on them, they make me fly"?

I must admit to not listening to the song.. I am a grump old bar steward.

Mine is scheduled to go for 4 months, but I will extrapolate accordingly.. Mine has already done the cross-year duration.