Home > Regular Features > Monday Message Board

Monday Message Board

July 31st, 2017

Another Monday Message Board. Post comments on any topic. Civil discussion and no coarse language please. Side discussions and idees fixes to the sandpits, please.

Categories: Regular Features Tags:
  1. JJ
    July 31st, 2017 at 20:44 | #1

    What do you think of Wolfgang Streeck’s work John?

  2. david
    August 1st, 2017 at 10:41 | #2

    re the Qld Police Commissioner reappointment which I note is a short term one to cover the immediacy of the Commonwealth Games. I do not know why.
    I have followed the case of Graham Stafford the innocent man who did 15 years for the murder of Leanne Holland which murder was quashed on his final appeal having already been denied by the High Court.
    This involves another exercise in discovering the shortfalls of the Legal System and necessary defence funding.
    I have no doubt of Graham’s innocence see “Body of Evidence” on the ABC Site and in Australian Story. Anyone who disagrees I would be more than willing to discuss directly.
    My concern is I remember Stafford asking post-acquittal publically for certain evidence which Atkinson said satisfied him of Stafford’s guilt which evidence as I understand it has not been provided certainly publically.
    Our justice and political systems demand the proper publication of this none the least for Leanne, her family, Graham, identifying the real killer and any perjurers and the Public Interest.

  3. Nevil Kingston-Brown
    August 1st, 2017 at 12:13 | #3

    A story in the New York times that is probably of interest: another failure of nuclear energy to materialise or deliver on its promises. “putting an end to a project that was once expected to showcase advanced nuclear technology but has since been plagued by delays and cost overruns.” – sounds rather familiar.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/climate/nuclear-power-project-canceled-in-south-carolina.html

  4. John Quiggin
    August 1st, 2017 at 12:40 | #4

    @JJ
    I have heard of him, but haven’t had time to follow up yet

    @Nevil Kingston-Brown
    I pitched an article to the NY TImes, anticipating this event, but they didn’t bite. I’m trying the Guardian now

  5. John Turner
    August 1st, 2017 at 14:02 | #5

    I write a monthly article for a local newspaper on health related matters. A recent article titled “anti-quackery alert” drew the ire of Chiropractors including the CEO of the Chiropractic Association of Australia. Regarding the efficacy of the Chiropractic treatments they seem to hang their hat on a) the fact that to become a chiropractor you have to undertake a 5 year university degree course and b) that chiropractors like doctors and nurses are subject to oversight by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency.

    Regulating nonsense of course does not make it anything else but nonsense. The scientific evidence supporting the many diverse claims of chiropractors is virtually non existent. Where studies do show a modicum of support they have generally been poorly designed and poorly executed.

    Should universities be lending their support to this pseudo-science nonsense and providing legitimacy? In the U.K. the University of Exeter had a Chair of Complementary and Alternative medicine (CAM) that applied rigorous scientific method to the claims of CAM. Unfortunately Prof Edzard Ernst had the temerity to challenge Prince Charles support for Homeopathy and following his resignation the position has not been filled.

    Meanwhile Australia spends millions of health dollars on therapies that have no evidence to support their claims of effectiveness.

  6. James Wimberley
    August 2nd, 2017 at 00:45 | #6

    The marginal costs of road use include wear and air pollution as well as congestion. The former is created almost entirely by heavy vehicles: some combination of license fees (trucks, unlike luxury cars, do not spend a lot of time slumbering in garages) and fuel taxes will get close if an electronic spy in the cab logging actual miles is too difficult politically. The more interesting and important omission is air pollution. The costs here are enormous: $>3trn annually worldwide according to the OECD. The damage is done in urbanised areas, not open country, so the social cost will track congestion fairly well. Unlike congestion, the problem is limited in time as most vehicles will be electric in 20 years. How fast the transition happens depends a lot on whether public policy recognizes the social costs and imposes differential pollution charges, as in London.

  7. James Wimberley
    August 2nd, 2017 at 00:48 | #7

    Sorry, wrong thread. Will repost.

  8. Jozef
    August 2nd, 2017 at 18:18 | #8

    Just came across this video which might be of wider interest courtesy of Vox

    This captivating video created by Antti Lipponen visualizes more than 100 years of temperature change in 191 countries in just 35 seconds. Lipponen, a researcher at the Finnish Meteorological Institute, used publicly available data from NASA to demonstrate the rising temperatures across the world. This isn’t the first time the story of global warming has been told with the help of a mesmerizing graphic. Last year, Brad Plumer wrote for Vox about a viral GIF created by climate scientist Ed Hawkins, and David Roberts wrote about a set of clever climate GIFs inspired by the one Hawkins made…”
    https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/8/1/16074956/global-warming-visualization-117-years-191-countries

  9. D
    August 4th, 2017 at 01:47 | #9

    Washington Post releases “leaked” transcript of Trump-Turnbull phone call.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/politics/australia-mexico-transcripts/?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.32444eefdbeb

    One key point:

    Under the “US Deal” on refugees the US doesn’t have to take a single person from Manus or Nauru.

    Read the transcript and decide who is more crazy out of Trump or Turnbull. Trump sounds completely balanced while Turnbull’s attempt to explain Australia’s ALP anti-refugee policy is downright unhinged.

    For example:

    Turnbull: Yes, but let me describe what it is. I think it is quite consistent. I think you can comply with it. It is absolutely consistent with your Executive Order so please just hear me out. The obligation is for the United States to look and examine and take up to and only if they so choose – 1,250 to 2,000. Every individual is subject to your vetting. You can decide to take them or to not take them after vetting. You can decide to take 1,000 or 100. It is entirely up to you. The obligation is to only go through the process. So that is the first thing. Secondly, the people — none of these people are from the conflict zone. They are basically economic refugees from Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. That is the vast bulk of them. They have been under our supervision for over three years now and we know exactly everything about them.

    Trump: Why haven’t you let them out? Why have you not let them into your society?

    Turnbull: Okay, I will explain why. It is not because they are bad people. It is because in order to stop people smugglers, we had to deprive them of the product. So we said if you try to come to Australia by boat, even if we think you are the best person in the world, even if you are a Noble [sic] Prize winning genius, we will not let you in. Because the problem with the people —

    Trump: That is a good idea. We should do that too. You are worse than I am.

    Turnbull: This is our experience.

    And don’t get smug ALP supporters, this is your policy that Turnbull is looking like an idiot trying to defend.

    I weep for this country. The ALP is a cancer.

    Under their policy more people have died on Manus and Nauru than have been “processed” in the four years of this atrocity and all you can do is call for some minor sadist like Dutton to be sacked, simply because he gleefully continued ALP policy.

    You are very sick individuals.

  10. D
    August 4th, 2017 at 02:14 | #10

    The whole thing should be read, but here is the key to what’s wrong with Australia:

    Turnbull: Let me explain. We know exactly who they are. They have been on Nauru or Manus for over three years and the only reason we cannot let them into Australia is because of our commitment to not allow people to come by boat. Otherwise we would have let them in. If they had arrived by airplane and with a tourist visa then they would be here.

    Trump: Malcom [sic], but they are arrived on a boat?

    Turnbull: Correct, we have stopped the boats.

    Turnbull: Please, if we can agree to stick to the deal, you have complete discretion in terms of a security assessment. The numbers are not 2,000 but 1,250 to start. Basically, we are taking people from the previous administration that they were very keen on getting out of the United States. We will take more. We will take anyone that you want us to take. The only people that we do not take are people who come by boat. So we would rather take a not very attractive guy that help you out then to take a Noble [sic] Peace Prize winner that comes by boat. That is the point.

    Trump: What is the thing with boats? Why do you discriminate against boats? No, I know, they come from certain regions. I get it.

    Indeed, Trump does “get it”. Shame so few Australians get it.

Comments are closed.