Another Message Board
Post comments on any topic. Civil discussion and no coarse language please. Side discussions and idees fixes to the sandpits, please.
I’ve moved my irregular email news from Mailchimp to Substack. You can read it here. You can also follow me on Twitter @JohnQuiggin
I’m also trying out Substack as a blogging platform. For the moment, I’ll post both at this blog and on Substack.
John Quiggin 
A Short Note on the “Science” and Math of COVID-19 Denialism.
COVID-19 denialism I define as the attitude that COVID-19 is either not a real disease or it is not a serious disease. This can encompass views that the morbidity, deaths and long term sequalae from COVID-19 disease are also not real or that they don’t really matter. This view is based on the idea that it is only the vulnerable and elderly with preconditions who may sicken seriously or die. If they die it’s because they were due to die soon anyway.
None of these views of Covid denialists are factually correct nor are they ethically supportable. COVID-19 denialism (sometimes called “minimising”) has nothing to do with the epidemiological concepts of elimination and eradication. Indeed, COVID-19 denialism and minimization of the disease’s seriousness then function ideologically and socially to ensure further spread of the dangerous mutating and evolving pathogen, SARS_CoV_2. COVID-19 denialism is a recent development in health supremacism as a general ideology. Health supremacism in turn is an integral part of ableism and eugenics and thus an integral part of the full spectrum of supremacist and fascist ideologies. A good article on this is:
“Loathe fascism? Then don’t be a health supremacist.” by Maarten Steenhagen.
https://msteenhagen.medium.com/loathe-fascism-then-dont-be-a-health-supremacist-c8841acdf69
However, in this note I want to focus on the insidious methods of rationalization and data cherry-picking employed by the scientifically literate, but ethically challenged, in their effort to concoct a scientifically and logically compelling deception of COVID-19 minimisation. They do not always use pseudoscience or pseudo-math though some do. The more intellectually Machiavellian use a misapplication of science and math to get a predetermined QED. The misuse of math is particularly interesting. As a specialized and somewhat arcane language, what math (as opposed to mere arithmetic) says or proves is not open to refutation by the math-illiterate. Furthermore, as a precise language, the math qua math, if accurate, is not open to refutation at all. However, if the math is ill-applied to the real situation it can still be completely fallacious and dishonest. This process is often effected with calculus (differential calculus & integral calculus) because calculus is difficult enough to bamboozle the arithmetic-literate who are yet math-illiterate. Strictly speaking, calculus ability is not necessary for a basic logical assessment which is able demonstrate where the math is being fallaciously or dishonestly deployed.
simply First, one needs to understand what calculus does. It permits calculation, or estimation, of change in a dependent variable over time. It does this via equations with a finite number of terms (variables or parameters). For scientifically applied mathematics, the terms or parameters must relate to something measured in real scientific quantities or the so-called “scientific dimensions”. One can refer to the International System of Units (SI) for these real “scientific dimensions” and their units. These units are well established as scientifically, empirically valid and dependable. Units derived from combinations of such units are also valid (eg. meters per second). There are also cases where ratios or dimensionless quantities are valid.
R(0), the basic reproduction number of an infection is a scientifically valid dimensionless quantity. It is a theoretical, predicted ratio of infected person to persons infected in the next cycle of infection. R(eff) is the effective ratio observed from a real, empirical event. Any equation with R(0) in it, is NOT theoretically invalidated by that sole fact. It may however be empirically invalidated as an estimate by later real outcomes.
How and when may a valid equation or valid calculus equation with R(0) in it be scientifically invalidated or highly dubious? First, it could be invalidated in this case by not recognizing/admitting that the R(0) is estimated, thus giving a false impression of objectivity and real applicability to the theoretical exercise. The estimate is context relative (to the real population context) but it becomes invariant to evolving context once estimated and then adhered to for multi-cycle calculations.
To project forward with an invariant R(0), it must be assumed that the dynamic context in and of the system will not vary even if individual and collective behaviours likely will vary as infections proceed and spread. This is a mathematically heroic assumption to say the least. In addition, the other parameters or variables employed must be relatively small in number or the whole equation becomes immense and unwieldy. It can become one of multiple interacting variables which could differentially affect each other: a nightmare of multi-function calculus one could say. So any neat, “physics-simple” R(0) equation that predicts pandemic waves will damp out over time (a favorite trick) may well be pretending to be something it isn’t.
I say “physics-simple” not to denigrate physics. Physics can and does derive simple, elegant and very powerful equations. This is not always the case however. A consideration of the 3-body or n-body problems illustrates the point. Any R(0) style equation that is used to project future pandemic waves will have made a great many greatly-simplifying assumptions. One major assumption inheres in the fact that many potential, radical, “known unknown” change factors are excluded like mutations. Pandemic projection is a a wicked “n-body” physics problem.
Fundamental laws don’t change in physics or at least not in orbital physics for example (outside of quantum effects introducing probabilistically induced chaos perhaps?). The “fundamental” chaos dynamics of the observed large, non-homogenous population system in an R(0) problem do change and can change; among other factors they from the unpredictable emergent evolutionary trajectory of the pathogen. Researchers of molecular evolutionary genetics analysis are now working with brute force calculations on supercomputers to attempt to predict the pathogen’s evolutionary possibilities. This must only increase the combinations and permutations involved in attempting to predict how these would interact with human immune systems, let alone how it would affect pandemic population dynamics.
We are forced in the case of this horrendous real complexity to resort to more basic logic, heuristics and even to straightforward consequentialist ethical precepts. We should not let mathematicians, physicists or even epidemiologists of minimizing intent baffle us by throwing mathematical bulldust in our eyes. There is a real and very near limit to what they can predict about the future of such super-complex real world biological systems. A simple fact is that every infection stopped then stops n more infections where the relevant theoretical function is R(n).
Trying to “scientifically” and “mathematically” finesse our way through a dangerous pandemic by calibrating titres of acceptable hospitalizations, acceptable deaths, acceptable quantities of disabling and so on is a piece of breath-taking and callous hubris that is profoundly dishonest at all levels: a dishonest pretense by some self-appointed experts or by oligarch appointed, enabled, paid and captured experts (hired guns), that they know and can predict a lot more than they can really know and predict. This is basically true because we can’t accurately perform n-body or n-parameter style pandemic trajectory projections where n is a very large number and the number of further unknown parameters is also large.
This pushes us back to the realization that suppression / elimination of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (always and still realistic if ideology, fatalism and defeatism are rejected) is the correct and only path to reject and obviate the emergent, insoluble combinations and complications (mathematical and real) of a dangerous, highly mutable pandemic pathogen when it is permitted nearly unlimited evolutionary space to evolve in with nearly 8 billion humans as handy evolutionary reactor vessels.
I have reached such a point of exasperation with some narrowly based experts in the mainstream, captured it seems by the ideological far-right, that I feel I have to point out the above to, or at least about, such scientists and mathematicians. Some of them are becoming mere useful idiots for eugenics and social murder or democide. To possess extensive science and math technical knowledge without understanding the nature of the ontological interface and the epistemological limits involved at the boundary between applied mathematics and complex relational system empiricism is a sad, sad cul-de-sac of over-specialization, skill-for-hire and an ossification of that kind of extensive learning and imagination necessary to sense new paradigms arising in the latest research and in current historical-empirical events. What’s even worse is these said scientists’ and mathematicians’ complete loss of any vestigial ethics. Advanced science/mathematical genius combined with moral idiocy is an extremely dangerous combination.
We do it all the time. Every time a new medicine is considered by the PBAC for public subsidy we make a judgement on the acceptable level of morbidity and deaths relative to the unspecified opportunity cost (I.e unspecified in respect to the foregone investment). Unlike covid, this is pretty much hidden to most people. In fact the the cost per qaly saved or death avoided that the tax payer stomped for during the pandemic, is of a magnitude higher than for any other serious disease in the country. I guess we are all health denialists in respect to disease burdens borne mostly by others.
And yes we use naive maths to justify not funding.
Ikon said “And yes we use naive maths to justify not funding.”. And absolutely agree with “the insidious methods of rationalization and data cherry-picking”.
And Andrew said “And yes we use naive maths to justify not funding.”
Yet QALY’s are for a specific medical decision to,allocate scarce resource at “time opportunity cost death.”. And alleviate personal grief of decision maker. If I were a doc in this position I’d use QALY’s and if I could go against suggested decision, I would.
Based on questions of humans, cost perception relative to market, shitty funding if infrastructure and private health (how many private hospitals in Australia? ) with ouliers dumped before calculation.
QALY’s. Good for medicos & money, bad for you if in trauma when hospital at breaking point, specially if aged, disabled and or comorbid.
Oh, where did those outliers go? To heaven without being asked. I’ve asked. Looked. No one says.
How many more lives via better infrastructure and funding may be saved if applying:
“… we quantify the fiscal space for Australia and find that a permanent increase in the primary deficit can be afforded up to reaching a debt to GDP ratio of 79 per cent. Furthermore, this so-called ‘free lunch’ in the fiscal space can be expanded if debt is used to finance public investment.”
“Australia’s Fiscal Space: The Role of Public Investment”
Begoña Domínguez,
John Quiggin
First published: 22 July 2022
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1467-8462.12481
Ikon, I feel you’ll approve my recasting of characters. And it will give you a chuckle. It did me.
Re Scott Morrison and Westminster “conventions”.
Insert Scomo as King Arther who is pretending to ride a horse, and a young Terry Eagleton as the “Constitutional Peasant” – oops – sovereign person – in the mud.
Terry Eagleton
https://thebaffler.com/latest/everyones-a-critic-merrick
*
Monty Python – Constitutional Peasants Scene
Why Qantas is paying out $400m due to “shareholder inattention”, and keep them that way. And for Alan Joyce to satisfy “a desire to reward management” perception.
…”Following these special meetings, we find that the next quarter performance of the firm is negative. Our results are consistent with an interpretation of shareholder inattention to governance following good firm performance or a desire to reward management for good past performance. Overall, our evidence seems more consistent with the former interpretation.”
Are the Seeds of Bad Governance Sown in Good Times?
https://www.nber.org/papers/w17061
Renationalise Qantas – or at least out me onto the Board with veto power.
“Don’t forget, you are all peasants and it is your duty to die from mandatory work-with-COVID rules to ensure that you fulfill your role in augmenting the wealth of your lords and rulers and don’t hang around afterwards for a pension.” – Delivered in a Monty Python character voice.
US petroleum geologist Art Berman tweeted yesterday (Aug 28):
IMO, the red curve in the graph looks like it has peaked/plateaued.
Also IMO, most of those fossil fuel reserves need to remain in the ground if humanity is to have any chance of the Earth System remaining compatible for sustaining civilisation in the coming decades (and beyond).
A few questions arise … firstly, “fossil fuel reserves” is not a useful term; it needs to be broken down into (1) good-quality “sweet” crude oil that can be extracted at a reasonable price, for a good length of time, (2) natural gas (ditto on extraction costs and depletion rates), (3) very unpleasant and difficult tar sands of the Canadian style, and (4) fracking / shale oil (which is expensive, environmentally ruinous, and depletes very rapidly).
And has he bundled (5) coal into this big arm-waving picture? And again, there are several types of coal – all with varying levels of availability, extraction ease, and environmental harm.
I feel like I’m marking a first-year Geology 101 essay. Next he’ll be telling us that America achieved “oil independence” – which we know did no such thing. The problem is that modern economies can’t sustain themselves with oil at $US100/BBL, and many oil companies can’t survive with oil less than say $US60/BBL … and there appears to be no Goldilocks sweet spot.
I am the only one who wears a mask to work and I am the only one there who hasnt had it yet – from about 20 staff . Some have had it twice .Mainly just by wearing a proper mask properly my friend has worked 60 hr + weeks in disability care houses with covid positive residents without getting it .
Barring a miraculous turnaround it looks like my mother has very suddenly gone from a manageable and happy mid stage dementia to an unmanageable miserable final stage since getting covid . She didnt have much in the way of actual covid symptoms for very long but it can accelerate dementia. She was 4 Vaxxad and got the antivirals quick .Dad got it too ,he is fatalistic and stoic to the point of self destruction so he says he is fine now, but he is 86 so I am not sure .He has no other health complication but how many times could he get it and rebound ?
At this rate covid will be what finishes everyone off who is lucky enough to live very long .Also the otherwise compromised will suffer .My younger brother has it too , he is on immune suppressing drugs but is otherwise a picture of health and vitality – more fit than most 20 year old’s . His negligent doctor wouldnt give him the antivirals and he has dads stoic fatalistic nature so he didnt push the issue ,if he went to the hospital he would have been given them instantly .He will be a long time getting over it (I assume he will) and off work too.
sunshine, my sincere sympathy for your family and your plight.
Go masks! I believe I only caught Covid due to my teenager getting it at the superspreader exemplar – schools. Close contact at home even though we tried our best isolate and manage airflow.
As ‘we’ render the over 70 almost invisible in Australia – kulcha – and especially during the pandemic, I thought the only solution is to fund the ABC to have “Over 80 TV” where aged persons have the camera, get to be producers and editors and are garanteed time and viewing slots.
I liken this to the difference between vision of the Vietnam War and subsequent black out excepting DoD approved vision.
And related “privacy” and NDA’s in many vital industries, workers and sites in Australia.
I wonder what other countries do?
When sci-fi isn’t science fiction anymore. Ahh, progress.
What about all the other humans on streets who can’t even afford a motorbike? Mr Adani may pay.
*
“But the guys on the bike, they have no protection at all.”
“So his company designed a helmet with an air purification unit, fitted with a replaceable filter membrane and a fan powered by a battery that runs for six hours and can be charged through a Micro USB slot.”
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-29/india-s-state-funded-helmet-promises-fresh-air-in-battle-on-wint/101382670
Cargill: – “I feel like I’m marking a first-year Geology 101 essay. Next he’ll be telling us that America achieved “oil independence” – which we know did no such thing.”
Your statements suggest to me you are unfamiliar with Art Berman’s work.
From his blog post headlined U.S. Energy Dominance is Over, dated 18 Jun 2022 (bold text my emphasis):
https://www.artberman.com/2020/06/18/u-s-energy-dominance-is-over/
Cargill: – “The problem is that modern economies can’t sustain themselves with oil at $US100/BBL…”
Yep, it’s a recession generator.
Cargill: – “…and many oil companies can’t survive with oil less than say $US60/BBL…”
It depends on whether it’s conventional onshore oil, conventional offshore oil, tight oil, heavy oil, or oil sands – see the Cost Curve of New Global Crude Oil Supply in Selected Areas from new projects expected to start production between 2021 and 2040 at: https://ihsmarkit.com/research-analysis/global-crude-oil-curve-shows-projects-break-even-through-2040.html
Average WTI price needed for U.S. oil and gas producers to stay profitable by well status in selected U.S. oilfields as of 2022 at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/748207/breakeven-prices-for-us-oil-producers-by-oilfield/
“Your statements suggest to me you are unfamiliar with Art Berman’s work.”
I know of him of course, but certainly not that familiar with his perspective. American “oil independence” is (and always has been) a fraud, so I’m pleased he recognises that.
But it is a side issue. His bigger crime – as I outlined in my post – is that he has aggregated up “fossil fuel reserves” into a totally misleading and meaningless number. I find it interesting that you have totally avoided THAT most important part of my post.
The guy is devious, it seems. Peak Oil is not going away.
Cargill: – “His bigger crime – as I outlined in my post – is that he has aggregated up “fossil fuel reserves” into a totally misleading and meaningless number.”
The cumulative fossil fuel reserves in the graph by Art Berman are expressed in billion barrels of oil energy equivalent. Some people/organizations in the energy business use that as a dimension of energy. It appears that the data is sourced from BP’s Statistical Review of World Energy 2022. One barrel of oil energy equivalent = 6.119 GJ (page 56). Thus, one billion barrels of oil energy equivalent = 6.119 EJ.
I suspect you are revealing your unfamiliarly with this terminology.
Cargill, what do you think the number should be? Is BP’s data wrong?
Cargill: – “The guy is devious, it seems.”
Ah, yes, it seems to me you are quick to judge people despite you being “certainly not that familiar with his perspective.” 🙄
When in a hole, stop digging!
Manageing welfare receipants costs at least 6200 Euro each. Just got my regional numbers. Thats without jobtraining or similar and the “service quality” is non existing. Callcenters with endless waits, if you try to use their digital system things will not arrive and it is your fault etc….The payout is less than 12000 Euro a year. All that paranoia to deny payments on spurious grounds sure does not pay off.
Geoff Miell, I nominate you to represent us on a Central West “Regional Expert Panel” … ” to provide regionally specific advice on funding applications and to ensure decision-making is aligned with the needs of the local area”
Yes? I have no idea of your credentials or situation, yet I am confident you would be factual and data driven. A valuable quality on such panels.
*
“The NSW Government is calling for applications from interested people to join a Regional Expert Panel.
“Royalties for Rejuvenation Fund
“Regional Expert Panels
“As part of the Royalties for Rejuvenation Fund, the NSW Government is currently establishing Regional Expert Panels to provide regionally specific advice on funding applications and to ensure decision-making is aligned with the needs of the local area.
Applications opened on Monday 8 August 2022 for positions on the four Regional Expert Panels in the Hunter, Illawarra, Central West and North West regions.
“Applications are sought from individuals who:
– have knowledge of the economic or commercial activity of the affected coal mining region
– can represent the interests of a group likely to be affected by a move away from coal mining
– can provide innovative, logical, transparent, and informative advice.
“The recruitment process will target members with a diverse range of skills, gender, expertise, backgrounds and experiences.
…
https://www.nsw.gov.au/regional-nsw/programs-and-grants/royalties-for-rejuvenation-fund
“I suspect you are revealing your unfamiliarly with this terminology.”
It appears you’re incapable of having a discussion without resorting to ad hominem attacks – but so be it – some people have no other recourse.
I know perfectly well with a BOE is and what it measures, but it is beside the point – a red herring. The point is that aggregating all fossil fuel reserves into one graph is nothing but crude misinformation. Apart from that, all authorities on the matter always include a pretty sizeable caveat – the statistically accuracy of “proven reserves” are by their nature very unreliable.
Firstly because nations and energy companies don’t necessarily report accurately, and secondly, what is included in “reserves” can be wildly optimistic especially if it helps the share price.
What will happen if Trump wins the next US Presidential election? This article suggests politicization of the public sector and the armed forces and rejection of court-based judgements. Its a grim forecast that sees the emergence of a new totalitarianism. The Republican Party are essentially committed to the Trump agenda:
“We should rationally assume that if Republicans protected him after he and his supporters attempted a coup, they will protect him no matter what else he does. Republicans are now so thoroughly complicit in his misdeeds that anything that jeopardizes him politically or legally also jeopardizes them.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/trump-2024-reelection-viktor-orban-hungary/671264/
Oh, the irony of having a non reflective mirror!
“It appears you’re incapable of having a discussion without resorting to ad hominem attacks – but so be it – some people have no other recourse.”!
Geoff M gave a reference. Feel free ro rebut not slag off. I’m not holding my breath. Sand-pitty.
Geoff Miell, I nominate you to represent us on a Central West “Regional Expert Panel” … ” to provide regionally specific advice on funding applications and to ensure decision-making is aligned with the needs of the local area”
Yes? I have no idea of your credentials or situation, yet I am confident you would be factual and data driven. A valuable quality on such panels.
*
“The NSW Government is calling for applications from interested people to join a Regional Expert Panel.
“Royalties for Rejuvenation Fund
“Regional Expert Panels
“As part of the Royalties for Rejuvenation Fund, the NSW Government is currently establishing Regional Expert Panels to provide regionally specific advice on funding applications and to ensure decision-making is aligned with the needs of the local area.
Applications opened on Monday 8 August 2022 for positions on the four Regional Expert Panels in the Hunter, Illawarra, Central West and North West regions.
“Applications are sought from individuals who:
– have knowledge of the economic or commercial activity of the affected coal mining region
– can represent the interests of a group likely to be affected by a move away from coal mining
– can provide innovative, logical, transparent, and informative advice.
“The recruitment process will target members with a diverse range of skills, gender, expertise, backgrounds and experiences.
…
https://www.nsw.gov.au/regional-nsw/programs-and-grants/royalties-for-rejuvenation-fund
And don’t tell them you might use this basis for framing;
“The Tragedy of the Commons: How Elinor Ostrom Solved One of Life’s Greatest DilemmasThe design principles for solving the tragedy of the commons can be applied to all groups”
https://evonomics.com/tragedy-of-the-commons-elinor-ostrom/
Harry, if people such as Lindsey “incitement” Graham keep dog whistling for violence, the inevitable mob riots will be worse.
Yet it seems the Dems are slowly gaining. Perhaps a silver lining to Dobbs & abortion decision – women voters.
*
“Law professor and former White House ethics chief Richard Painter referred to Trump supporters’ deadly attack on the Capitol when he said: “A senator who calls for ‘riots in the streets’ if Trump is indicted should be expelled from the Senate. He’s inciting January 6 all over again.”
“The president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass, said the “prediction that violence may follow any prosecution of the former [president] may not qualify legally as incitement but it is irresponsible all the same as it will be seen by some as a call for violence. Public officials are [obliged] to call for the rule of law.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/29/lindsey-graham-riots-trump-prosecuted-records
And here is
1) the Facebook whistleblower’s on the social media incitement algorithm protection law and baked in to algorithms.
2) And dark side psychologogy used
3) And Australian style section 230 deform-ation laws.
Section 230!
“Long title – Protection For ‘Good Samaritan’ Blocking and Screening of Offensive Material”. Wikipedia
How offensive and Orwellian is “For Good Samaritan”!
Can’t wait to see “private citizens sue Facebook and other social media companies for harm caused by their algorithms”.
And Australia has deformation law ala Section 230. Wikipedia below…
“Under the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW),[198] s 32, a defence to defamation is that the defendant neither knew, nor ought reasonably to have known of the defamation, and the lack of knowledge was not due to the defendant’s negligence.”
*
“Here are 4 key points from the Facebook whistleblower’s testimony on Capitol Hill
…
“Haugen urged lawmakers to examine the algorithms that drive popular features, like the main feeds in Facebook and Instagram.
“The algorithms reward engagement. In other words, when a post receives comments, “likes” and other interactions, it is spread more widely and is featured more prominently in feeds, instead of just featuring posts in chronological order. The engagement-based formula helps sensational content, such as posts that feature rage, hate or misinformation, travel far and wide, she said.
“It is causing teenagers to be exposed to more anorexia content. It is pulling families apart. And in places like Ethiopia, it’s literally fanning ethnic violence,” Haugen told lawmakers. She added that reforms should make “the platforms themselves safer, less twitchy, less reactive, less viral.”
“One proposal now being discussed by Blumenthal would let private citizens sue Facebook and other social media companies for harm caused by their algorithms.
“Right now, a decades-old law known as Section 230 immunizes social media companies from being sued over what their users post, but lawmakers are examining possible carve-outs.
…
https://www.npr.org/2021/10/05/1043377310/facebook-whistleblower-frances-haugen-congress
And trust & attachment style dark side baked into Facebook & Instagram etc algorithms…. “anxious subjects were quicker at recognizing jumbled letters as representing words that conveyed rejection, such asabandoned, or ridiculed, even if these jumbled words were preceded by a tone they’d been conditioned to associate with approval. Anxious people are so vigilant for dismissal that they register cues of it while ignoring signals of their acceptance.”
…
https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2022/08/making-keeping-friends-attachment-theory-styles/671222/
*
Section 230 style in Australia under
》”Similar legislation in other countries《 “Australia” tab.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230
Cargill: – “It appears you’re incapable of having a discussion without resorting to ad hominem attacks – but so be it – some people have no other recourse.”
Have you reflected on your behaviour towards others you’ve referred to here at this blog?
https://johnquiggin.com/2022/08/29/monday-message-board-568/comment-page-1/#comment-255341
Cargill: – “I know perfectly well with a BOE is and what it measures, but it is beside the point – a red herring.”
…and yet you described it earlier as “a totally misleading and meaningless number.” It seems to me you perhaps didn’t know, until I pointed it out to you – BOE is a valid & quantifiable dimension of energy.
“The point is that aggregating all fossil fuel reserves into one graph is nothing but crude misinformation. Apart from that, all authorities on the matter always include a pretty sizeable caveat – the statistically accuracy of “proven reserves” are by their nature very unreliable.”
I return to my earlier question: Cargill, what do you think the number should be? Can you (ballpark) quantify it?
Cargill, do you agree/disagree with my earlier statement? –
https://johnquiggin.com/2022/08/29/monday-message-board-568/comment-page-1/#comment-255315
“I return to my earlier question: Cargill, what do you think the number should be? Can you (ballpark) quantify it?”
I certainly know what BOE is, and I knew many years ago.
But that is my point – the headline-grabbing statement from Art Berman is meaningless unless and until you separate out the elements of “fossil fuel reserves”. Good sweet crude in conventional productive wells (such as Ghawar) is very different to the fracking experience, or the tar-sand experience, or the extreme deep-sea experience. Let alone coal.
Not sure why I need to spell this out … and it has nothing to do with BOE equivalence – it has everything to do with the cost of energy for the rest of this century, and it’s not a very nice picture. I more than concede I have a Peak Oil mindset, and have had for a very long time, but nevertheless, I still think the statement made is seriously misleading …
“World fossil fuel depletion is insignficant (sic) because reserve additions have been consistently greater than reductions (depletion).” Sounds like a Mobil-Exxon or Aramco talking point.
Russell Broadbent has called for a repeal of the tax cuts, saying that the world has turned on its head since their inception.
Indeed the world has turned, the Govt’s books are heavily in the red and they need to be fiscally conservative.
Albo needs to think of the public good, he would get a big thumbs up from voters if he knocked this one on the head.
Sussan Ley has said more stupid things, this time about electric utes.
Is there something about the Libs that, having already lost an argument, they just double down and go that little bit further?
As an aside, the reason that Ms Ley changed her name from Susan to Sussan was because of numerology – that’s a fact!
“Albo needs to think of the public good, he would get a big thumbs up from voters if he knocked this one on the head.”
I can’t believe the rationale Albanese is using for not re-legislating these outrageous tax cuts. I haven’t voted Labor for decades (always Green) – but I’m seriously thinking about never giving them my second preference ever again. Clive Palmer is looking good!
How can Labor – as an alleged social democratic party – support a flat tax system … it really is mind-boggling. The only answer is that Albanese and all his nice-suited front bench Cabinet sycophants are only thinking about the one thing that matters to them – winning the 2025 election.
They are despicable indeed.
“As an aside, the reason that Ms Ley changed her name from Susan to Sussan was because of numerology – that’s a fact!”
I don’t know about her adherence to weird science, but I have to say that every time I see her on TV, she looks like she’s had three pink gins before lunch. Maybe it’s just me.
“Cargill, do you agree/disagree with my earlier statement? –
…most of those fossil fuel reserves need to remain in the ground if humanity is to have any chance of the Earth System remaining compatible for sustaining civilisation in the coming decades (and beyond).”
Indeed – I used to have a (tongue-in-cheek) sig line on the Lonely Planet Thorntree travel forum that said, “Good News – Peak Oil will solve Global Warming”.
I get a huge amount of feedback – from both those who agreed with me and those who thought my statement was outrageous. Good fun.
As to whether I “agree” with you is a complicated question. I totally understand that the planet is getting warmer, and climate events are getting more chaotic (look at Pakistan as we speak), but I have two caveats: (1) whether anthropogenic CO2 is really THE big factor, and (2) the proposed solutions seem to me to be really unwise … you can’t shut down coal or gas fired power stations (or even nuclear ones) BEFORE you have alternatives in place.
But country after country seems to be doing that … I think it’s madness. It’s going to take a zillion solar panels and a million wind turbines to replace what we need now – and what is the cost of all this? I think EVs are also a path to madness.
Fair enough Good Fun Mirror didn’t get past moderation.
Green shipping update
Earlier I reported that methanol seems to have already won the race to green shipping, beating out liquid hydrogen and ammonia. I was a bit premature; turns out that batteries have a good chance too.
A surprising finding from Berkeley researchers: https://www.pv-magazine.com/2022/08/24/ev-shipping-is-set-to-blow-internal-combustion-engines-out-of-the-water/
“After modeling a wide variety of containership sizes, as well as 13 major world trade routes, the research suggests that more than 40% of the world’s fleet of containerships could be electrified “cost-effectively and with current technology,” by the end of this decade. […] Using only technology available for purchase today, nearly all ships with routes shorter than 2,000 kilometers are economically advantageous, and ships with routes as long as 3,000km are economically viable. Graph ‘b’ projects that price reductions to “near future“ battery technology are expected to roughly double the economic viability and range of electrified containerships.
Crucially, this research demonstrates that electrified containerships have an economic advantage over the internal combustion engine (ICE), even when the costs of environmental and health damages are excluded.”
Australia and NZ will be about the last to benefit from this change, as they are so remote from their main trading partners. Sydney to Shanghai is 7,800 km by ship, Sydney to Long Beach 12,000 km. New York to Rotterdam is only 5,800 km, with much more vigorous EU policy in prospect.
So will it be methanol or batteries? The latter avoids a lot of round-trip conversion losses, so should win in the long run – at least for container ships, maybe not for bulk. Methanol can be burnt in refitted diesel engines so is cheaper in the short run and for longer hauls. We will probably end up with a mix. Either will do.
JQ’s superannuation paying for…
Another vampire squid. Granicus Inc
Privatise the losses, subsidise the private revenue, bleed the poor, clip the social & superannuation fund, which is funding this model globally to replace all 3 levels of government services.
1 -The henhouse – Palaszczuk “Labor” Qld
“… the Queensland government will provide the secret (and commercial-in-confidence) sauce by subsidising the revenue stream.”. The New Daily
Wow! And all commercial in confidence! Brought to you by “Mark began his career with Bain & Company as a consultant.” (fn^Bang4$) and…
2 – The PR arm
“Once your agency starts to impact more and more people, the cynics begin to matter less.” (fn^TL)
3 – THE QUESTION –
“If the Queensland government thinks we need more social housing, which we do, then why doesn’t it just spend the money itself?” (fn^TND)
*
Private profit disguised as a “pragmatic” approach to politics.
Vampire Example:-
…”with Granicus, Inc. to increase the payment limit by $175,000 to a new payment limit of $825,816 for the continued hosting of the Citizen Document Access Solution.” (fn^Citizen)
Source of Capital, set up, domicile, tax status, structure & returns SECRET for social housing! What!
Paid for by what was once called the pension. Now private capital using superannuation. And Bang the Table Pty Ltd in bed with Qld Labor to provide “scial housing”, yet sold out to a US co. By a guy who “began his career with Bain & Company as a consultant.”!
Grrrrr! Your government JQ.
Austerity leads to greater uptake of technology services to provide forgone services, budgets, wages & employment. Then private suppliers, less employment and bleeds public to private. And then to comercial in confidence hide the profits by “Labor”!
New social housing brought to you by Labor and my least preffered term – Commercial in Confidence, cover for vampire capital.
*
fn^TND
“The ART of the deal: Queensland has a super plan for investing in social housing
https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/superannuation/2022/08/29/super-for-housing-queensland/
*
fn^Bang4$
“This site is hosted for QLD Department of Housing and Public Works by Bang the Table Pty Ltd.
https://yoursayhpw.engagementhq.com/terms
Bang the Table Pty Ltd, front for Labor Qld social housing investment vehicle, and website diverts to “Granicus, a US provider of cloud-based civic engagement technology and services for the public sector”
Mark Hynes – CEO
“Mark began his career with Bain & Company as a consultant.”
And – BOB AINSBURY
Chief Product Officer
et al
https://granicus.com/company/
BOB AINSBURY in Fortune
…
“In the United Kingdom, this dynamic sparked a nontraditional response in the face of budgetary constraints at every level of government: digitalization of citizen services that led directly to public sector revenue generation.
“…to understand how municipalities, from Wrexham to Weymouth, brought citizen services and forums online to connect with communities in more dynamic and revenue-generating ways, like moving parking passes and permit application processes online.”
…
https://fortune.com/2020/10/07/covid-19-state-and-local-budget-cuts-digital-transformation/
“Two Australian GovTech innovators, Bang the Table and OpenCities, have been acquired by Granicus, a US provider of cloud-based civic engagement technology and services for the public sector
…
“These acquisitions follow extended periods of growth for Bang the Table and OpenCities. Bang the Table has doubled its revenue and expanded its global reach over the past three years, now operating in four continents. OpenCities has also grown to power millions of daily interactions for cities, counties and states across Australia, New Zealand and North America. ”
https://www.govtechreview.com.au/content/public-sector-network/news/two-aussie-scale-ups-acquired-by-us-govtech-leader-1553084853
*
“She says asset sales contributed to the demise of the Bligh government – where she was transport minister – in 2012 and the Newman government last year. “The people of Queensland don’t want it. I am not going to break that trust,” she says defiantly. (This promise doesn’t extend to selling government property like excess land parcels which she is planning to sell or gift to developers to build renewal projects.)”
https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/management/annastacia-palaszczuk–the-cautious-reformer-20161010-grz5si
*
fn^TL
Acquired by Granicus
“How to Improve your Agency’s Reputation in Three Simple Steps
Tara Lerman, Content Fellow at GovDelivery
“Once your agency starts to impact more and more people, the cynics begin to matter less.”
https://granicus.com/blog/create-relate-and-communicate-how-to-improve-your-agencys-reputation-in-three-simple-steps/
*
NSW Local council residents unaware profit bkeeds to US or UK. I tentacle of Granicus Inc:
Orwellian double speak;
“Sutherland Shire Housing Strategy 2041
“Planning for future housing needs without sparking general community opposition”
https://granicus.com/sutherland-shire-housing-strategy-2041/
*
fn^Citizen
“Increased Payment for Citizen Document Access Solution
“Supervisors voted 5-0 to approve a contract amendment with Granicus, Inc. to increase the payment limit by $175,000 to a new payment limit of $825,816 for the continued hosting of the Citizen Document Access Solution.”
https://contracostaherald.com/category/environment/page/4/
*
I don’t have time to make it concise. JQ, you’re standing in it.
KT2: – “Geoff Miell, I nominate you to represent us on a Central West “Regional Expert Panel””
Thanks for the ‘heads-up’. I’ve flagged the link for the NSW Government seeking applications for the Central West Regional Expert Panel with someone else I think would be a better fit.
Professor Kevin Anderson from the Tyndall Centre at Manchester University, in the YouTube video titled Kevin Anderson methane is a transition fuel to 4°C, published Jun 5, IMO was telling it bluntly, including:
0:09:32: “So, there’s lots of money around the world being spent on gas, erm, and the rhetorical language around it is that it’s a transition fuel – it’s, it’s probably accurate – it’s a transition fuel to four degrees Centigrade of warming. It’s not a transition to 1.5 to 2 degrees Centigrade of warming.”
0:19:08: “To do it in the timeframe to stay within 1.5, I disagree with virtually all the economists on this that it’s going to be – enthusiastic economists for this transition – I don’t think it will be cheap. I think it will be very, very, very, very costly, but much less cost than not doing it. I think we’ve underplayed the cost of making these transitions. There’s not just the economic cost, but the social disruption that is required, particularly in the wealthy parts of the world, as we rapidly make this transition. Now if we’d made it earlier, we could have made it in a, in a much more sort of measured, careful, you know, staged fashion. When you’re faced with an emergency, the emergency measures typically are challenging, and we are in a climate emergency. As I say, every month we’re using just under one per cent of the remaining carbon budget.”
0:25:38: “And I find it disturbing and interesting in the Law that we still, that we will protect things that are causing incredible damage, and we will prosecute things that are trying to stop that damage being caused.”
0:28:13: “The scale of the emergency we face today is considerably more challenging than it was in 2015. It was very challenging in 2015. But, you know, there were options then that you had, which are now off the table. And every year we choose to fail, or – and I think this is an important build point – every year we choose to do something that makes us feel OK and we say we are making a step in the right direction, the point, the reason I’m raising that is because I regularly hear that, ‘well that’s better than doing nothing’, but it’s still a step backwards. A step in the right direction which isn’t a large enough step in the right direction, is a step backwards, just not as far back as it would otherwise have been. So, we are not making progress – we’re just not regressing as fast as we could be. And so I think that’s important, to bear that in mind, that every year we fail we go backwards and it gets more challenging. And so the scale of that emergency now, the sorts of changes that are required are so deeply profound – I mean they were very difficult then, but they’re – they, they beg questions about every single facet of contemporary society. But do we hear that debate amongst the people that are controlling the, the established message? Of course we don’t. We don’t hear anything like that at all. And we don’t hear enough people, although there is more people now, decrying the nonsense that is spouted by, by that establishment, by those elites.”
0:33:56: “In 2022, that a highly educated member of the British Cabinet can say that, can suggest we should reclassifying gas as green fuel tells us something about how come the status quo is very much locked-in to the old way of doing things.”
0:37:40: “If we carry on as we are today, then the prospects don’t look promising; look at them and they look really dire. But we don’t have to carry on as we are today. And then what some people say, and this is what the really deep doomsters’ sort of view of this is that we are already past all the tipping points. But what I like about the uncertainty in the science, and I don’t mean the uncertainty about, you know: is climate change caused by reducing, by er, by emitting carbon dioxide – all of that we know – but we don’t know exactly what the response to the climate is going to be, so we don’t know whether we’ve passed the tipping points, or not. And because we don’t know that, then it’s worth trying everything we can to avoid passing them. The lower the temperature that we can hold to, the less chance that you pass tipping points. And so, you know, it’s, it’s almost an, an excuse or a defence for inaction, to say we are too late. But we don’t know we’re too late. The science tells us that the more CO₂ and other greenhouse gases we put in the atmosphere, the higher the temperature goes, and we know that with a high degree of certainty. What the science can’t tell us is exactly where these tipping points are, and so there is everything to play for, because as the temperature goes up, the chance of passing tipping points is greater. When you pass some of these tipping points, they may well cascade, and then, then you get into a position where, well, what, what do we do now? And I don’t think there is anything we know we could do. And so there’s everything to play for now. And so, that’s a very hopeful narrative. That’s a narrative that, it doesn’t matter whether we have passed tipping points, which is because we don’t know, but we know the consequences are dire if we do, and therefore, what, what action does that leave you with? Everything you can possibly do today, and that’s what we should be doing, but instead what are we doing? Nothing what we can do today, other than increasing the eloquent speeches, and more rhetorical technical salvations in the future.”
Guy Rundle makes it perfectly clear why the tax cuts won’t/shouldn’t be reversed;
“Let’s face it — Labor would be politically mad to go back on the cuts. It would get the Coalition back into the game in an instant. At the moment, it can languish indefinitely. Labor has its eyes on the prize now: a decade in power, with the foundations laid in the first 18 months of this government.”
James – container traffic China-Australia does not do Shanghai-Sydney. It does Shanghai-Singapore-Perth-Melbourne-Sydney-Brisbane-Shanghai (sometimes the reverse). Melbourne is Australia’s largest port. Singapore to pick up Australia-bound containers dropped there on the east-west routes. So long as they can re-charge the batteries along the way, not a problem. Bulk cargoes are harder, and trans-Pacific is a long haul (eg Shanghai-Long Beach).
James Wimberley: – “Earlier I reported that methanol seems to have already won the race to green shipping, beating out liquid hydrogen and ammonia. I was a bit premature; turns out that batteries have a good chance too.”
Thanks for that info. I’d suggest a system standardizing battery packs that when discharged can be removed from vessels at ports and replaced with fully-charged packs that can then be added, would be the way to go. Steady charging of the removable battery packs at a slower rate would be done onshore, maximising battery pack longevity, allowing the vessel to have a quick turnaround with limited duration at ports. Something akin to the Janus Electric solution for heavy trucks.
https://www.januselectric.com.au/
“Let’s face it — Labor would be politically mad to go back on the cuts. It would get the Coalition back into the game in an instant.”
How does setting up a flat-tax regime for $45,000-$200,000 endear you to the large majority of the electorate who vote centre-left? It is so regressive that it can make your toes curl … apart from adding to the budget deficit.
I think there should be two tiers between average wages (say $52,000) and $200,000. But that’s just me, although I think there are good economic reasons for increasing taxes (but not politically achievable it seems). I guess we can always just “print” more money.
rog.
Do you know many voters the stage 3 tax cut effects?
And where?
What is the difference between breaking a promise now or then?
NSW valuable Covid Consequences over 2 years.
*
“Sax Institute Covid 45 & Up Study
[“The 45 and Up Study is Australia’s largest ongoing study of health and ageing, made possible thanks to the contribution of our 250,000 NSW participants.”]
COVID Data Hub now available
9 August 2022.
“Over the past two years, the 45 and Up Study has helped inform the NSW pandemic response with its COVID Insights surveys and related questionnaires. This data is highly valuable to researchers and will soon be available through a new resource – the COVID Data Hub.
“In 2020, more than 45,000 participants completed COVID questionnaires, with around 32,000 people then enrolling in a series of five surveys (the COVID Insights surveys) which continued to March 2022. We have combined all this data in the COVID Data Hub.NSW policy changes during the pandemic
“The COVID Data Hub will be available to approved research in the coming months. It can be linked with all 45 and Up Study data along with other administrative data. The Hub offers snapshots of health and wellbeing during the pandemic across a range of areas, including mental health, lifestyle and access to health services as well as insights into changing attitudes and behaviours.
“By following the same people over time, researchers can examine the impact of lockdowns, changes in public health messaging, extent of health care appointments missed, variation in the pandemic’s effect on mental health across areas and population groups. Here’s a peek at what our participants are reporting on ‘long COVID’, mental health and more.
“New data on ‘long COVID’
“The fifth and final survey was in the field in March 2022, several months after the Omicron variant of COVID-19 was first detected and after restrictions began easing across NSW.
“For respondents who tested positive to COVID-19, 7% reported persistent symptoms that lasted longer than three months.
“The most common persistent symptom was fatigue, affecting 82% of people with long COVID, followed by a cough (43%) and poor memory and concentration (40%).
“Telehealth is popular but missed care still high
“The March 2022 survey also revealed that telehealth has become a popular medical service, with 39% of participants using it in the past three months and almost two-thirds of them finding it as good as an in-person appointment. The most common type of telehealth appointment was with a GP.
“However, missed health care is still at raised levels, especially for women. In the latest survey, 18% of women reported missed healthcare in the past month, compared to 13% of men. That is down from the 30% of women (and 21% of men) reporting missed care in September-November 2021 (reported in Survey 4), but it’s at the same level as June-September 2021 (reported in Survey 3).
“The most frequently missed care was dental, then GP and specialist appointments. One in 10 people missed a cancer screening appointment. Data about missed care is valuable as researchers can examine its impact on health outcomes.
“More mental health impacts than a year ago
“In the March 2022 survey, 44% of survey participants felt their mental health had deteriorated because of the pandemic. That figure was a large rise from the 32% in June-September 2021.
“Across the series of surveys, more women reported poorer mental health than men – half of all female participants reported that their mental health had deteriorated in the March 2022 survey.
“The March 2022 survey revealed that 11% of the general population were intensely lonely, which is an increase from the 9% who reported that in the third survey. People with a disability are most affected by loneliness, 24% intensely lonely and 41% with some degree of loneliness.
“Reported quality of life has remained relatively high over the past 12 months. In the March 2022 survey, 74% had excellent or very good quality of life, compared to 73% in June-September 2021 (Survey 3). Those figures are lower than the 78% of people reporting excellent or very good quality of life in July-December 2020 (Survey 1). There is also substantial variation between different groups, with markedly worse findings for those with disability and those living alone.
“The 45 and Up Study is an open access resource. The new 45 and Up COVID Data Hub will include information collected in the five COVID Insights surveys and the 2020 COVID supplement which was completed by 45,000 participants. This data can be linked to other survey and administrative health data available through the 45 and Up Study, for unique research into the ongoing effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health and well-being of the population. ”
Find out more
Find out more about the 45 and Up COVID Data Hub here.
To enquire about accessing the COVID Data Hub, please email
45andUp.Research@saxinstitute.org.au
Find out more about 45 and Up COVID Insights surveys here.
Find out more about the 45 and Up Study here.
https://www.saxinstitute.org.au/news/covid-data-hub-now-available/?
“Graph ‘b’ projects that price reductions to “near future“ battery technology are expected to roughly double the economic viability and range of electrified containerships.”
Where will the large amounts of electricity come from to recharge these ship batteries in ports around the world? If it comes from gas or coal fired power stations – as it still must in many places – what have you gained in converting the ships to run on batteries?
I appreciate that bunker fuel is dirtier than natural gas, but many power stations are still coal-fired.
“but many power stations are still coal-fired.”
Or not.
We’ve been dudded. And are fools. Indian co + banks + vultures + lax corporation law in Australia. Groan. And Adani gets the spoils!
Australia’s newest coal fired power station, take a bow. 2009 to zero in 11yrs …
“Meanwhile, Sumitomo and Kansai in 2020 wrote the value of the Bluewaters power station down to zero as an onslaught from renewable energy and coal supply woes took a toll.”
Everybody knew since 2014. But – Vultures …
…”Instead, the banks sold their debt stakes at a discount to distressed debt specialists — the so-called vulture funds — including Oaktree Capital and Elliot Management.”
From:
“WA’s biggest private power station moves to take over loss-making, Indian-owned coal mine
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-31/power-plant-seeks-control-of-indian-owned-wa-coal-mine/101391152
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanco_Infratech
https://reneweconomy.com.au/imminent-failure-lanco-infratechs-investment-griffin-coal-20014/
“Stranded Out West: The Imminent Failure of Lanco Infratech’s Investment In Griffin Coal” (pdf)
Click to access Lanco-Infratechs-Griffin-Coal-Pty-Ltd_A-Western-Australian-stranded-fossil-fuel-asset_Dec2014.pdf
https://ieefa.org/articles/report-stranded-out-west-imminent-failure-lanco-infratechs-investment-griffin-coal
Australia has been selling its resources too cheaply since 1788 – and allowing huge foreign ownership from essentially the same date. Nothing seems to change much. We could have been hugely wealthy if a few things had been done better – as it is we’re a paddock, a mine, and a beach … and Australians get a few crumbs off the table. Sad.
JQ, Ernestine, James, Ikon, Harry et all;
Any fair economic system suggestions, or is “fair” the wrong word?
“But given that Jeff Bezos has $200 billion, there must be some world in which $200 billion more could have gone to consumers through lower prices.
“I don’t know what a fair economic system that takes this model into account would look like.”
*
Scott Alexander said;
“The problem with the neoliberal argument is that it gives the first person to fill a niche credit for the niche’s entire existence, not just for filling it earlier than it otherwise would have been filled. Just because Jeff Bezos solved Internet retail two years earlier than the person who would have done it if he was never born, he gets to collect rent on all transactions forever, while that other guy gets nothing.
…
This . . . maybe still isn’t a good argument to tax Jeff Bezos or distribute his money to his employees? Taken seriously, it implies that the only person who Bezos has “stolen” any money from is the second-best entrepreneur.
“But that isn’t exactly right. Suppose that if Bezos hadn’t existed, …”…
https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/billionaires-surplus-and-replaceability
Astralcodexten swamps comments. Too many to read! 6hrs to reach 422 comments.
I suspect a generous personal wealth limit of $50 million dollars coupled with strong anti-monopoly laws would make an appreciable positive improvement to innovation and equality.
“I don’t know what a fair economic system that takes this model into account would look like.”
I would call it democratic socialism …but perhaps that’s just me.
Ikon. If $200bn value/ 200m lives saved globally over 10yrs maybe >1%? What shiuld we pay Elanor Ostrom or mRNA seekers? Or Mr Internet?
Cargill, with laissez-faire, private property? + 2nd LessonOr nicer wages? UBI. etc.JG.. Limited companies. Trusts – ha! Orwell nailed it with nuspeak.
Not so much politcal, market / trade system.
Ernestine at one time posted about an economic system I hadn’t heard of and – oops – just cant recall or find.
Gotta run, Mad as Hell on soon! Last season. Last week was a cracker. Thanks sdomo.
Thanks, James!! Great news!
Meanwhile at the union summit the ACTU look likely to collaborate with the Albanese government (and the unrepresented opposition) to keep wages low indefinitely. Indeed the ACTU and the business groups agree substantially with increasing the migration quota to around 200,000.
Businesses and farmers don’t want to limit profits and urgently seek to avoid an increase in wages by increasing the supply of labour in the economy through increased migration. Even the standard argument that having more migrants will boost demand is not being trotted out – it cannot be since demand is strong so no need for immigrants for that reason..
The better option. Allow wages to rise to prevent labour shortages. That will meet the skills shortage in a natural way and might even end the hypocritical cant from labour leaders that wage growth has been too sluggish. The hypocrisy here is that government policy will itself perpetuate the slow wages growth.
I guess you can always drag out that old chestnut that bringing in skilled workers will have effects in boosting demand for unskilled workers so having more immigrant doctors will boost the demand for unskilled Aussie doctor’s receptionists! etc etc.
Alternatively you can argue that increasing the supply of labour won’t influence wages as an empirical fact. This is akin to the nonsense that minimum wages wont have any effect on unemployment. The Ripley’s “Believe-it-or-not” School of Economics.
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/unions-say-chance-of-agreement-with-business-on-migration-20220831-p5be9q.html