Archives For General

Remembrance Day 2008

November 11, 2008 — 4 Comments

Lest We Forget.

Until the day I die I’ll always remember that my great-grandfather died on the Western Front, and that my Grandmother lost her father at such a young age, and her speaking of it when I was young (she has since passed on). We are the last generation to have met or have spent time with those who remember the Great War, but let us hope that future generations will never forget the sacrifices made by an entire generation for freedom.

The one fact that always startles me from an Australian perspective: 216,000 Australian casualties at a time the country had a population of 4.5 million. They say that no town was left without a casualty, and that 1 in 6 Australian families were directly affected, and that everyone knew someone in that total. There are towns today in France that still proudly fly the Australian flag in remembrance of their sacrifices.

In General
permalink

Dear Kevin Rudd, Re: The Car Industry

November 10, 2008 — 19 Comments

An open letter to the Prime Minister of Australia

Hon Kevin Rudd MP
Prime Minister
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600

Dear Prime Minister

I read with interest today your Government’s $3.4 billion proposal to bail out the Australian car industry. No doubt your Government is concerned about the welfare of the unionized employees at these plants, and in related parts industries.

While some may argue that the payment is corporate welfare, your decision follows the billions spent previously by the Howard Government, and before that under Keating and Hawke on the industry as well, so it certainly is not without precedent.

However, my concern as a taxpayer extends to the Government handing over money to these companies for nothing in return. Mitsubishi received significant contributions from both State and Federal Governments, and yet still closed their Australian manufacturing plant, and I take from the current round of funding that there is little or no guarantee that Ford, Holden (General Motors) or Toyota won’t do the same thing.

My suggestion to you Prime Minister is that instead of handing over this money without condition, that the Australian Government would be better placed acquiring one of these companies instead. Not the Australian concerns, but the American holding companies.

The market capitalisation as of close of business Friday for General Motors was $2.8 billion USD, and Ford $4.87 billion. General Motors would be the more appealing acquisition of the two, due to the lower acquisition cost, its historic relationship with Australia (producing the first locally made car) and the fact that it actually makes a half decent local product, unlike Ford over the last 20-30 years.

As taxpayers it is not unreasonable to expect something in return for the investment of our money. Despite being of the right, the American Government has taken stakes in banks as part of the financial bailout. For an Australian Government of the left to take a similar step in the car industry would not be difficult by comparison.

I look forward to your consideration of this idea, and hopefully one day seeing the Australian flag fly over the automotive plants of General Motors in Michigan.

Yours sincerely
Duncan Riley
CEO Nichenet Pty Ltd, Editor The Inquisitr.

In General ,
permalink

An end to the politics of old

November 5, 2008 — 3 Comments

Barack Obama will be the 44th President of the United States of America. Voters have rejected the negative politics of McCain over something more positive.

Today’s coverage on The Inquisitr

Obama Victory Speech

Obama Wins Election

CNN Hologram

Exit polls show economy number one election issue (update: Obama up)

Election Results

In General
permalink

We’re F*cked

November 4, 2008 — 5 Comments

So on Melbourne Cup day, the Reserve Bank of Australia cut interest rates by 75 basis points, or 0.75%, on top of the 100 basis points, or 1% cut last month.

We’re f*cked. Nearly 2% in 2 months….nothing I can remember in my life time. Massive economic stimulus attempt that could have only been based on figures that showed Ausrtalia sliding to a halt, or going backwards. It was nice to grow up through a recession, then beyond that. Gen Y and Z, welcome to my youth!!!!!!! 😉

In General
permalink

How Obama is to the right in an Australian sense

November 2, 2008 — 55 Comments

The 2008 US Presidential election is getting unprecedented coverage in Australia. The Presidential debates were covered live here on major stations, and our television news, online news, radio and newspaper news is giving the elections serious coverage.

But how do the two sides compare in an Australian sense? Not everyone in Australia is following the news, and the depth of understanding in probably weaker again.

Traditionally Australian political parties have affiliations to American parties (often formal), for example the Liberal Party of Australia (our conservative party) has ties to the Republicans, the Labor Party to the Democrats. This split is reflected amongst newspaper columnists as well, for example Andrew Bolt is fiercely pro-Republican, anti-Democrat, but the divide has never made sense to me, because the policy divide isn’t anywhere similar to the Australian picture.

My wife recently told my mother to think of the two sides this way: The Democrats are the Liberal Party, and the Republicans Family First, because both are to the right in an Australian sense, but one is clearly more religious. It’s a generalization to be sure, but lets test it.

How Obama compares to the last Howard Government (and where applicable the Rudd Government)

I’m a former Howard Government staffer, as was my wife, so I’ve got some grounding in what the Liberal Party did in office. These points may generalize a little bit, but they are accurate without always referencing every fine detail.

Healthcare

Howard: supported universal healthcare through the Australian Medicare system. Offered tax incentives to those who took private cover

Obama: doesn’t favor state sanctioned universal healthcare, but is looking at a fallback option outside of the private system, an affordable health care pool

Result: Obama to the right of Howard

Defence (or Defense in US English)

Howard: troops in Iraq (and generally supported Bush), but most Australian troops in Afghanistan. Pro ANZUS

Obama: favors pulling out Iraq, increasing troops in Afghanistan. Pro Anzus

Rudd: favors pulling out Iraq, has kept troops Afghanistan. Pro Anzus

Result: Obama is to the left of Howard only on Iraq. May be more interventionist then Rudd

Industry policy

Howard: spent billions on propping up car industry, subsidising other industries. Reduced tariffs but didn’t remove them all.

Obama: talks about investing in industry, retooling car industry.

Result: about the same

Free Trade

Howard: started signing free trade agreements later into his term, previously more a unilateralist. Generally free trade, although conceded may conditions in various FTA’s.

Obama: wants conditional FTA’s. Regarded as anti-free trade, but hasn’t ruled them out

Result: hard. Obama wants different conditions in FTAs, but Howard regularly had conditions as well, so Howard wasn’t a pure free trader either. Obama slightly to the left, but not by a lot.

Farm policy

Howard: unprecedented socialist on farm policy, billions in subsidies.

Obama: not clear. Farm subsidies aren’t talked about much because generally both sides in the US support them.

Result: about the same.

Welfare

Howard: cracked down on unemployment benefits, but didn’t abolish them. Number of disability pensioners ballooned. Australia still has a generous social welfare system

Obama: wants the state to look after people more, but hasn’t proposed Australian style system.

Result: Obama to the right.

Environment

Howard: soft on global warming, but backed clean coal and some alternative industries.

Obama: strong on global warming, talks about investing billions in green energy.

Rudd: talks strong on global warming, but hasn’t done much yet.

Result: the environment isn’t necessarily a left/ right divide anymore, but Obama to the left

Taxation policy

Howard: cut taxes at all levels while in power. Did offer tax cuts to middle class only at times. Didn’t offer relief in Fringe Benefits Tax but some Capital Gains Tax relief

Obama: will cut tax for middle class, increase for wealthy, but rates are still much lower then Australia

Result: actually about the same. Howard did target tax cuts for the middle class, and the wealthy still pay tax at higher rates.

Education

Local/ State issue in both countries at some levels.

Howard: increased funding in education, talked about choice and standards. Tax help for early childhood education/ daycare.

Obama: wants to increase funding in education, supports “charter schools.” Wants to target early childhood education.

Result: about the same. Obama more to the right on some things, left on others.

Higher Education

Howard: supported HECS/ HELP, the system where University students don’t pay upfront, but pay back the Government when they earn, although increased fees significantly. Government still major backer of University system

Obama: wants to make College more affordable. Is not proposing a HECs style scheme from what I’ve read. College in the US primarily private or nonprofit run.

Result: Obama is a shift to the left from Bush, but is still way to the right compared to Howard.

Retirement/ pensions

Howard: free market superannuation where savings are invested with fund managers. However, increased the compulsory rate employers must contribute to super.

Obama: anti-free market 401ks, but isn’t proposing compulsory employer contributions from what I can read

Result: about the same. Howard increased taxes on employers and forced them to contribute more to retirement savings, yet was to the right on where the money should go.

In General , ,
permalink

Proposition 8

October 28, 2008 — 47 Comments

California votes next week on Proposition 8, a motion that would outlaw gay marriage (that’s the short version, I know it’s more complicated than that).

It’s great to see Louis Gray and Jesse Stay, both Mormons openly discuss the issue in light of the Mormon church bankrolling the Yes to Proposition 8 campaign (one figure I saw was 40%).

I’ve said this in the past, but I will repeat myself, so bare with me.

I’ve got no issue that religious teaching dictates that marriage is between a man and a woman. Religions are entitled to hold those views, as are those who follow them.

Where I have an issue is with religious doctrine being dictated to the state, no matter where you live in the world (the issue is just as topical in Australia).

If marriage is a sacred religious institution, then surely we should outlaw civil marriages as well. Why aren’t the very same people calling for a ban on gay marriage calling for a ban on the state marrying anyone, after all, if marriage is the exclusive domain of religion, and defined exclusively by religious teaching, then the state has no role in marrying people.

Sound extreme? Well so is dictating to the state who they can and cannot marry in a non-religious ceremony. No laws that I’m aware of are forcing churches to marry GLBT people (least most places). The laws of the state should always be based in non-discrimination, even if religion isn’t.

Although I’ve become more libertarian as I’ve gotten older, it was this argument that originally saw me shift in support of gay marriage several years ago, back in a time where my natural inclination may have been in favor of a ban.

Think about it.

In General
permalink

FriendFeed and Politics

October 27, 2008 — 16 Comments

Blue.

That’s not just the logo color of FriendFeed, it’s also the political slant.

Blue though in the US sense, not the rest of the world, where blue is actually the conservative color.

Mark Rizzn Hopkins announced Friday that he’d had enough and was quitting FriendFeed. The reaction was mostly negative.

I don’t agree with the criticism. If I was Mark, I would have quit sooner.

Mark did make one mistake though: the reason he gave in his post wasn’t a good one. The Obama birth certificate story was being pushed by an anti-semitic loon that a good number of hard right-wing sites had disowned. It had also been disproved many, many times. But hey, sometimes we call it wrong, and not everyone knows all the facts leading up to it. Hell, could have been me making the wrong call there. The Obama birth certificate story polluted Mark’s general issue, which is a shame, so lets ignore it.

Politics on FriendFeed has gotten nasty at times, and even stupid. Most of the nasty stuff did start on the right, at least among the threads I followed or posted. I even blocked a few people along the way. But finger pointing in one direction isn’t fair when it should go in both directions, because some of those preaching intolerance can be intolerant themselves.

Then there’s this really weird…or should I say stupid hate the rich meme that’s come up of late, driven in part by Alex Scoble. If you ever wanted to prove that Obama supporters are socialists, read Alex’s stuff. Dumb stuff, like the rich are only rich because they already have money, and should be taxed so they are equal, or people shouldn’t be allowed to make interest on money because that’s not a productive use of money.

Scary stuff, and far to the left.

I shouldn’t generalize because most people are reasonable, it’s just sometimes they get caught up in a myopia of thought that they can’t see the middle line.

Here’s a great endorsement for Obama today from FT.com. Middle line, explains the weaknesses but argues why on the balance he’s the better candidate. Similar message we’ve heard from some on the right who have endorsed him as well. These are arguments I can relate to, and many people in the middle will as well.

The thing is, it’s wrong that Mark felt the need to quit FriendFeed; not wrong that he did it, but wrong that people couldn’t be more accommodating of his point of view and he felt his only recourse was to quit.

I don’t agree with Mark on everything, but we agree on far more than we disagree. I nearly unsubscribed from his Google Reader shares last week because he shares and reads the same stuff I do. I know for example that his leanings are Libertarian (like mine), but he’s a little clouded by the socialist rhetoric pointed at Obama. If I was 10 years younger I know I would have made the same calls Mark does.

Don’t lynch Mark for his decision. Consider it an opportunity to improve your discourse and respect towards others. Yes, some on the hard right go over board, but you will always be better placed taking the high moral ground of civility in response. And remember, the truth is sometimes in the middle.

In General
permalink

Review: Without Warning (America is Gone) John Birmingham

October 27, 2008 — 11 Comments

This post includes spoilers. I’ll start with my conclusion (which includes the basic premise…which is available online anyway), then warn when we get to the real spoilers part. I finished the book 2 weeks ago and have been meaning to write this ever since, so my recollection may not be quite as fresh as it was.

Summary
John Birmingham follows up his excellent alternate reality come Sci-Fi series the Axis of Time with a book that posses the question: what happens if America was to disappear?

In this book, America (except some small parts), parts of Canada, Mexico and Cuba disappear in an unexplained energy bubble that wipes out people, but not places.

Here’s the official teaser for the book:

2003: In Paris, an assassin wakes from a coma. In Kuwait, American forces are assembled for their invasion of Iraq. In the pristine forest of the Cascades, a lone hiker watches a plane fly into the side of a mountain. And just north of the Equator, a modern-day pirate, a rogue Tasmanian, is witness to the unspeakable. A wave of inexplicable energy has slammed into America. And destroyed it. In one instant, all around the world, from Cairo to Canberra, things will never be the same.

Like Birmingham’s previous books, the narrative includes a strong emphasis on the military, and he’s been likened previously to Australia’s version of Tom Clancy in previous outings. Clancy isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, but I’ve long been a Clancy fan so I easily picked up Birmingham’s books. This one doesn’t disappoint. His geopolitical plays consider the what if in details that show researched thought, and like the previous Birmingham books, I couldn’t put it down. Recommended reading, although American’s will obviously find the premise deeply disturbing. It’s out now in Australia, and goes on sale elsewhere in January.

SPOILERS******* Don’t read any more if you don’t want to know more in the book.

Like the Axis of Time series before it, Birmingham takes a what if approach to this series. The “disappearance” may be a secret weapons test gone wrong or a terrorist attack, we don’t know. Where the premise lets us down compared to the last series is believability; yes, the thought of a multinational force from the future being sucked back in time to WW2 was a stretch in the Axis of Time novels, but it was about a future event then affecting the past, and the issues with time there in. Without Warning takes place just before the star of the second Iraq war, so it takes an extra leap of faith in the what if stakes. I understand why on certain fronts this premise was used, but I don’t believe it was necessary; the time placement may have been better suited in the near future without a specific date, making it a what if as opposed to a what if + alternate history book.

The environmental and political plays are well considered. Extreme greenies love to consider that a world without people would be a better place, but in Birmingham’s world without America, the lack of people creates an environmental crisis without parallel. Without people, America burns, including its nuclear reactors, causing a global nuclear winter that affects the rest of the world in serious ways. The political plays can be a stretch, particularly the narrative around France, and the idea of a race/ religious war; while not unbelievable in the book, it shows Birmingham’s right wing leanings. The plays with Britain, Israel, the Middle East and what’s left of the America’s is far more believable.

The various character streams are strong and mostly believable. You feel for the characters, you get inside their heads, and Birmingham paints a brilliant picture in words. There was one exception though: Caitlin in France. Birmingham uses his characters as a way of relating the broader picture in each location (Middle East, Gitmo, Hawaii, Seattle etc…) and as a tool it works well for him, but the French stream, except nearly right at the end of the novel was perhaps the worst character development ever delivered by Birmingham. I’ve never skipped pages in his books before, but it got to the stage that I did everytime the story switched to France, because page after page would describe the characters torment and a convoluted spy story line that is never really explained in the context of the book. I’m not suggesting everyone shouldn’t read these parts, but the Paris story line can be skipped until the introduction of the journalist in the last third of the book.

The ending wasn’t great, and set the story up for a sequel which Birmingham is already talking about writing. It’s a BIG book for a Birmingham novel, and an awful lot to cover, and the need to flip ahead into the future is understandable, but it didn’t conclude strongly.

One last thing: the energy wave is described in the book as being red, but on the cover, it’s blue…..

Overall though I’m happy to have read it, and I’m looking forward to the next one 🙂

In General
permalink

America! Fuck No!

October 24, 2008 — 15 Comments

Something really strange is happening in America in 2008: American’s, their leaders, and the press seem to have woken up to the fact that the rest of the world doesn’t like them quite so much anymore.

The references to America’s standing in the world have been peppered throughout the election campaign, most regularly from Obama, but also in the recent slew of newspaper editorials as well. The NY Times in support Obama had this to say:

The United States is battered and drifting after eight years of President Bush?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s failed leadership. He is saddling his successor with two wars, a scarred global image….

Both presidential candidates talk about strengthening alliances in Europe and Asia, including NATO, and strongly support Israel. Both candidates talk about repairing America?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s image in the world….

There would appear to be a shift away from the America! Fuck Yeah! ethos so nicely put in Team America World Police, a blind idea by all Americans that they are the best of the best, superior to the rest of the world, and that every other country should be like them.

For once, some Americans at least now care that the world thinks less of them.

The shift isn’t huge; the acceptance that America needs to play nicer in world affairs and earn respect hasn’t fully replaced the blind ideology of American supremacy over all.

Oddly enough, it’s Obama who calls upon this idea of American supremacy more than McCain, at least in the speeches I’ve seen from both.

I cringe every time Obama says that his story would only be possible in America, because it’s so patently untrue, and so patently populist crap pandering to base nationalism. Obama’s story could have been possible in any number of countries, from my own Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, western Europe, South America (economically less so, but the racial mix most definitely)…and numerous other places.

There is of course nothing wrong with being proud of your country, but there is a difference in blindly believing that your country is the best of the best, and that you a superior in every way, and that others do not share or enjoy the same freedoms and benefits you do.

The numerous times I’ve been asked on my trips to the United States when I’d be moving there (honestly) I’ve responded that I am happy with the country I live in, and although I like visiting places, I don’t feel an urge to leave because some how (in at least some of these people’s minds) that America is better.

The difference is in grounded reality. I love Australia, but I know it isn’t perfect, for example these words could be blocked soon from being seen by my fellow countrymen due to our Governments inability to understand free speech. But there are many positives as well. Americans tend to overstate the positives and ignore the negatives, or downplay them more than people in other countries. One small example: homeless people aren’t an issue regularly discussed there, but every time I visit I’m horrified by the huge number of beggars in some cities on every corner.

Health care: how exactly can the richest country in the history of the world not look after every person? It’s not socialism to keep people alive: it’s loving thy neighbor, it’s looking after everyone because you should morally do so.

It’s a positive trend that the United States is finally taking into account how others see it. It may also be reflective of looking inwards, and realizing that all is not perfect in the land of the free. There’s still some way to go, but finally America might be saying Fuck No, we can and should do better, and that we are not perfect.

In General
permalink

Now to watch the GOP implode

October 16, 2008 — 3 Comments

So Obama won the debate, at least according to the polls, and I’m yet to find a reasoned argument saying he didn’t. He was cool, calm and collected, where as McCain was angry, real angry at times.

I made the observation during the debate that while Obama spoke more about what he would do as President, McCain spent more time attacking Obama than speaking about his plans. There were attacks in both directions, and I don’t have data to back that up, so it’s an observation only.

Obama’s no Churchill, and despite some earlier comparisons, he’s not a JFK or RFK either, at least in a debate. And yet he presents himself as the right man at the right time: a man who is smart, confident in himself, and remains oh so cool under pressure.

The fun part now will be watching the GOP implode as they realize the election is lost. They were hoping that McCain would win the debate, and giving polling showing Obama with a double digit lead, it was really their last serious throw of the dice. They lost.

The signs of a GOP implosion had already started before the debate. Reports of disagreements between Palin and McCain, a number of high profile conservatives coming out to support Obama, pulling ads in previously battleground states because they’ve conceeded they can’t win them. Odd leaks, the starting of finger pointing, and even some of the right wing blogs are starting to join in, instead of just towing the party line as usual.

There is still a slim chance of the election being won by McCain. Obama could slip up, but those chances are slim. Reagan came from a similar behind position to McCain 3 weeks out to beat Carter in 1980. But Reagan also won the last debate.

The only question now is how bad will the implosion be before November 4.

In General
permalink