Posts
....I'm on holidays??
Those of us who are old enough to remember William Hurt's acting debut in the film, "Altered States" may also have been lucky enough to have experienced something of what the movie was about. No, not the regression to a primal state of mind, let alone physical being, as Hurt portrayed in the 1980 sci-fi, suspense flick. Although, if you've indulged in some recreational hallucinogens while experiencing sensory deprivation, you're a braver person than I am, Gungadin!
Karl Marx was a brilliant man and a deep thinker, but sadly, didn't recognise the principal flaw in his philosophy, as defined by himself. Marx believed that capitalism was simply a societal system of class divisions, which would eventually destroy itself through it's innate inequity. Other systems of societal structures - feudalism, socialism, communism as examples, are all fatally flawed just as is capitalism, due to one over-riding, inevitable, non-programmable factor. People.
I'd decided to give Archangel IV it's service today, before I head off on a camping trip next weekend. All of my cars since the 1988 Bluebird have been named Archangel. It's an inside joke. Anyway, initially intended to be an oil and filter change, remove plugs & clean and general check over of fluids, I discovered when removing the plugs that I was facing an original equipment issue. The plugs were extremely difficult to remove, in fact, I very nearly destroyed a plug spanner and pair of multi-grips in the process but out they all came with gentle but firm persuasion. I took pics of these rare birds, which you'll find below and on my Flickr site.
I have six invites to Google Wave, which appears to be Google's entry into the live chat/Twitter/discussion forum format, but with much greater expansion capacity & broader useability. Being the geek that I am, I asked a friend for an invite and today was awarded 8 more myself. I've invited my wife and step-daughter, so there's six left. The platform is currently in Beta preview mode, which means it's still being worked on and might show the odd glitch. Those of us who were Vox Beta testers will understand the growing pains a new platform undergoes in Beta.
The Copenhagen Climate Change talks were always destined to be little more than a talk-fest. If anything genuinely inspiring comes from it, I for one will be much surprised. My feeling is that what we're witnessing, even after a couple of days, is the arising of a new world order where the industrial giants, the so-called 'first world' nations, will call the tune on climate change mitigation. Second & third-world nations will simply be the lesser players. The oceanic island states will lose their sovereignty ultimately because in the grand global scheme in which the tune is called by the major industrial nations, their concerns are transitory. I'd even go so far as to state that arguments of climate change deniers will be utilised by the first world nations such that claims of inevitability will be aired by the first world in a bid to belittle the outcries of the the smaller island states. In my view, it is inevitable that Small Island Developing States (SIDS) will lose out in global climate change negotiations simply because their voices, their contributions to the global picture simply aren't loud enough or of high enough concern to the first world. There is no appeasing going on. There is only overt collaboration, collusion occurring between the major players in much the same way as the major powers in pre-world war two Europe made decisions about what could and couldn't be sacrificed in a bid to stave off war. Some might like to call that 'appeasement' but in reality, the only parties being appeased are those who are apparently conducting the 'appeasement'. There is no third party.
In my view, humanity being the pathetic species it truly is, will use events like Copenhagen to pave the path to its own destruction. The atmospheric carbon 'tipping point' used to be 350 ppm. Copenhagen is all about limiting atmospheric poisoning to 450 ppm. In ten years or less, the target will be 550 ppm, by which time the oceans will be exhibiting conclusive symptoms of acidification, polar ice will have vanished for the foreseeable geological future during the northern summer and continental ice shelves in Antarctica will have reduced by at least 20%.
It's what we do, we human beings. Habitat destruction is our forte. We lose more species every day, week and month than we realise, and most of us don't care a fig, nor have the least understanding of what it is we do. Last night on the ABC's 7:30 Report there featured an article on farmed Atlantic Salmon in Tasmania. I was struck by the words of David Suzuki addressing the National Press Club in October 2006... "You all sat here and chowed down on farmed salmon and obviously you don't give a shit about what you're putting into your body. You know what a farmed salmon is? It's filled with toxic chemicals."
It's worthwhile recalling Suzuki's words in regard to the performance of the media, national & international, in regard to the pressures humanity places on this planet daily.
He calls himself 'second-rate', but I'm afraid I prefer to listen to him than any self-interested politician colluding with other self-interested politicians when it comes to the future of my species.
How is Tony Abbott's style? He understands diplomatic sensibilities and he understands how disappointed people may be because the PM can't meet the Dalai Lama. His Holiness makes many trips to this country, so perhaps Kevin Rudd should appoint Tony Abbott as the government's official greeter? Lords know, Abbott could do with exposure to the Buddhist perception of life, the universe & everything.
The holidays are in full effect, so tell us: What's your favorite holiday song? Bonus points if you share it with us!
That's easy!!! "Hey Santa Claus" by Kevin Bloody Wilson. For all you non-Aussies, I'd caution clicking on the link.
I'm still not on Joe Hockey's 'friends' list on Facebook, so I can't comment in response to his plea to his 'followers' (he uses Twitter almost exclusively which repeats to Facebook) for opinions on the CPRS/ETS, as some of you may have seen on the evening news. I can, however, email him via Facebook and amusingly enough, always get a response. So I thought, what the hell.
As a Climate Change response, 5% to 15% over a ten year period is pathetic. As a political tool, the CPRS has been masterful and will continue to be so UNLESS those opposing it as an ideological stalking horse get out of the way and allow those with the party's best interests at heart to step up, avoid the embarrassment of a double dissolution election loss, and deny the government any further political points.
The CPRS, as I understand it, is little more than a cash cow for the government coffers, purpose designed to eradicate government debt through carbon taxation. Consumers (voters) will not be adequately compensated for the costs of a measly 5%-15% cut in emissions. There's already been a concessional cut in consumer compensation of $914m in order to secure the support of conservatives. Now they've reneged. Government is already clawing back its $900 cash handouts through covert cuts to medicare. Why should we - who will bear the brunt of government feeding itself - blithely allow the government to secure itself at least two more terms because of troglodyte conservative ideologues who do not understand true Liberalism, and don't support it.Without a viable, concerted and united Opposition, keeping government in check and holding it to the hard light of public inspection, democracy fades away leaving Australia as a one-party state. We're very close to that now. If you, as a potential leader, allow the conservative side of the party to take the stance of opposing government because opposing is what they feel they need to do, without actively and constructively contributing to the process of parliamentary democracy, then the Liberal Party ceases to be what Menzies created, is not what your stated mentor - John Stuart Mill - defined as Liberalism.
Stand up, Joe!! Grab your gonads and take the party down the road you know it needs to tread. CPRS/ETS is a mere bump in the road and one neither you, Turnbull, Minchin, Abbott or indeed any other member of the coalition parties can avoid or defeat. A Double Dissolution election loss will consign the coalition parties to the wilderness for two terms, minimum. Lords only know how government will grow in that time, how it will lose touch in that time, and how Australians in general will suffer from the inevitable arrogance and ignorance. Stand up and be counted!!
Political theatre aside, there is a plethora of confused opinion buzzing around in the ether regarding the government's Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. There's the economists view as reported by Robert Gottliebsen on Business Spectator this morning which has all the overtones of the sky falling, then there's the government spin touting the $49b package for consumers over ten years to accommodate low to middle income earners. Bearing in mind that government spin is predicated upon getting the CPRS legislation passed in the Senate this afternoon, thanks to a deal with the Liberal Party (or some of the Liberal Party, anyway) which includes a $914m decrease in consumer funding to better grease the palms of business and industry, thereby making the free market capitalists feel better about helping the planet. And that's what a CPRS or Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) if you prefer that acronym. Helping the planet. Not that the planet cares either way whether we pathetic human beings pay attention to the environment we live in. If we shit in our nest, we'll die off and the planet will recover over an eye-blink in cosmic time scales. The planet will be as if we've never existed, life will recover, evolve and move on. I find myself asking whether "a reduction of between 5 and 15 per cent in carbon emissions from 2000 to 2020" is going to have any effect whatsoever in the grand scheme, in light of the proposed cost to you & me, the consumer (and voter) here in Australia? Even the United States is seriously looking at a target in excess of ours, and given that nation's previously recalcitrant attitude to climate change, that's a huge step forward. Five to fifteen percent? Are we in any way serious? It certainly doesn't look that way. Then there's the economics of the CPRS. If you care to take the time to read the governments latest release on the proposed changes to the CPRS currently before the senate, you'll note that forward budget estimates are predicated upon a carbon price per tonne of emmission of $26/tonne. The current world carbon price is hovering around $15/tonne. Then there's the inevitable profiteering which will occur when emission permits are handed out, which if the world carbon price stays the same, will immediately attract a post-Kyoto bargain basement sell off of the freebies by those who have them to those who don't at an exorbitant price over the world mark, leading to a drop in the value of said freebies similar to what occurred in Europe in the latter part of last century. This whole issue is so complex, so convoluted, that it's little wonder the Business Council of Australia is staying quiet, preferring to be inside the political tent closer to the action, than outside complaining with no leverage when it's needed. I strongly suspect, as Gottliebsen writes, that a CPRS for Australia, when viewed through the prism of maximum 15% emissions cuts by 2020, is little more than a cash cow for government, and a damn fat one at that. Will voters be swayed by the inevitable back pocket injections come election time? We all know they will. History proves the point. I'd suggest that one way or another - either through the Senate @ 3:45pm this afternoon, or via a double dissolution early in the new year, Australia will have a carbon trading regime in place which will net the government coffers multiple millions if not billions of surplus budget dollars, clearing the GFC-inspired spending deficit in no time flat. Rudd et al will appear as Little Jack Horner on a number of fronts, the anti-Labor parties will still be wandering in the political wilderness, we'll all be grumbling about the 30% increase in our power bills and wondering when the handout subsidies promised as a part of the CPRS will arrive. But will we have achieved something momentus in response to climate change? Will this era's generations be remembered in 2079 as those who took a stand, or those who simply said, "ok, where do I sign?"
