Whoever wins Australia loses

I am Dreading Saturday. I will have to put a number next to Abbott and Rudd knowing that whoever wins Australia loses.

There have been poor candidates for high office in the past but this election really is scraping the bottom of the gene pool.

It is a choice between bad policy, lies and economic vandalism and bad policy, lies and economic vandalism in an election dominated by biased media polling. This should not happen in a place like Australia.

I have decided to vote for Rudd only because if Abbott is elected it will be the return of the Australian cringe, and overseas Australia will be confirmed as Bogan Central. I have dual citizenship so if I travel overseas I will claim to be British rather than admit I belong to a country that has Abbott as Prime Minister.

Advertisements

Politicians, know your place.

There is an old Taoist saying that the along the lines that the better the government the less the people notice them. What does that say about Australia’s politicians?

The place of the politician is to legislate on what the people want, not on how it should be done. The first needs to be the will of the people, and the second, how it should be done, they have no idea.

An example of democracy working properly was the introduction of legislation to limit the pollution emitted from motor vehicles. In the 1972 Vehicle Emission Standards where introduced and progressively tightened since. (Department of Infrastructure).

The people through the parliament legislated that motor vehicle emissions would be subject to new standards and then the motor industry worked out how those standards could be met. That is democracy in action.

Neither side of the political divide in Australia has the slightest idea what to do about climate change. Nor should we expect them to. Solutions to technological problems need technological answers.

If we are to cut carbon emissions to acceptable levels the answers will come form scientists, engineers, architects and other technocrats working together. In order for technocrats to find solutions to the problem of climate change they need direction.

The way to give technocrats direction is to legislate standards. “By 2015 the maximum carbon emissions per gigawatt of power produced shall be …..”” By 2020 it shall be …… ” That is all the technocrats need to fix the problem. Given the standards that need to be met those with the expertise will find a way to meet them.

Politicians arguing about the price of carbon, or about planting more trees is totally pointless because I doubt if there is a single politician in the Australian Parliament who has the slightest understanding of the technological issues involved. Australian politicians are a bunch of Nero’s fiddling whilst the planet burns. Just pass the standards and let those who know what they are doing get on with it.

Another issue where the politicians need to step aside is the NBN. Malcolm Turnbull may have had a little to do with the internet when it was Web 1.0, a few simple text pages with no interactivity, but that was long ago. Now we have Web 2.0 with its social interaction and we are on the brink of Web 3.0.

3D printing linked to the Internet now makes it possible to download data from the other side of the world and ‘print’ (construct) the object locally. It may sound like science fiction but on-line shopping with the object we buy materialising in our homes without any physical delivery is now technically possible. What is technically possible now will be commonplace in a few years.

It will require a massive data transfer speeds for web 3.0 to work properly. Do any of our Pollies have the slightest idea how to deal with that one? Turnbull’s Web two and a half is not adequate to meet today’s needs and if the NBN is adequate when it is finished it will not be adequate for long. With the NBN it is a case of too much power is never enough.

What is need is for those who have the expertise to understand what is happening and make intelligent guesses about what form of internet we will need to be given the responsibility of telling our politicians what is really needed. If we mess this one up the results could be very expensive and potentially chaotic for Australia.

If the place of politicians in our live is examined we could well think that they are continually messing things up because they are constantly making insane statements and decisions about things they nothing about. They also prevent those who do know what they are doing getting on with it.

Our politicians know nothing about climate change. Our politicians know nothing about the Internet. They know very little about anything. But that does not prevent them from being good representatives of the people if they could remember what their position is supposed to be.

Politicians are not required to know the answers. Their job is to give direction, by way of legislation and according to the will of the people to those who do know what they are doing. Then it is the place of the politician to step aside and let it happen.

If politicians understood their place in a democracy and stop seeing politics as a stepping-stone to power we would all be much better off. We could also get things done.

Reference.

Vehicle Emissions Standards. Australian Government. Department of Infrastructure and Transport. .pdf file retrieved from https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/environment/emission/index.aspx

Problems and Distortions in Australian Politics.

Basically Australia does not have any problems, but there are many distortions that politicians are claiming to be problems for personal gain.

If a person has cancer they have a problem. If a person has a pimple on their nose they do not have a problem, they have a distortion that can be fixed without it being life threatening.

There is no cancer in the Australian economy. If you think we have problems take a look at Greece, Spain and Europe in general. That is what a problem looks like.

What about our Border Security problem?

If we want to revert to the 1960’s yellow peril mentality of hordes invading from the North remember that they would have to bring their own cut lunch and water bottle. Australia’s Border Security is that a large-scale invasion of Australia could not be physically supported by the Australian continent. It is no coincidence that we have a very small population on a very large land mass. There are physical limits to the population Australia can support. If we do nothing about climate change those limits could dramatically contract.

Invading Australia for its minerals would be an exercise in futility. It would have to be a ‘Fly in-Fly out’ invasion. The cost would be prohibitive when compared for the silly prices we are prepared to accept for our minerals.

So what is our border security ‘problem’? It is our distortion of the global problem of the large and growing number of mobile refugees fleeing tyranny.

When Rudd and Abbott claim that this is a Border Security problem they are distorting the world refugee problem into a perceived problem for the purpose of creating a political persona. Who can be the toughest in curbing the invasion from the North?

The reality is that removing the politically created distortion and acting with compassion towards refugees will do no damage to Australia, particularly to our overseas image and standing in the world community.

We pretend we care about refugee welfare and don’t want them dying at sea. Let us remember that if we had not been party to invading Iraq and Afghanistan many refugees would not know we existed.

We help invade a country, kill untold numbers of innocent civilians and advertise our supposed superior life style. We then fain concern when refugees drown trying to get here when they are displaced from their own country of problems caused in part by Australia’s actions. Australia is so hypocritical.

What about the economic problem of the ‘mining boom’ ending? If we are going to sell our minerals first we build the infrastructure and then sell the minerals. The mining boom has not ended; we are just completing the infrastructure phase.

The mining boom has been a major distortion in the Australian economy.

In WA the ‘mining boom’ meant great wealth for a few whilst the majority suffered the effects of rapidly rising rents and staggering elevations to the cost of living.

In Perth we have the phenomena of people with jobs sleeping in their cars because there they cannot find or afford accommodation. For many people it would have been better if the mining boom had not happened.

There are many social distortions in Australia that are being elevated to manufactured problems for political purposes, such as same sex marriage. Being a heterosexual male I have no desire to marry another man. What is it to do with me if other men do want to marry each other? Australia needs laws that end discrimination, not cause it.

It is a case of politicians trying to turn personal issues into political capital. If there is to be equality in Australia then it has to be total equality, not politically expedient equality.

There is one thing in Australia that I do see as a problem. That problem is that many Australians seem to be accepting of the state of Australian politics as being democratic. This is not democracy.

There is nothing democratic about the behaviour of either Rudd or Abbott. They have distorted the concept of democracy to such a degree that they have become akin to two Roman senators engaged in a bloody battle to see who will be the next Emperor. It is a contest between two men each with an insane lust for power who will turn any minor distortion into a political problem if it will buy them one vote.

Do Rudd and Abbott really represent who we are as a country? Is Australia really a place where politicians can whip up the most base of baseless non-issues into a frenzy of fear and hatred? Are Australians are so non-thinking that they can be led down non-existent paths to nowhere by the likes of Rudd and Abbott? If we are we do have a problem. A real problem.

Malcolm Fraser said last Friday that neither of the political parties deserved to win the September election. I am with you on that one Malcolm.

War with Indonesia: Rudd Copies Abbott Tactics

Kevin Rudd’s comments implying that Abbotts ‘Turning back the boats’ policy will lead to war with Indonesia has used the same tactics Abbott uses, and listen to the opposition squeal. Say something that is a lie but say it in a way that cannot be proved to be a lie and it will be believed.

In scientific terms, lie in a way that lacks the property of falseability. It cannot be proved untrue. But to many of the population not being able to prove it is untrue means it must be true.

Dirty, dirty tactics have no place in a democracy. But here we are with Abbott and Rudd facing off to see who can tell the most un-provable lies in a bid to lead the next government. No sign of any policies yet from either.

It is possible that by ‘out-Abbotting Abbott’ Rudd might lead to a Labour victory in the next election and to the end to Abbott, but for me it will be a bitter victory.

I want to see the Labour Party win the next on policies, not on who can be the biggest liar.

Fighting evil with evil only doubles the evil. If winning means becoming no better than the Liberal Party is it worth it?

In the mean while a good Prime Minister with policies that benefited ordinary Australian has her political life cut short long before the good she has, and could still have done comes to fruition. It is a dreadful waste of talent. There is also Greg Combet and others who are leaving before they have reached their full potential. Australia is the poorer for it.

I want to see the Labour Party win the next on policies, not by a contest to see who can be the biggest liar.

Is Abbott a Traitor?

What would you call a man who deliberately undermined a countries economy for personal Gain?

What would you call a man who deliberately undermines business confidence with a campaign of lies for personal gain?

What would you call a man who deliberately undermines the confidence of the population in its Government for personal gain?

What would you call a man who goes overseas and bags his country and the leader of his country for personal gain?

What do you call a man who spends over two years trying to destabilise his countries government for personal gain?

What would you call a man who reverses his position on climate change and carbon pricing for personal gain?

What would you call a man creates rubbish Action Man photo shoots to lie about his involvement in the community for personal gain?

What would you call a man who runs away and hides behind others when he gets caught out?

The one thing I would not call him is a man. This person must never become PM.