Every once in a while you can get very lucky. You get a glimpse of what is possible, you get a chance to see the world through someone else's eyes. Allow me to tell you about my Saturday morning. Get comfy, this could take a while...
I went to collect the money for the old Yamaha. I'd arranged to go early to catch the guitar teacher before his first student arrived. When arranging the meeting, I'd mentioned how different the replacement guitar - a Maton 12 string - felt, and that I was on the point of going back to the Yammy. He said "bring it out and we'll check the set-up". I mumbled "OK".
Of course this caused me a problem. He'd want to see me play to identify why I was having trouble and, of course, the truth is I'm shit at at guitar. I can't really play properly. So I asked Mrs VVB, who gave me one of those...female...looks, and said something including the words "male", "pride", "testosterone" and "stupid". I eventually deduced I was being given a message.
Back to this morning. I waited until he opened the doors and then in I went. "Did you bring the Maton?", he asked. Ummm. Went back to car and got it. Laid the case on his desk, he took it out, played a few chords. I had never heard that depth of sound from it since I'd owned it. "Yes" he said, "it's got a wider neck and I bet you hold it like this?" demonstrating. Ummmm. "This is what you'll need to do."
Then a short anatomy lesson; how the hand works, which tendons get used and overused, how the tension goes up your arm, the elbow ('tennis elbow') and into your neck. Yep, it all sounded very, very familiar. Now in fact I knew a little of this, but to have it explained very carefully and matter-of-factly was actually somewhere between reassuring and revelatory. I started to get the feeling this bloke just loved what he did.
And that's when it started. He's playing at his nephew's wedding this afternoon (the teacher's brother being a good friend of mine, hence the connection). He showed me the set list, picked up a classical guitar and off he went. Not just playing...explaining, telling the story of the music, the composer, who else around the world plays, the different schools of thought on classical guitar, why he belongs to a particular school.
Now, I love music but I'm a legend in my own lunchtime, as already admitted. That said, I reckon I have some feel for it and I love music in my life. But this was another dimension. For a second, I saw down through the ages - why some chords provoke certain feelings and responses, why some keys have similar effects on people. The timelessness...the relationship of key to key, of note to note, that hasn't changed over all that time.
For a second, you understand how "music hath charms", why it is such a universal language. How it can bridge divides. You wonder what more it could achieve given the right conditions.
This was all pretty amazing and uplifting, for a Saturday morning especially. But as it turned out, his 9am lesson never arrived so we just got chatting. We covered a bit of politics, teaching, children, the decline of civility, and people we'd known. Why are people the way they are, why do they do the things they do. Maybe not 'they', maybe 'we'.
Concerned that not having students show up wasn't a very good business model, I asked about his plans. He's a primary school teacher as a day job but the music shop and teaching is the retirement strategy. The cash flow is less important than his own continuing progression as an artist, but more importantly the pleasure he gets from transferring his knowledge. This was so tangible I could feel it. I mentioned about my fear that he'd ask me to play something. "No" he said, "you can do that when you're ready. Drop in anytime."
I reckon we should start cloning as soon as we can, and we should clone people like this. The world would be a far better place.
12 August 2006
11 August 2006
m-m-m-m-my g-g-g-g-g-generation
But before we get to the endless self-absorption of the boomers, a point or two on the London arrests. As will have been extremely apparent over the life of VVB I am, for want of better stereotyping, wishy-washy left and as part of this I am generally opposed to war, capital punishment, 'tough love' and all similar sorts of straightener and punisher policies. This includes of course preemptive bombing of places just because they might hurt us, or be associated with people who might hurt us, in the future.
The interception of an apparent terrorist act as seems to have happened, though, should cause even those of us of similar disposition to think twice. What if they - the people who preach pre-emptive action at a 'maximum', 'strategic', level - are right? I don't think we can just dismiss it from a purely ideological standpoint. I don't like it, but I have to consider the implications both positive and negative. I'll come out with my same preferences. But I do think that all positions should be examined, and none dismissed out of hand. That's playing the 'other side's' game.
The more wishy washy thing is to just ignore it and talk about something more pleasant, and also within power to influence. The regular Friday coffee was good as usual this morning (well, the actual coffee not so, we had to order a second, stronger one) and the theme of generational differences got another run.
My Friday interlocutor mounted an argument along the lines that, contrary to usual assumptions, baby boomers are just as - if not more so - adaptable to change than Gen X and Gen Y. His example was a former colleague, now about 55, whom he had assisted in searching for a job. He is an expert in ERP, or Enterprise Resource Planning. But this bloke's advantage is that when he started out as a production scheduler, he learnt to do it manually - pad, paper, and head. Then came the calculator. Then came the computer. He learnt the new systems but, as results of having learnt in the manual era, he actually understands how it works. I know this will resonate with a couple of my readers.
And I think that applies to a lot of us in this age bracket: we do understand the basics and we have adapted to - well, actually invented - the computer age. Just don't ask me to try to work a new device - mobile phone particularly - without giving me some time. Somehow I bypassed the early computer games period and, as a result, I just find it difficult to relate to some types of screen displays that, to me, mimic games screens. Script too small. Too many doo-dads going on.
Maybe the generalisation above doesn't really apply to me. I like real stuff.
Have a good weekend. May do some brewing this weekend, and I'll try to get photos of the remaining models so I can resume the ongoing car story.
The interception of an apparent terrorist act as seems to have happened, though, should cause even those of us of similar disposition to think twice. What if they - the people who preach pre-emptive action at a 'maximum', 'strategic', level - are right? I don't think we can just dismiss it from a purely ideological standpoint. I don't like it, but I have to consider the implications both positive and negative. I'll come out with my same preferences. But I do think that all positions should be examined, and none dismissed out of hand. That's playing the 'other side's' game.
The more wishy washy thing is to just ignore it and talk about something more pleasant, and also within power to influence. The regular Friday coffee was good as usual this morning (well, the actual coffee not so, we had to order a second, stronger one) and the theme of generational differences got another run.
My Friday interlocutor mounted an argument along the lines that, contrary to usual assumptions, baby boomers are just as - if not more so - adaptable to change than Gen X and Gen Y. His example was a former colleague, now about 55, whom he had assisted in searching for a job. He is an expert in ERP, or Enterprise Resource Planning. But this bloke's advantage is that when he started out as a production scheduler, he learnt to do it manually - pad, paper, and head. Then came the calculator. Then came the computer. He learnt the new systems but, as results of having learnt in the manual era, he actually understands how it works. I know this will resonate with a couple of my readers.
And I think that applies to a lot of us in this age bracket: we do understand the basics and we have adapted to - well, actually invented - the computer age. Just don't ask me to try to work a new device - mobile phone particularly - without giving me some time. Somehow I bypassed the early computer games period and, as a result, I just find it difficult to relate to some types of screen displays that, to me, mimic games screens. Script too small. Too many doo-dads going on.
Maybe the generalisation above doesn't really apply to me. I like real stuff.
Have a good weekend. May do some brewing this weekend, and I'll try to get photos of the remaining models so I can resume the ongoing car story.
10 August 2006
turning Japanese
Actually, the Japs are turning into us, only moreso. It seems that adoption of the Anglo-American model of competition and individual pursuit of promotion is having a disproportionately greater effect in Japan, where tradition dictated knowing your place in the team. And singing company songs, of course.
My usual immediate cheap shot would be denigrate the Washington Consensus model, but dammit, if Richard Stiglitz can turn apostate, why can't 'umble observers make a few similar observations. Of course the world is more complicated than this and it will be interesting to see whether any counterfactual evidence emerges from Japan or whether other factors are identified.
My theory of people's almost infinite capacity to absorb change, in particular in the workplace, should lead to saying something like "so what" to news such as that from Japan. I think people do find ways to get around or subvert the system, but then I've never worked on a chicken plucking production line. I don't know how you subvert that.
On a kind of similar note, there was a letter to the editor in yesterday's AFR from a young lawyer lambasting the culture of chasing billable hours, the heavy workloads this produces and the effect on work/home life. In today's edition there is a reply from an evidently more successful - or perhaps more driven - young lawyer arguing that yesterday's correspondent is obviously a failure and that the recent rise in such complaints is evidence of those will never make the grade because they're not good enough, so they just moan about the situation.
When I read today's letter, my first response was "maybe you shoud wait until you've matured a bit and you might see that different people hold different values and yours are not necessarily superior to the others, and yours might even change over time." And then I thought that I wouldn't want to be a client of a firm where an insufferably arrogant young lawyer valued maximising the firm's billable hours over providing the best service to the client.
We are all individuals.
My usual immediate cheap shot would be denigrate the Washington Consensus model, but dammit, if Richard Stiglitz can turn apostate, why can't 'umble observers make a few similar observations. Of course the world is more complicated than this and it will be interesting to see whether any counterfactual evidence emerges from Japan or whether other factors are identified.
My theory of people's almost infinite capacity to absorb change, in particular in the workplace, should lead to saying something like "so what" to news such as that from Japan. I think people do find ways to get around or subvert the system, but then I've never worked on a chicken plucking production line. I don't know how you subvert that.
On a kind of similar note, there was a letter to the editor in yesterday's AFR from a young lawyer lambasting the culture of chasing billable hours, the heavy workloads this produces and the effect on work/home life. In today's edition there is a reply from an evidently more successful - or perhaps more driven - young lawyer arguing that yesterday's correspondent is obviously a failure and that the recent rise in such complaints is evidence of those will never make the grade because they're not good enough, so they just moan about the situation.
When I read today's letter, my first response was "maybe you shoud wait until you've matured a bit and you might see that different people hold different values and yours are not necessarily superior to the others, and yours might even change over time." And then I thought that I wouldn't want to be a client of a firm where an insufferably arrogant young lawyer valued maximising the firm's billable hours over providing the best service to the client.
We are all individuals.
more bits and pieces
Well I don't have to hate Howard today becos' the Beazer and (insert appropriate description here) Tuckey have provided the grist for the mill. Tuckey, if you want to make a cheap political shot, as is your calling, don't be offended when you get it back, as is Beazley's calling.
Oh oh, 7.30 report on, just gotta go and change channels in case you know who...done!
The PM said he was "disappointed" at the three who crossed the floor on the offshore processing division, but his visage betrayed a baser emotion. Watch this space. Mind you, as many commentators have pointed out, Labor boots you for such treachery. Talk about regulatory constraints...
The Business Review Weekly (not available online) contains a story that I haven't seen elsewhere, about political interference in ensuring that Mark Vaile's preferred supplier, Wheat Australia, got the Iraq supply deal after the Iraqis blackballed the Australian Wheat Board. There were seven other applicants but apparently Wheat Australia got the job on a late bid. All dates are mentioned. Media diversity, anyone?
Ah shit, this gets tedious. I know you agree.
In various situations today I've had conversations about generational change. My mentoree this morning made the observation that there are so many more support mechanisms for new job entrants that enable them to become effective so much quicker. Induction courses, ongoing training and of course mentoring programs themselves. The same theme was reflected this arvo when a job applicant mentioned that they always seek a mentor when joining a new organisation.
Afterward, a couple of us doing the interviewing reflected that when we started, a public bawling out was routine: no such thing as being taken aside and either counselled or yelled at. Such public dressings-down really only diminished the boss in the eyes of all the staff who had to witness it, but that was the way it was done. No one ever seemed to think it was odd. Today it would result in some extended grievance procedure, but the fundamental thing is that it's counterproductive, so why do it? I think we recognise now that such behaviour is usually a sign of insecurity and it gets treated appropriately.
So maybe we have made some progress over the years. Put it down to the sixties? Well maybe, maybe not. There are always at least two views on any particular issue and while the sixties may have expanded many people's views of what might be possible, over the longer term I can't imagine that it changed the overall balance of X's and Y's, righties and lefties, hardasses and softcocks.
Oh oh, 7.30 report on, just gotta go and change channels in case you know who...done!
The PM said he was "disappointed" at the three who crossed the floor on the offshore processing division, but his visage betrayed a baser emotion. Watch this space. Mind you, as many commentators have pointed out, Labor boots you for such treachery. Talk about regulatory constraints...
The Business Review Weekly (not available online) contains a story that I haven't seen elsewhere, about political interference in ensuring that Mark Vaile's preferred supplier, Wheat Australia, got the Iraq supply deal after the Iraqis blackballed the Australian Wheat Board. There were seven other applicants but apparently Wheat Australia got the job on a late bid. All dates are mentioned. Media diversity, anyone?
Ah shit, this gets tedious. I know you agree.
In various situations today I've had conversations about generational change. My mentoree this morning made the observation that there are so many more support mechanisms for new job entrants that enable them to become effective so much quicker. Induction courses, ongoing training and of course mentoring programs themselves. The same theme was reflected this arvo when a job applicant mentioned that they always seek a mentor when joining a new organisation.
Afterward, a couple of us doing the interviewing reflected that when we started, a public bawling out was routine: no such thing as being taken aside and either counselled or yelled at. Such public dressings-down really only diminished the boss in the eyes of all the staff who had to witness it, but that was the way it was done. No one ever seemed to think it was odd. Today it would result in some extended grievance procedure, but the fundamental thing is that it's counterproductive, so why do it? I think we recognise now that such behaviour is usually a sign of insecurity and it gets treated appropriately.
So maybe we have made some progress over the years. Put it down to the sixties? Well maybe, maybe not. There are always at least two views on any particular issue and while the sixties may have expanded many people's views of what might be possible, over the longer term I can't imagine that it changed the overall balance of X's and Y's, righties and lefties, hardasses and softcocks.
09 August 2006
bits and pieces
Well as all you regular reader will attest, I haven't been here lately. No particular thing to put it down to - apart from the bet with DH to desist from any Howard-hating activities - just been doin' other stuff. This has partly consisted of trying to replace the headlights in offspring no 2's replacement car. This has gone partly well: one went in OK, the other has been a real nuisance as I keep breaking bits of it. I haven't done this sort of work for about 25 years and when I last did it, headlights were a standard circular 7 inch affair and they all went together the same way. Now headlights are all odd shapes and are very complex inside and when you break a bit, it's bad news. Out with the glue when I've finished here.
If I was to walk the thin line in relation to Howard-hating, I'd have to talk a bit about current issues as Parliament resumes. The renascent discovery of backbone in some of the so-called 'broad church' is very welcome. The interesting thing will be to see how Fielding (Family First) swings. No doubt he will have been offered all manner of inducements that we either will never find out about, or so late it won't matter. I thought Labor's immigration spokesman, Tony Burke, came across on TV as well briefed and very adept at the sound bite. What a shame that Beazley will forever sound like a year 12 debating student confecting a rage.
A thinner version of the same line would probably make some comments about chicken noises in Parliament yesterday. Bring it on, and more often. Costello's rooted and everyone knows it.
A little while ago I mentioned that I had started on Hugh Mackay's book Australia at the Turning Point. I'm still wading through it and I still wince a bit at its earnestness and obvious bias (even if I agree with him). I retrieved my copy of Generations today so I'll be keen to go back through it to look at the differences. I guess - and it is a guess - that after a further three years of the current government, Mackay had had enough and decided to go for the polemic, whereas I think my interest is more in the descriptions of the preferences, foibles and beliefs of each of the generations as a reflection of the Australia we have become. Swapping family stories with a mate today, I was again blown away by the stories we all carry of the peculiarities found within families, how they get ignored, covered up, explained away or sometimes just never explained. No wonder so many of us end up a bit bent (more on bent in a minute). I occasionally will suddenly recall some incident from childhood and think, "now what did that signify? Why did that come back to me just now?"
So, not much grist for the mill today I'm afraid. I have left a few comments elsewhere around the 'sphere but the muse is not with me. What an empty life with no whingeing to be had.
Bent: that was the personalised plate I saw today on one of these. I guess that's how the rich do whimsy. I certainly liked it.
If I was to walk the thin line in relation to Howard-hating, I'd have to talk a bit about current issues as Parliament resumes. The renascent discovery of backbone in some of the so-called 'broad church' is very welcome. The interesting thing will be to see how Fielding (Family First) swings. No doubt he will have been offered all manner of inducements that we either will never find out about, or so late it won't matter. I thought Labor's immigration spokesman, Tony Burke, came across on TV as well briefed and very adept at the sound bite. What a shame that Beazley will forever sound like a year 12 debating student confecting a rage.
A thinner version of the same line would probably make some comments about chicken noises in Parliament yesterday. Bring it on, and more often. Costello's rooted and everyone knows it.
A little while ago I mentioned that I had started on Hugh Mackay's book Australia at the Turning Point. I'm still wading through it and I still wince a bit at its earnestness and obvious bias (even if I agree with him). I retrieved my copy of Generations today so I'll be keen to go back through it to look at the differences. I guess - and it is a guess - that after a further three years of the current government, Mackay had had enough and decided to go for the polemic, whereas I think my interest is more in the descriptions of the preferences, foibles and beliefs of each of the generations as a reflection of the Australia we have become. Swapping family stories with a mate today, I was again blown away by the stories we all carry of the peculiarities found within families, how they get ignored, covered up, explained away or sometimes just never explained. No wonder so many of us end up a bit bent (more on bent in a minute). I occasionally will suddenly recall some incident from childhood and think, "now what did that signify? Why did that come back to me just now?"
So, not much grist for the mill today I'm afraid. I have left a few comments elsewhere around the 'sphere but the muse is not with me. What an empty life with no whingeing to be had.
Bent: that was the personalised plate I saw today on one of these. I guess that's how the rich do whimsy. I certainly liked it.
06 August 2006
pressure down up
Blood pressure, that is.
In another of her typical efforts at eliding the truth to suit her extreme views, Miranda Devine manages to confuse so many elements in this piece railing against Jon Stanhope's nomination of Terry Hicks as Father of the Year it's hard to know where to start.
A "cult" that has grown around David Hicks? He is being "sanctified?" No, just an increasing number of people who have woken up that he is a political prisoner. Get him in open court, get the facts out. And why would Australian youths be seeking to emulate him, given his treatment by his own government? She's a dill, but that's no impediment to earning a living as an opinion writer, I realise.
Then Devine slides artfully into a review of Flight 93, just to confuse those who may have forgotten that any alleged links between what Hicks may or may not have been doing - with the Taliban, remember - and the al-Qaeda attacks on the United States, are yet to be proven.
However, her most egregious error is to sign off with "Lest we Forget". That should reel 'em in, eh Miranda? Draw some inference between the awful Mr Hicks and our fine diggers?
Oh, how I wish the old man was still here so I could get him going on this one. Because one of his main objections to the glorification of war in this country was the (in his view) misappropriation by the RSL of that particular phrase from Kipling's "Recessional". I wish I had a quid for every time I had to listen to him ranting that the poem was all about regret at England's loss of empire and nothing at all to do with honouring those who lost their lives in war. He was quite monomaniacal about it and it was, I believe, the reason he never joined the RSL. See this article, he was pretty much on the money.
Finally, from everything I read that is happening in Canberra recently, Stanhope appears to be a grade-A dill. If he really wanted to get Terry Hicks up, he should have organised for someone else to nominate him, because his own nomination is such an easy target.
In another of her typical efforts at eliding the truth to suit her extreme views, Miranda Devine manages to confuse so many elements in this piece railing against Jon Stanhope's nomination of Terry Hicks as Father of the Year it's hard to know where to start.
A "cult" that has grown around David Hicks? He is being "sanctified?" No, just an increasing number of people who have woken up that he is a political prisoner. Get him in open court, get the facts out. And why would Australian youths be seeking to emulate him, given his treatment by his own government? She's a dill, but that's no impediment to earning a living as an opinion writer, I realise.
Then Devine slides artfully into a review of Flight 93, just to confuse those who may have forgotten that any alleged links between what Hicks may or may not have been doing - with the Taliban, remember - and the al-Qaeda attacks on the United States, are yet to be proven.
However, her most egregious error is to sign off with "Lest we Forget". That should reel 'em in, eh Miranda? Draw some inference between the awful Mr Hicks and our fine diggers?
Oh, how I wish the old man was still here so I could get him going on this one. Because one of his main objections to the glorification of war in this country was the (in his view) misappropriation by the RSL of that particular phrase from Kipling's "Recessional". I wish I had a quid for every time I had to listen to him ranting that the poem was all about regret at England's loss of empire and nothing at all to do with honouring those who lost their lives in war. He was quite monomaniacal about it and it was, I believe, the reason he never joined the RSL. See this article, he was pretty much on the money.
Finally, from everything I read that is happening in Canberra recently, Stanhope appears to be a grade-A dill. If he really wanted to get Terry Hicks up, he should have organised for someone else to nominate him, because his own nomination is such an easy target.
04 August 2006
i believe...
..for every drop of rain that falls, a conspiracy theory grows.
Sure seems like it and this, I reckon, is one trend you can put down to the internet. While some folks have always leant towards the less probable, but more exciting, version of events, it used to be relatively hard to get the word around. Now, with instant mass communication, you can relay, interpret, embellish and distort to your heart's content.
In the case of the story linked, it'd be easy to draw a few more conclusions around why lots of folks believe this particular story as things in Iraq get worse, Lebanon has emerged, and so on.
But it's late - well, late for me - on a Friday night and any comments made here wouldn't be particularly insightful or helpful.
So, back to the usual refrain in these cases: if it's a choice between a stuff-up and a conspiracy, go for the stuff-up every time.
Sure seems like it and this, I reckon, is one trend you can put down to the internet. While some folks have always leant towards the less probable, but more exciting, version of events, it used to be relatively hard to get the word around. Now, with instant mass communication, you can relay, interpret, embellish and distort to your heart's content.
In the case of the story linked, it'd be easy to draw a few more conclusions around why lots of folks believe this particular story as things in Iraq get worse, Lebanon has emerged, and so on.
But it's late - well, late for me - on a Friday night and any comments made here wouldn't be particularly insightful or helpful.
So, back to the usual refrain in these cases: if it's a choice between a stuff-up and a conspiracy, go for the stuff-up every time.
02 August 2006
broken social scene?
Yesterday's post has been enthusiastically received by all one of my overseas reader, for which I am grateful. There were a few jumping-off points in that piece for subsequent expansion and, while driving to work this morning, I thought of a few to use tonight. Regrettably, the passing parade of the day has immersed those brilliant thoughts in a miasma of fog, so...
Note to self: need to install a voice-activated note-taker in the car so random brilliance is not lost. Or do some memory exercises.
But first, another coincidence. I was in someone's office today, busily planning the future - ha! - when I noticed Hugh Mackay's Turning Point on his bookshelf. A couple of copies, in fact, which struck me as I had mentioned Mackay's Generations only yesterday. So I snaffled a copy which I will read with interest. However, even the first few pages seem to indicate that by the time he wrote this, Mackay was turning his social research into the social democratic ('lefty') polemic that we see fairly often in his contemporary writing. Nonetheless, I'll be keen to see how he works through the arguments. Interestingly, in searching fruitlessly for a book review or similar page I could link to, I found dozens of references to the book in sermons and papers by religious leaders. Hmmmmm...
Also by sort of coincidence, I had early morning coffee today with one of the former mentorees I referred to yesterday. Said person complained - no, maybe boasted - of a raging hangover although my diagnosis, delivered after 10 minutes of having my ear bent, was still pissed. Not to worry, I guess one of the joys of being Gen X is being able to sustain a hangover midweek.
Said person had also come to a decision about the next couple of years: going travelling. This, after I had spent some time providing comments on said person's CV to help in getting the next job. Well, such a job may well be overseas and in all of this activity we see 'typical' Gen X priorities: travel, flexibility, the job isn't everything, and not so concerned about security as some baby boomers, at least.
I found as a manager that the propensity to travel did cause a few headaches, in that at all times there was at least one team member on a six month trip somewhere. Once you got used to it, the problem became a bit more manageable in that you can start to plan for it, eg by distribution of projects to fit with who might conceivably be around for the projected duration/delivery date.
The level of comfort with uncertainty is probably the trait that I personally find hardest to understand, as I have been very security-conscious for as long as I can remember. More to the point, I'm not sure what drove this preference: maybe father's stories of the Depression, maybe that when I was growing up, everybody's parents were in stable jobs. It was just the way things were.
Interestingly, offspring numbers 1 and 2 are quite different in this regard - one a voracious traveller, one a bit more stay-at-home. And I imagine these different preferences are distributed throughout the population although in Gen X cases the travellers are in the majority. Implications for policy? Well, it fits well with flexible workplaces - increased casualisation, part time work and so on. Reduced demand to purchase housing, because they would rather rent? Well, housing affordability is decreasing, but what is the cause and what is the effect might be open to debate, I reckon. After all, if you know you won't be able to buy, if you know (based on experience and data over your lifetime) that share investments will return you more, why not rent, invest and travel?
What would a scenario be that took this trend and extrapolated it? Less investment in housing, or fewer people bearing more of the cost and the return? What if declining oil reserves pushes up the price to the extent that - as I read somewhere yesterday - air travel again becomes the preserve of the rich?
Probably the single greatest thing driving us as parents is that we leave our children a better life and perhaps even a better world. I read that this will be the first generation where this will not be the case. But we all face the same problem in trying to understand different values. What if the life/world we leave is just different - maybe not as good as we would like, but not a problem for those who inherit it?
Baby boomer dilemma. Poor us - always focused on our own needs and values. Somehow, I don't think so.
Note to self: need to install a voice-activated note-taker in the car so random brilliance is not lost. Or do some memory exercises.
But first, another coincidence. I was in someone's office today, busily planning the future - ha! - when I noticed Hugh Mackay's Turning Point on his bookshelf. A couple of copies, in fact, which struck me as I had mentioned Mackay's Generations only yesterday. So I snaffled a copy which I will read with interest. However, even the first few pages seem to indicate that by the time he wrote this, Mackay was turning his social research into the social democratic ('lefty') polemic that we see fairly often in his contemporary writing. Nonetheless, I'll be keen to see how he works through the arguments. Interestingly, in searching fruitlessly for a book review or similar page I could link to, I found dozens of references to the book in sermons and papers by religious leaders. Hmmmmm...
Also by sort of coincidence, I had early morning coffee today with one of the former mentorees I referred to yesterday. Said person complained - no, maybe boasted - of a raging hangover although my diagnosis, delivered after 10 minutes of having my ear bent, was still pissed. Not to worry, I guess one of the joys of being Gen X is being able to sustain a hangover midweek.
Said person had also come to a decision about the next couple of years: going travelling. This, after I had spent some time providing comments on said person's CV to help in getting the next job. Well, such a job may well be overseas and in all of this activity we see 'typical' Gen X priorities: travel, flexibility, the job isn't everything, and not so concerned about security as some baby boomers, at least.
I found as a manager that the propensity to travel did cause a few headaches, in that at all times there was at least one team member on a six month trip somewhere. Once you got used to it, the problem became a bit more manageable in that you can start to plan for it, eg by distribution of projects to fit with who might conceivably be around for the projected duration/delivery date.
The level of comfort with uncertainty is probably the trait that I personally find hardest to understand, as I have been very security-conscious for as long as I can remember. More to the point, I'm not sure what drove this preference: maybe father's stories of the Depression, maybe that when I was growing up, everybody's parents were in stable jobs. It was just the way things were.
Interestingly, offspring numbers 1 and 2 are quite different in this regard - one a voracious traveller, one a bit more stay-at-home. And I imagine these different preferences are distributed throughout the population although in Gen X cases the travellers are in the majority. Implications for policy? Well, it fits well with flexible workplaces - increased casualisation, part time work and so on. Reduced demand to purchase housing, because they would rather rent? Well, housing affordability is decreasing, but what is the cause and what is the effect might be open to debate, I reckon. After all, if you know you won't be able to buy, if you know (based on experience and data over your lifetime) that share investments will return you more, why not rent, invest and travel?
What would a scenario be that took this trend and extrapolated it? Less investment in housing, or fewer people bearing more of the cost and the return? What if declining oil reserves pushes up the price to the extent that - as I read somewhere yesterday - air travel again becomes the preserve of the rich?
Probably the single greatest thing driving us as parents is that we leave our children a better life and perhaps even a better world. I read that this will be the first generation where this will not be the case. But we all face the same problem in trying to understand different values. What if the life/world we leave is just different - maybe not as good as we would like, but not a problem for those who inherit it?
Baby boomer dilemma. Poor us - always focused on our own needs and values. Somehow, I don't think so.
in which we eat humble pie, crow, hat, whatever...
I once I said I'd treat the PM with something other than derision if and or when an industry group supported an interest rate rise...
Well blow me down, look what Peter Hendy said today:
OK, the PM is correct to say that every dollar that a worker gives up in previously agreed, negotiated, contractually binding agreements, is a plus to the economy's competitiveness. That is why, as I understand it, profits are taking an increasingly greater proportion of GDP.
Doesn't make it right.
DH: whatever...
A more interesting post will follow later this evening.
Well blow me down, look what Peter Hendy said today:
Peter Hendy, the chief executive of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, saysCaught like a rat in a trap. Hoist by own petard. Done like a dinner. So, something other than derision, eh....
his organisation supports the Reserve Bank's decision to raise rates.
"We think there's quite a lot of justification for this particular rate rise," he
said.
"We've been very worried about inflationary expectations building up."
He acknowledges that it will cost business but says rising inflation is also
a burden to businesses.
"We're hoping that it will be the only rate rise that's necessary to get us back to the 2 to 3 per cent target for inflation the Reserve Bank has," he said.
OK, the PM is correct to say that every dollar that a worker gives up in previously agreed, negotiated, contractually binding agreements, is a plus to the economy's competitiveness. That is why, as I understand it, profits are taking an increasingly greater proportion of GDP.
Doesn't make it right.
DH: whatever...
A more interesting post will follow later this evening.
01 August 2006
what's my scene-ario?
In the course of preparing a talk last week, I ran across this piece of scenario development sponsored by the Business Council of Australia. I was surprised I hadn't heard of Aspire Australia before, as I do try to keep up with these sorts of things.
I'm also usually a bit suspicious of scenarios, mainly because they seem to be a bit of a 'must-do' for all sorts of organisations, but then there is no follow through. That is to say, they devote resources to building the scenarios but then don't use any of the findings in their strategic planning. Everyone cites BP's experience (even those who claim that the subsequent strategic change and rebranding was just greenwash), but how many organisations have done scenario development and then left them on the shelf?
All that said, the three scenarios produced here are quite appealing in that they reflect trends that we can see, attitudes to which we can relate and provide a reasonable basis for any subsequent planning and action. The three are, in the BCA's own words:
But when you look at the list of eminent Australians who participated, it is a very representative list of both broad and sectional interests and the scenarios reflect not only a substantial and careful process to develop them, but also can be understood as having emanated from those who took part, ie there is no obvious overlaying of any agendas (econo-gabble excepted, as I have said).
My interest was particularly piqued by "Changing the Crew", as Gen X/Gen Y and their impacts on the country are a special fascination of mine, dating back to Hugh Mackay's Generations. This mainly comes about because offspring no 1 and offspring no 2 are on the Gen x/Gen y cusp, but also because as time goes on, the people in the units I have led are increasingly Gen Y. I've found I need to work hard to get comfortable with their frames of reference and that the assumptions I lazily make on their behalf are nearly always wrong. One way I have found to bridge the understanding gap is through being actively involved in the mentoring program that the organisation where I work runs for its new graduates. I've been lucky to have had a series of grads as mentorees with whom I've been able to forge good relationships, so that we can discuss generational difference issues and each party gets something that they can take back to the workplace.
But I also feel that the pace of change in all areas of life, particularly technology, has the potential to drive unnecessary wedges between the generations that could be avoided with a little effort by all parties. For those who follow the random scribblings here, you will have seen that occasionally I try to do a piece on my experiences in running a blog. To what extent is blogging - and similar trends such as podcasts etc - the new medium of exchange? What do they give us that other mediums of communication don't? What, if anything, do we lose from not using other mechanisms? Like talking to each other...
To be continued.
I'm also usually a bit suspicious of scenarios, mainly because they seem to be a bit of a 'must-do' for all sorts of organisations, but then there is no follow through. That is to say, they devote resources to building the scenarios but then don't use any of the findings in their strategic planning. Everyone cites BP's experience (even those who claim that the subsequent strategic change and rebranding was just greenwash), but how many organisations have done scenario development and then left them on the shelf?
All that said, the three scenarios produced here are quite appealing in that they reflect trends that we can see, attitudes to which we can relate and provide a reasonable basis for any subsequent planning and action. The three are, in the BCA's own words:
Riding the Wave explores the consequences of a breakdown in trust between people and institutions. It is a story about reform fatigue and complacency. In this scenario a loss of faith in institutions eventually undermines Australia's capacity to grow. A lack of long-term, focused investment and reform results in economic decline and social crises, ultimately leading to a reexamination of our political structures. In Riding the Wave, global prosperity is no guarantee of prosperity for Australia. Efficient and effective Government and trust between people and institutions are critical to building the capacity of the nation.
Stormy Seas focuses on Australia's international relationships. It explores Australia's policy options in a future where there is a sustained decline in Asia Pacific stability and security. Regional instability challenges Australia's international and economic relations. Australians become more nationalistic, more cohesive - they are more tolerant towards difference within Australia, but at the same time cocooned in their view of the rest of the world. While it is stressed that this is only one possible story about how these relationships might evolve, the Stormy Seas scenario presents a difficult future for Australia.
Changing the Crew examines the social dimension of change in Australia - in particular the potential value tensions within and between generations as baby boomers, who have dominated Australia's policies and values, are moving into retirement in unprecedented numbers. In Changing the Crew, a new generation of pioneers creates a sharper-edged Australia, resulting in friction with other generations. Australians are more strongly connected with the rest of the world than ever before, economically and culturally.
But when you look at the list of eminent Australians who participated, it is a very representative list of both broad and sectional interests and the scenarios reflect not only a substantial and careful process to develop them, but also can be understood as having emanated from those who took part, ie there is no obvious overlaying of any agendas (econo-gabble excepted, as I have said).
My interest was particularly piqued by "Changing the Crew", as Gen X/Gen Y and their impacts on the country are a special fascination of mine, dating back to Hugh Mackay's Generations. This mainly comes about because offspring no 1 and offspring no 2 are on the Gen x/Gen y cusp, but also because as time goes on, the people in the units I have led are increasingly Gen Y. I've found I need to work hard to get comfortable with their frames of reference and that the assumptions I lazily make on their behalf are nearly always wrong. One way I have found to bridge the understanding gap is through being actively involved in the mentoring program that the organisation where I work runs for its new graduates. I've been lucky to have had a series of grads as mentorees with whom I've been able to forge good relationships, so that we can discuss generational difference issues and each party gets something that they can take back to the workplace.
But I also feel that the pace of change in all areas of life, particularly technology, has the potential to drive unnecessary wedges between the generations that could be avoided with a little effort by all parties. For those who follow the random scribblings here, you will have seen that occasionally I try to do a piece on my experiences in running a blog. To what extent is blogging - and similar trends such as podcasts etc - the new medium of exchange? What do they give us that other mediums of communication don't? What, if anything, do we lose from not using other mechanisms? Like talking to each other...
To be continued.
30 July 2006
playa hater
If the blogosphere is anything to go by, the schism between left and right in Australia is deepening, getting more pronounced, or similar, as one reads is happening in the US. In the first example, Tim Blair calls his supporters over to see the weird lefties after jessculture had a shot at the young fellow who hugged the PM. For a little while it's a duck shooting gallery as they all come in a site they'd never normally visit and are appalled at the attitudes they find there. What - not all Australians support the PM? What's wrong with you people (DH: does this break the rules?). Then some of Jess's regulars ride in to shoot some holes in the arguments. But it's a no-win situation.
Meanwhile at that outpost of leftist tyranny, Larvatus Prodeo, some artfully juxtaposed photos of war dead along with some selected RWDB comments sets off another round of increasingly acrimonious baiting, with one commenter eventually banned.
Finally, at that institution of reasoned debate and libertarian idealism (is libertarian idealism a contradiction in terms?), Catallaxy, a slightly more restrained exchange of views although it's starting to get willing.
Did this level of intolerance exist in pre-internet days? How did the extremes of right and left get the shit off their livers? I guess it's only a small percentage of the population who are currently engaging in this increasingly hostile environment on the 'net, but surely it must spread and bust out? One thing we don't need in this country is violence at the polling station - we nearly got it with the rise of One Nation. But the polarisation seems to get gaining momentum.
Meanwhile at that outpost of leftist tyranny, Larvatus Prodeo, some artfully juxtaposed photos of war dead along with some selected RWDB comments sets off another round of increasingly acrimonious baiting, with one commenter eventually banned.
Finally, at that institution of reasoned debate and libertarian idealism (is libertarian idealism a contradiction in terms?), Catallaxy, a slightly more restrained exchange of views although it's starting to get willing.
Did this level of intolerance exist in pre-internet days? How did the extremes of right and left get the shit off their livers? I guess it's only a small percentage of the population who are currently engaging in this increasingly hostile environment on the 'net, but surely it must spread and bust out? One thing we don't need in this country is violence at the polling station - we nearly got it with the rise of One Nation. But the polarisation seems to get gaining momentum.
29 July 2006
both sides now
There's a whole big bunch of people out there who see no value whatsoever in the public sector and would privatise anything they can get their hands on. Fortunately for them the market, not surprisingly, is doing it on their behalf. The rise of two-speed economies in the major cities such as London and Sydney has the effect of pricing public sector workers out of large parts of these cities. Gentrification, high-rise luxury apartments and the like are not affordable or often suitable for those on fixed lower incomes - teachers, ambulance paramedics and the like. This article notes that the trend in London is spreading. As I understand it, England itself is a two speed economy where the south, integrated with the global financial/services economy, is thriving but the post-industrial north is declining. Stereotyping I know, but the bankers and insurance financial types who are now buying up country cottages, villages and so on are pricing everyone else out.
You certainly get better journalism in the UK than you do here. This opinion piece in the Times of London not only makes a number of cogent points about ideology (namely neo-conservatism) but lays it on the line with a number of people from both sides of politics including a fellow journo at the paper. The point of the article, about current opposition leader David Cameron needing to preserve some policy space for himself rather than nail his colours to the neoconservative mast, seems very sensible and is well argued in my view. Can you imagine any similar article here about Beazley. They'd be wanting to know "what does he stand for?" No recognition of realities or subtlety.
You certainly get better journalism in the UK than you do here. This opinion piece in the Times of London not only makes a number of cogent points about ideology (namely neo-conservatism) but lays it on the line with a number of people from both sides of politics including a fellow journo at the paper. The point of the article, about current opposition leader David Cameron needing to preserve some policy space for himself rather than nail his colours to the neoconservative mast, seems very sensible and is well argued in my view. Can you imagine any similar article here about Beazley. They'd be wanting to know "what does he stand for?" No recognition of realities or subtlety.
WTF? OMG! (*)
Last week you read about the saga of retrieving the Peugeot - pictured in all its glory left, from the dealer I had left it with. Satisfactorily fitted with another new battery, we took it home and wedged it moderately successfully into the non-existent fourth spot in the driveway.
We stuck it in the Trading Post and got three calls before the print edition even came out. Not wanting to go through the hassle of finding out what it needs for roadworthy, we suggested it needed an enthusiast prepared to get a bit dirty and were selling it unregistered (ie I take back the plates once it was sold). And that was exactly what we got (in fact the third caller also sounded ultra keen but realistic about what the deal was).
However, the first caller lives up the top end of the Sunshine Coast so there was some to-ing and fro-ing about would I let him post the number plates back. As it seemed like today would be a nice day, and offspring number 2 offered to forgo a day's pay to come up with me, I said I'd bring it to him as I was pretty sure he'd take it.
And he did. He gave it pretty good going over but suggested that it was in far better condition than he expected (the picture is misleading as it dates from when I first got it, in 1998). We did the deal and offspring and I started back. We stopped by the Maroochydore Surf Club for lunch and after an hour or so, we hit the Bruce Highway back to Brissie. Just after Aussie World we saw a plume of smoke up ahead and as we neared, it seemed pretty strong. It was car on fire on the northbound side. It was a red car. It was a red Peugeot 405 Mi16...
So what were the chances? Had he whacked some plates on it and taken it for a fang? Offspring no 2 and I agreed that this was exactly what either of us would have done. I had rabbitted on a bit to him about what a superb road car it was, including a few brief spurts well over the posted limit on the way up, and so he'd have had plenty of time to do it. We couldn't use the easiest indicator to check if it was our old one - a slightly faded offside front guard - because the flames were all over it from the windscreen forward. The wheels looked like series 2, not series 1, but....
Well, we had to go back and check, didn't we? It took us 10 minutes to get to a place we could turn. By the time we got back there was a substantial traffic bank-up....and the whole car was well alight - utterly engulfed in flames. But it was not the car we had just sold - the driver and his passenger were standing helplessly looking on and it wasn't our buyer.
There are a few of those red Mi16s about, but not too many. Who'd believe it, eh?
(*) I don't think this a song title. But it's what offspring no 2 and I agreed was a suitable expression of (first) alarm and (second) that sinking feeling.
28 July 2006
Im gonna be strong
So you go out to lunch with a few old, as in former, colleagues. It's a great catch-up, particularly as the denizen from Melbourne brings the rain. It's funny in a sense, but you seem to appreciate people a lot more with the benefit of a bit of distance and a (perhaps fairly recently acquired) ability to listen better, look for the nuances and get a lot more out of conversations. Maybe it was my imagination, but there was a bit less of the one-upsmanship that always seemed to be the feature of conversations in earlier days.
That said, there's always a few surprises. Why would an acknowledged fellow-traveller want to challenge me not to blog about the Hon John Howard MP, duly and popularly elected Prime Minister of our fair land, not to mention our incredibly able and hard-working Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Hon Alexander Downer MP. Surely the embedded links I have been using are an indication of my respect for the outcomes of the popular mandate - in Benelong and Mayo certainly. I was shocked I tell you, quite shocked. Anyway mate, I suggest you have look around and have good long think about the terms of any wagers. To comment, she is not to blog per se, capiche?
That said, I can't remember what was the consideration of the wager. How about a new job for you?
That said, there's always a few surprises. Why would an acknowledged fellow-traveller want to challenge me not to blog about the Hon John Howard MP, duly and popularly elected Prime Minister of our fair land, not to mention our incredibly able and hard-working Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Hon Alexander Downer MP. Surely the embedded links I have been using are an indication of my respect for the outcomes of the popular mandate - in Benelong and Mayo certainly. I was shocked I tell you, quite shocked. Anyway mate, I suggest you have look around and have good long think about the terms of any wagers. To comment, she is not to blog per se, capiche?
That said, I can't remember what was the consideration of the wager. How about a new job for you?
27 July 2006
tell me sweet little lies (updated)
What's the difference between Lebanese -Australians who aren't patriotic to this country by living in Lebanon until they need to be bailed out, and Australians who are fighting for another country? Well?
On the radio this morning I heard Condoleezza Rice say that she wanted peace for the Middle East but voted against an immediate cease-fire. Run that by me again? (Note - yeah, I know what was really meant and this is a sem-cheap shot, but still - it's absolutely fucking insane. Utterly one-sided and pointless).
The proposal to ban junk food ads on prime time TV is a knee -jerk reaction, but a proposal to ban books isn't. Run that one by me again?
Blow me down this gets tiring, doesn't it? Has the whole world gone stone crazy?
There's probably more, but this is just too depressing. Fortunately, I'm a more optimistic type than I thought (open an account and do some surveys - it's fun!).
Update: In the Business Review Weekly today Ian Mac Farlane, apparently the Federal Minister for Industry, says that "An economy in Australia that does not have a sound, competitive industry is not going to be competitive."
I'm absolutely speechless. And I kind of wish the Minister was similarly speechless if that's the best he can do. Someone has evidently briefed him about competitiveness, but he never got beyond learning to pronounce it.
The Minister will be releasing an industry statement in early 2007. I can't wait. Let's have a crack at the intro, shall we?
"An industry statement cannot be a statement unless it has some industry. And this one has both."
We're doomed I tell you.
On the radio this morning I heard Condoleezza Rice say that she wanted peace for the Middle East but voted against an immediate cease-fire. Run that by me again? (Note - yeah, I know what was really meant and this is a sem-cheap shot, but still - it's absolutely fucking insane. Utterly one-sided and pointless).
The proposal to ban junk food ads on prime time TV is a knee -jerk reaction, but a proposal to ban books isn't. Run that one by me again?
Blow me down this gets tiring, doesn't it? Has the whole world gone stone crazy?
There's probably more, but this is just too depressing. Fortunately, I'm a more optimistic type than I thought (open an account and do some surveys - it's fun!).
Update: In the Business Review Weekly today Ian Mac Farlane, apparently the Federal Minister for Industry, says that "An economy in Australia that does not have a sound, competitive industry is not going to be competitive."
I'm absolutely speechless. And I kind of wish the Minister was similarly speechless if that's the best he can do. Someone has evidently briefed him about competitiveness, but he never got beyond learning to pronounce it.
The Minister will be releasing an industry statement in early 2007. I can't wait. Let's have a crack at the intro, shall we?
"An industry statement cannot be a statement unless it has some industry. And this one has both."
We're doomed I tell you.
26 July 2006
little things
Been pretty busy at work and with work stuff after hours, so no recent posts. Will be similar tonight, preparing for a presentation tomorrow as well as a session with the boss, so just a few random thoughts on current affairs:
- what's the difference between Leterio Silvestri and David Hicks? This might read rather offensively but what is provoking this comparison is the notion of a fair trial. We have a reasonable suspicion about Silvestri based on evidence and his attitude (as espoused in his own words) to date. Silvestri's lawyers have been trying to get evidence given in camera as they suspect that if he goes to trial, he won't get a fair one. Probably a correct conclusion based on what we've learnt to date. Hicks has been charged but under a totally foreign system (in fact foreign even to its supposed jurisdiction, the rest of the USA), we have had no chance to consider his guilt or innocence ourselves apart from being pronounced guilty by Rumsfeld, Howard et al immediately after he was captured. There's something wrong in all of this.
- Jason Akermanis gets dumped from the Lions. V V B has never yet discussed anything remotely sport-related, but what got me about this issue was the tension between the nature of teamwork and value of the 'outsider'. We are exhorted to take 'outsiders' at face value as they have something to contribute to society that often the mainstream can't even recognise, let alone value. Think artists, poets, 'mystics' and so on. At the same time, the rule for teams is that no player is bigger than the team. In this case, it is the later that has triumphed after, admittedly, a fair history of 'Aker's' antics. Which is right. Does the 'normal' always win out? How do 'outsiders' maintain their drive? Maybe Aker isn't so much of an outsider as I am painting him here - just a thought experiment (or sorts).
Gotta go, potatoes need peeling.
23 July 2006
I read the news today oh boy (updated)
This article in the Times of London highlights what seems to be a trend around our bit of the western world: management by press release or, as explained here, by 'headline grabbing initiative'.
It's not surprising that the Times would excoriate (to use just one word from the article, would you ever expect to read that in the Sun-Herald or the SMH?) a Labor government. But as I recall the Times initially supported Blair and, all those years ago (1997), the New Labor brand and 'Cool Britannia' (eeugh) were meant to foreshadow a genuine step forward in governance, whether called 'triangulation' or the 'Third Way'.
The Blair government seems to have become an embarrassment as the years have passed. It's certainly not a liberal government and it never really sought to be of social democrat persuasion. All governments get tired and, as Blair and co got tired, they seem to have turned to increasingly inane proposals that get floated in all-singing, all-dancing press releases. And then get mugged by reality.
This approach is certainly consistent with how the State and Territory governments around Australia have been operating. Initiatives get announced several times over; private consultancy firms charge mega-amounts to provide tailored advice (ie to provide the answer originally sought, under the figleaf cover of 'independent advice'); and plans, and plans to plan, are the order of the day. When does anything actually get done?
The Federal government actually provides a counter-example: particularly with control of the Senate, they are able to ram legislation through rather than having to indulge in genuine consultation and negotiation. When they announce something they pretty well just power ahead and do it. Although on reflection , this hasn't applied so far to T3 and to media policy. Perhaps the potential impacts of any changes in media policy to those who really wield power around here gives a hint as to why this is the case.
Which is all just a longish-hand way of saying we get the governments we deserve but we are badly let down by the fourth estate in Australia - no-one really applies the blowtorch in an open and balanced manner. The opinion-makers all have their favourites and so no analysis actually underpins their daily pronouncements. And it all just gets lapped up.
Update: This opinion piece in the Guardian runs along fairly similar lines to my earlier words, just with more detail and clarity. We are not the only country with a problematic relationship with the US, influenced almost totally from the top. By which I mean that most of us have no problems with Ameicans, just with their current government. The comments are also revealing and you'll like it when close to the end, you get to Richard52 who is a Pom here downunder. He's mightily unimpressed by our media oligopoly as well by Bush's treatment of Howard.
It's not surprising that the Times would excoriate (to use just one word from the article, would you ever expect to read that in the Sun-Herald or the SMH?) a Labor government. But as I recall the Times initially supported Blair and, all those years ago (1997), the New Labor brand and 'Cool Britannia' (eeugh) were meant to foreshadow a genuine step forward in governance, whether called 'triangulation' or the 'Third Way'.
The Blair government seems to have become an embarrassment as the years have passed. It's certainly not a liberal government and it never really sought to be of social democrat persuasion. All governments get tired and, as Blair and co got tired, they seem to have turned to increasingly inane proposals that get floated in all-singing, all-dancing press releases. And then get mugged by reality.
This approach is certainly consistent with how the State and Territory governments around Australia have been operating. Initiatives get announced several times over; private consultancy firms charge mega-amounts to provide tailored advice (ie to provide the answer originally sought, under the figleaf cover of 'independent advice'); and plans, and plans to plan, are the order of the day. When does anything actually get done?
The Federal government actually provides a counter-example: particularly with control of the Senate, they are able to ram legislation through rather than having to indulge in genuine consultation and negotiation. When they announce something they pretty well just power ahead and do it. Although on reflection , this hasn't applied so far to T3 and to media policy. Perhaps the potential impacts of any changes in media policy to those who really wield power around here gives a hint as to why this is the case.
Which is all just a longish-hand way of saying we get the governments we deserve but we are badly let down by the fourth estate in Australia - no-one really applies the blowtorch in an open and balanced manner. The opinion-makers all have their favourites and so no analysis actually underpins their daily pronouncements. And it all just gets lapped up.
Update: This opinion piece in the Guardian runs along fairly similar lines to my earlier words, just with more detail and clarity. We are not the only country with a problematic relationship with the US, influenced almost totally from the top. By which I mean that most of us have no problems with Ameicans, just with their current government. The comments are also revealing and you'll like it when close to the end, you get to Richard52 who is a Pom here downunder. He's mightily unimpressed by our media oligopoly as well by Bush's treatment of Howard.
I can feel the grass grow
HA HA HA runs a very strange blog where nothing is as it seems and it really doesn't matter because it's virtually unintelligible to all except those of dyslexic inclination or people who just like their letters - or reality - to sequence differently. But what a hide to throw muck at our wonderful University of Queensland here in the leafy western suburbs?
22 July 2006
catch 23
You go to pick up the old car so you can take it and sell it to one of the bucket shops on the 'Magic Mile'. Somehow during the 5 or so weeks that it's been with this used car bloke who'd promised he'd unload it for you at a better price than you'd get for it, the battery has died (altho' it doesn't seem all that old). So they jump it. A tyre has gone flat (again, how did that happen?) so you take it to their shop and they put some air in it. You stop the car because it has no petrol (where did that go?) so you have to jump it again. There's the spare wheel you dropped off, but the boot won't open. How did that happen?
You take it to the nearest petrol station knowing that you' ll have to turn it off while it's at the pumps. You pull up and switch off - too late, you've forgotten which side the filler is. Push the car back, push it up to the correct side (someone comes to help just as you get there). But the petrol filler flap won't open. Ahh, because the there is an electrically operated lock on the flap and the battery's dead.
So we have to get a battery before we do anything else. You push the car to a spot on the edge of the forecourt and go looking for a battery because the RACQ coverage has been transferred to the replacement car. Find battery place and talk the bloke into lending a small shifting spanner. When ring spanners of the correct sizes - three different sizes - would be faster. But half an hour later it's done. It's afternoon now. Let's just take it home and clean it up a bit before we try to sell it.
You remember what a nice car it is on the road, even if it's getting pretty damn scrappy inside and out. How great it is to have a sunroof. And just for fun, blow some young punk in a late model VW Golf into the weeds when he tries to overtake on the inside on an access ramp to the motorway. Blissful Saturday once again.
Update: Sunday. Now the boot's opening again. I vacuumed the interior. The battery that failed looks like a cheapie, if so, no wonder it's cactus. It's a red car, it looks good: I might keep it and drive it myself.
And on another tack entirely, Yo Blair. This is how we do it. And women have it better in Afghanistan, just as predicted. Because theory - more accurately, ideological blind faith, blustering and bullying - has trumped the real world for the last five years.
You take it to the nearest petrol station knowing that you' ll have to turn it off while it's at the pumps. You pull up and switch off - too late, you've forgotten which side the filler is. Push the car back, push it up to the correct side (someone comes to help just as you get there). But the petrol filler flap won't open. Ahh, because the there is an electrically operated lock on the flap and the battery's dead.
So we have to get a battery before we do anything else. You push the car to a spot on the edge of the forecourt and go looking for a battery because the RACQ coverage has been transferred to the replacement car. Find battery place and talk the bloke into lending a small shifting spanner. When ring spanners of the correct sizes - three different sizes - would be faster. But half an hour later it's done. It's afternoon now. Let's just take it home and clean it up a bit before we try to sell it.
You remember what a nice car it is on the road, even if it's getting pretty damn scrappy inside and out. How great it is to have a sunroof. And just for fun, blow some young punk in a late model VW Golf into the weeds when he tries to overtake on the inside on an access ramp to the motorway. Blissful Saturday once again.
Update: Sunday. Now the boot's opening again. I vacuumed the interior. The battery that failed looks like a cheapie, if so, no wonder it's cactus. It's a red car, it looks good: I might keep it and drive it myself.
And on another tack entirely, Yo Blair. This is how we do it. And women have it better in Afghanistan, just as predicted. Because theory - more accurately, ideological blind faith, blustering and bullying - has trumped the real world for the last five years.
drive in Saturday (*)
Courtesy of reader John, a piece that explains why I go fair dinkum amok when a certain whining, grating voice pops out of the TV or radio. The next step I suppose is some anger management classes, or yoga, or something, to curb this wild unnecessary (well, counterproductive) behaviour. Either that, or start drinking a lot more. Yes, Plan B it is, that will be much more fun.
And here's an example of the sort of thing that really gets me riled and is at the same time a real insight into how democracy gets perverted when any one party (as in participant, not political party) in a situation has too much power. Mr Parkin may well be a dangerous lunatic who wants to overthrow society, but we'll never find out this way. Not to mention the inequity of charging someone with unspecified allegations and then whacking him more than the cost of a 5 star hotel for his incarceration. The same principles apply with large companies and the like: the less accountability, the more propensity to push it as far as you can. Lord Acton, again as ever (and didn't he have a nice line in irrefutable sayings, btw. Where is his like today)?
It's the clear light of day that mitigates against extreme behaviour by any party. The case against Mr Parkin would be stronger, and the likelihood of public support for the government's response much more certain, if we knew what the details were. As it stands, in the absence of facts and evidence, the automatic conclusion to be drawn is that there is no case except ideological opposition. David Hicks, another case in point. And as for the many letters and blog comments I have seen that suggest the Hicks should just be summarily shot: think about the features of democracy in Australia that we should actually be fighting to retain, not throw away.
Not a good way to be starting a Saturday so we might pull up stumps - actually, there's a bit of precipitation here in the leafy western suburbs so I doubt that play would in fact have commenced, if we were actually playing cricket - and go and do some Saturday things. Dinner tonight with some friends down - well, actually up - from the high country. Had a few bevvies with them last night: it's amazing (no it's not) how quickly the conversation can turn a bit ribald. Anyone out there know about cold spoons (scroll down), for example?
(*) 'cos I gotta sell the Pug today. I just gotta.
And here's an example of the sort of thing that really gets me riled and is at the same time a real insight into how democracy gets perverted when any one party (as in participant, not political party) in a situation has too much power. Mr Parkin may well be a dangerous lunatic who wants to overthrow society, but we'll never find out this way. Not to mention the inequity of charging someone with unspecified allegations and then whacking him more than the cost of a 5 star hotel for his incarceration. The same principles apply with large companies and the like: the less accountability, the more propensity to push it as far as you can. Lord Acton, again as ever (and didn't he have a nice line in irrefutable sayings, btw. Where is his like today)?
It's the clear light of day that mitigates against extreme behaviour by any party. The case against Mr Parkin would be stronger, and the likelihood of public support for the government's response much more certain, if we knew what the details were. As it stands, in the absence of facts and evidence, the automatic conclusion to be drawn is that there is no case except ideological opposition. David Hicks, another case in point. And as for the many letters and blog comments I have seen that suggest the Hicks should just be summarily shot: think about the features of democracy in Australia that we should actually be fighting to retain, not throw away.
Not a good way to be starting a Saturday so we might pull up stumps - actually, there's a bit of precipitation here in the leafy western suburbs so I doubt that play would in fact have commenced, if we were actually playing cricket - and go and do some Saturday things. Dinner tonight with some friends down - well, actually up - from the high country. Had a few bevvies with them last night: it's amazing (no it's not) how quickly the conversation can turn a bit ribald. Anyone out there know about cold spoons (scroll down), for example?
(*) 'cos I gotta sell the Pug today. I just gotta.
20 July 2006
ABC, dah doo doo dah dah dah
"...being just slightly biassed was,
easy for me..."
Len Barry, where are you?
Anyone with a bone to pick about the ABC really needs to take a look at how the Canberra Times does factual reporting (well it appears online as a front page report, not an op-ed piece).
Mind you, I quite like it! More reporting like this, please. Why should anyone take the little fukcer seriously?
easy for me..."
Len Barry, where are you?
Anyone with a bone to pick about the ABC really needs to take a look at how the Canberra Times does factual reporting (well it appears online as a front page report, not an op-ed piece).
Mind you, I quite like it! More reporting like this, please. Why should anyone take the little fukcer seriously?
19 July 2006
big country
Just a small spit before we start: if Alexander Downer claims that Australia is a global player, how come we get gazumped on contracts? And by the Canucks of all people - we usually cooperate very closely with them overseas.
Rather than responding to JahTeh in comments, can I put a couple of things here:
So we stop here.
Rather than responding to JahTeh in comments, can I put a couple of things here:
- Australia's overseas missions are required to have emergency evacuation plans appropriate to factors such as the level of risk, ease of exit, number of Australians in the country and so on. But in a situation such we are facing in Lebanon, the plans are only as good as the means to implement them. Despite the spit above - which is simply meant to show up more misleading arrogance from the government, 'cos I loathe them so much - for whatever reason the agreement to charter the ship fell through, the airport has been bombed and land routes are too dangerous, there's not much else that can be done easily. I was for a couple of years stationed in a country not too far from Lebanon, and our escape plans were based on the assumption that the first means of exit, the airport, would be out of action early on in any battle.
- In relation to the ongoing 'battle' to keep blogging, nice one JT. The first time I was going to give it away, I was admitted to Adrian's blogroll which was a big boost. The second time, Gerry just said "keep going". This time, you hang some guilt trip on me :-) What's a bloke to do? I'll tell you. Just keep going.
So we stop here.
18 July 2006
losing it
Even thought this is just a weensy corner of the blogosphere, I am chuffed by the visitor traffic I get and much moreso by getting comments from people I see as 'recognised' in the 'sphere such as Gerry, Barista, tigtog and JahTeh. And my poisnal friends, natch.
But again this is starting to get to me. I spend hours in front of this machine looking for inspiration and points of difference. I sure can't come up with any myself and having promised to give up raging at the federal government I keep slipping back into very bad habits..
The last two nights, in between doing the blogrounds, I've been watching and listening to Pulse, which has just been released on DVD, and doing the odd strum and moan along. That is very rewarding, provided I don't actually try to imagine I'm a member of the band but just having a thrash. (but I do, of course).
Mrs v v b has commented that I'm starting to get a bit obsessive about all this - 'this' being the political scene, altho' I've been an amateur policy wonk for years. She would prefer that I kind of ceased and desisted for a while I think, or at least wound it back a notch. Particularly in her presence.
Which is a long way of saying I think I will wind it back a notch. In the time I've been following blogs, starting to comment and then having started v v b, I've noticed differences appearing in how the regular bloggers relate to each other. It's only natural that the 'sphere should mature (in a cheese-like sense, nothing to do with good behaviour). Trying to relate over the 'net is difficult - once the words are out there you are kind of committed, which can mean quick retaliation and exacerbating misunderstandings. But it's been instructive to watch the vast ideological differences get reeled in a bit; to look at those who give an inch and those who don't. Not forgetting those who take a mile. But I have noticed increasing civility - virtual social capital, if you like. So maybe the maturing is more than like cheese.
I really don't want to become obsessive but, on the other hand, this little blog has still to achieve its potential: in other words, I have yet to achieve mine through it. Ill-thought-through opinions are fine up to a point, but a bit tedious after that, I suspect. So, perhaps a few less postings and a bit more thought might be applied. Over and out-ish.
But again this is starting to get to me. I spend hours in front of this machine looking for inspiration and points of difference. I sure can't come up with any myself and having promised to give up raging at the federal government I keep slipping back into very bad habits..
The last two nights, in between doing the blogrounds, I've been watching and listening to Pulse, which has just been released on DVD, and doing the odd strum and moan along. That is very rewarding, provided I don't actually try to imagine I'm a member of the band but just having a thrash. (but I do, of course).
Mrs v v b has commented that I'm starting to get a bit obsessive about all this - 'this' being the political scene, altho' I've been an amateur policy wonk for years. She would prefer that I kind of ceased and desisted for a while I think, or at least wound it back a notch. Particularly in her presence.
Which is a long way of saying I think I will wind it back a notch. In the time I've been following blogs, starting to comment and then having started v v b, I've noticed differences appearing in how the regular bloggers relate to each other. It's only natural that the 'sphere should mature (in a cheese-like sense, nothing to do with good behaviour). Trying to relate over the 'net is difficult - once the words are out there you are kind of committed, which can mean quick retaliation and exacerbating misunderstandings. But it's been instructive to watch the vast ideological differences get reeled in a bit; to look at those who give an inch and those who don't. Not forgetting those who take a mile. But I have noticed increasing civility - virtual social capital, if you like. So maybe the maturing is more than like cheese.
I really don't want to become obsessive but, on the other hand, this little blog has still to achieve its potential: in other words, I have yet to achieve mine through it. Ill-thought-through opinions are fine up to a point, but a bit tedious after that, I suspect. So, perhaps a few less postings and a bit more thought might be applied. Over and out-ish.
17 July 2006
blue monday (updated)
The PM on the news a minute ago: "Having cities on permanent water restrictions makes as much sense as having cities on permanent power restrictions." Maybe he could have a think about the likelihood of both unless we move away from a simplistic approach that says more dams' and 'more coal'. To be fair - and by jingo it's hard in that little turd's case - he did talk about water recycling, to my mind the first best/most obvious step on water.
From the ABC news today: At their press conference, Mr Bush has declared it is wrong to "expect Russia to look like the United States" but pressed Mr Putin on issues like the role of an independent media." I talked about my desire to promote institutional change in parts of the world like Iraq, where there is a free press and free religion and I told him that a lot of people in our country would hope Russia would do the same thing," he said. Mr Putin replied: "We certainly would not want to have the same kind of democracy as they have in Iraq, I will tell you quite honestly". He really is on another planet, isn't he? And I love Mr Putin's tongue-in-cheek reply. Was it understood, do you reckon? No money on that one.
Because other people, unlike me, will see Bush's message as demonstrating single-minded persistence and clarity (normally a good thing, I agree). But people with such a single-minded view of how the world works often tend to not recognise irony, I have noticed. Still, you gotta love the variety in human outlook and worldview. Just don't like the other side ;-)
And I see my former employer is dragging its feet on getting Aussies - well, they're not real Aussies are they? - out of Lebanon. Because we're further away? Don't buy it for a second.
Over and out.
Update 2: Again at Surfdom, a very good analysis of the current state of representative democracy in Australia. Note particularly Tim's points about the ABC. Without the ABC, we are utterly stuffed and with the ABC in its current pussy-whipped state, we may as well be.
From the ABC news today: At their press conference, Mr Bush has declared it is wrong to "expect Russia to look like the United States" but pressed Mr Putin on issues like the role of an independent media." I talked about my desire to promote institutional change in parts of the world like Iraq, where there is a free press and free religion and I told him that a lot of people in our country would hope Russia would do the same thing," he said. Mr Putin replied: "We certainly would not want to have the same kind of democracy as they have in Iraq, I will tell you quite honestly". He really is on another planet, isn't he? And I love Mr Putin's tongue-in-cheek reply. Was it understood, do you reckon? No money on that one.
Because other people, unlike me, will see Bush's message as demonstrating single-minded persistence and clarity (normally a good thing, I agree). But people with such a single-minded view of how the world works often tend to not recognise irony, I have noticed. Still, you gotta love the variety in human outlook and worldview. Just don't like the other side ;-)
And I see my former employer is dragging its feet on getting Aussies - well, they're not real Aussies are they? - out of Lebanon. Because we're further away? Don't buy it for a second.
Update 1: Right at the end of the ABC news, we are told breathlessly that Alexander Downer has - presumably single-handedly - got 86 Australians out.
Finally, via the really excellent Road to Surfdom a good, long discussion on the political benefits of lying through your teeth to the country you are allegedly leading, for over ten years. And people don't give a damn, he's better than the alternative. Whoever that is. And on the radio - in fact on Radio National of all places, if you ever needed evidence that the ABC is whipped into submission, there it is - today I heard something about Howard "leading Australia to the next election". No he bloody won't. He will lead the Parliamentary Liberal Party. And that, gentle readers, is the organisation to which he dedicates his life efforts. Don't ever, ever, forget it.Over and out.
Update 2: Again at Surfdom, a very good analysis of the current state of representative democracy in Australia. Note particularly Tim's points about the ABC. Without the ABC, we are utterly stuffed and with the ABC in its current pussy-whipped state, we may as well be.
15 July 2006
ways and means
More like ends and means, but...
There was a bit I meant to add last night but forgot. Just as well I don't get paid for this...or I wouldn't be.
It was about the Natwest Three case. In a mean-spirited mood, I kind of hoped that the Yanks banged the three up 'real good', because that would at last open Blair's eyes about the calibre of people he is dealing with, and hopefully a few more eyes might get opened as a flow-on effect. A bit harsh on the three bankers, perhaps...the magnitude of their crime aside. I mean it's just thieving from the employer, right? Should they bear a disproportionate burden just get that part of the world that hasn't woken up to Bush and co to do so?
What's worse about this story is the apparent suicide of another Natwest employee after a visit from the British security forces. I'll be watching this one closely. I loathe official bastardry in all its forms.
Similarly, the James Hardie case. There's no reason why the Australian taxpayer should bear any of the cost - the fate of those dying of mesothelioma because of their exposure to Hardie products means that Hardie should be paying up. But if the legal implications of that mean that the recipients don't get the money...where's the justice? There was a Hardie victim in the ward where the old man was. This feller seemed about 70 or so and told me he didn't know how long he had to go - he had a hole in one lung about the size of Jatz cracker. He was bitter but not angry, and somewhat whimsical that he would be getting money for the first time in his life and he wouldn't be able to enjoy it.
So, do the ends justify the means? Even though Hardie moved operations offshore and set up a bogus trust, do we bail them out so the victims at least get something? And do three Pommy crooks endure the delights of the US penitentiary system rather than a Pommy gaol?
There was a bit I meant to add last night but forgot. Just as well I don't get paid for this...or I wouldn't be.
It was about the Natwest Three case. In a mean-spirited mood, I kind of hoped that the Yanks banged the three up 'real good', because that would at last open Blair's eyes about the calibre of people he is dealing with, and hopefully a few more eyes might get opened as a flow-on effect. A bit harsh on the three bankers, perhaps...the magnitude of their crime aside. I mean it's just thieving from the employer, right? Should they bear a disproportionate burden just get that part of the world that hasn't woken up to Bush and co to do so?
What's worse about this story is the apparent suicide of another Natwest employee after a visit from the British security forces. I'll be watching this one closely. I loathe official bastardry in all its forms.
Similarly, the James Hardie case. There's no reason why the Australian taxpayer should bear any of the cost - the fate of those dying of mesothelioma because of their exposure to Hardie products means that Hardie should be paying up. But if the legal implications of that mean that the recipients don't get the money...where's the justice? There was a Hardie victim in the ward where the old man was. This feller seemed about 70 or so and told me he didn't know how long he had to go - he had a hole in one lung about the size of Jatz cracker. He was bitter but not angry, and somewhat whimsical that he would be getting money for the first time in his life and he wouldn't be able to enjoy it.
So, do the ends justify the means? Even though Hardie moved operations offshore and set up a bogus trust, do we bail them out so the victims at least get something? And do three Pommy crooks endure the delights of the US penitentiary system rather than a Pommy gaol?
14 July 2006
back in the usaussr (updated)
It seems like the UK is learning what it's like to be on the receiving end of the US's particular interpretation of justice and they might wish they were back in the USSR. The so-called 'Natwest Three' case is fascinating - a bunch of crooked bankers do what crooked bankers do, and rip off the system. They get caught but instead of the usual slap on the wrist (although that approach to white-collar crime is slowly changing), they get hauled off to the US because the US Senate hasn't ratified its Extradition Act and so the US doesn't require a prima facie case.
This has sent all sorts of elements in UK society into conniptions. The City, that is to say the London financial district, which usually protects its own, certainly doesn't want decent clean cut crooked bankers inside the US penitentiary system. Opponents of Britain's involvement in the Iraq war see this as yet another example of British acquiesence to Bush's duplicity.
The parallels with Australia, in relation to David Hicks, are not all that close but, in general, the common factor of acquiescence to the US's particular view of how the world should work are striking - at least to me. If the era of the nation-state is undergoing a resurgence, as I think I read somewhere recently, then surely friendly nations should not be beholden to other friendly nations. The US practices extraterritoriality for at least some of its laws, but won't submit to any international justice system. This is not sustainable. Oh...yes it is. Sorry about that DH. Heh heh. But if the Natwest 3 don't get bail, watch all hell break loose. Goodbye Tony Blair - you need to look after your citizens. It's just here that the government can get away with not fulfilling this basic function. We only have interests.
Meanwhile, as we scour the bureau of meteorology website for lifesaving rains, the Brisbane Institute comes out with a cracker of a column on water recycling. The public resistance is incredible but surely recycling offers the most cost-effective way of extending the use of currently available reserves. Breakfast with the infrastructure experts this morning pretty much agreed that: just pump the effluent back uphill, blend and treat. Or the other way around. Or both. But the really interesting, if not surprising, factor is the weakness of the pollies involved. Self-interest, backflips, minimising exposure and risk, shifting blame and failure to accept responsibility. Is it any wonder we're sick and tired of the fukcers fukcing us over.
But..and yet, and yet. I wanted to end on a more positive note than this and I will. Both the offspring have recently moved their blogs - linked on the blogroll - from Blogspot to MySpace. I don't pretend to understand MySpace which seems a sort of Gen y-ish sort of thing, but I've asked them to explain it to me. What I really wanted to say is how proud I am of the pair of them. You only get one go at parenting and whenever I've regretted the many shortcomings I thought I may have demonstrated during their younger years, they always reassure me that it was all OK. Compared to what I'm not sure, but I accept their assurances with as much grace as I can.
Have a great weekend, people.
This has sent all sorts of elements in UK society into conniptions. The City, that is to say the London financial district, which usually protects its own, certainly doesn't want decent clean cut crooked bankers inside the US penitentiary system. Opponents of Britain's involvement in the Iraq war see this as yet another example of British acquiesence to Bush's duplicity.
The parallels with Australia, in relation to David Hicks, are not all that close but, in general, the common factor of acquiescence to the US's particular view of how the world should work are striking - at least to me. If the era of the nation-state is undergoing a resurgence, as I think I read somewhere recently, then surely friendly nations should not be beholden to other friendly nations. The US practices extraterritoriality for at least some of its laws, but won't submit to any international justice system. This is not sustainable. Oh...yes it is. Sorry about that DH. Heh heh. But if the Natwest 3 don't get bail, watch all hell break loose. Goodbye Tony Blair - you need to look after your citizens. It's just here that the government can get away with not fulfilling this basic function. We only have interests.
Update - and I should have linked earlier: if you are interested in the Natwest 3 case and can't bring yourself to peruse the Grauniad, (here is an explanation of that term),this is a very good blog and it'll be worth following the Magistrate's comments, or you could go to a proper newspaper, which also has a blog on the case (and of course you get the incomparable writing of the thinking man's Tory as a kind of bonus.
Meanwhile, as we scour the bureau of meteorology website for lifesaving rains, the Brisbane Institute comes out with a cracker of a column on water recycling. The public resistance is incredible but surely recycling offers the most cost-effective way of extending the use of currently available reserves. Breakfast with the infrastructure experts this morning pretty much agreed that: just pump the effluent back uphill, blend and treat. Or the other way around. Or both. But the really interesting, if not surprising, factor is the weakness of the pollies involved. Self-interest, backflips, minimising exposure and risk, shifting blame and failure to accept responsibility. Is it any wonder we're sick and tired of the fukcers fukcing us over.
But..and yet, and yet. I wanted to end on a more positive note than this and I will. Both the offspring have recently moved their blogs - linked on the blogroll - from Blogspot to MySpace. I don't pretend to understand MySpace which seems a sort of Gen y-ish sort of thing, but I've asked them to explain it to me. What I really wanted to say is how proud I am of the pair of them. You only get one go at parenting and whenever I've regretted the many shortcomings I thought I may have demonstrated during their younger years, they always reassure me that it was all OK. Compared to what I'm not sure, but I accept their assurances with as much grace as I can.
Have a great weekend, people.
And finally, vale Syd Barrett.
13 July 2006
rockin' in the free world
Well, I have had the incomparable Mr Young on high rotation in the car recently. He'll sound better when I get a few speakers replaced this weekend, due to the surrounds having deteriorated to an extent where any bass at all causes a horrendous buzzing. Very very bad. And after that we going to look at toilets. Jeez I love the weekends. And so on to today's news:
more importanteasier to ask the questions. What a cop out. Is there anything on the teev? Maybe I'll get the Maton out and exercise the vocal cords a bit. Breakfast tomorrow with a bunch of workmates from a former life. Mega amounts of coffee leading to a high productivity levels of twitching day.
- "Howard is always talking about Australian mateship. But yet again he has shown the world that he doesn't know what mateship is, let alone what it's for.
Regardless of Peter Costello's failings, nobody could behave to a mate the way Howard has behaved to him.
And nobody can say now that Howard has any substance to him. He is only a collection of slogans and political posters wrapped around a bit of emptiness.
In a rare moment of honesty he once mocked the idea that a prime minister should have some sort of vision.
Since then he has been consistent in his determination to shrink Australia to fit his own shrivelled and constipated soul.
It has never occurred to him that his constant betrayal of the things he talks about so much might start to make people sick to their guts." This from a letter to the editor in today's Canberra Times. Couldn't have put it better meself. And also, they'll remove him and Lady Janette from Kirribilli (where they have to live because of the kids' schooling...oh, er yes....well, they have to live there because it's closer to the ferry) in a box. They'll be there forever. - Media revamp - is likely to reduce competition but who really knows? That biassed statement is made simply on the basis of experience that, in an uncertain and unstable environment, application of large sums of money usually finds ways of meeting its own objectives. It just does.
- Can anything else go wrong in Queensland Health? Any more bodies (so to speak)?
- And as for this (sorry about all the ABC links, it's just easier. But yes, it's partisan, what a pack of commies, blah blah blah.) Back to the Middle East - we have to do something about Islamic terrorism. But I've seen the Palestinian 'refugee' camps - I put that in quotes because it raises the issue of defining a refugee: can you be a refugee if you're a third generation inhabitant of a camp? It's supposed to be your land, but it's not. The conditions are - or at least were some years ago, but I can't imagine they've changed all that much - appalling. The point I was originally going to get to was whether every Israeli reaction is a vast over-reaction. Hamas has three Israeli soldiers. Three. How many people is Israel holding and on what grounds? And with what proof? Ah shit, too hard.
12 July 2006
cup holder
People, I have now seen it all. A baby stroller - well, more accurately one of those dinky fluoro lightweight alloy 3-wheel baby joggers - with a cup holder.
And people reckon I'm a caffeine addict.
And people reckon I'm a caffeine addict.
11 July 2006
hang tough
That's what it seems the Rodent and the Apprentice are going to do. Why not, they've played the entire electorate for suckers for ten years without a sufficient majority waking up, so why not press your luck. Who'll notice?
The disengaged aren't interested in either the theatrics or even the very notion of leaders and deputies having the confidence of their party. As the little general has torn up pretty much every other vestige of the Westminster system, no reason why they shouldn't take an axe to this bit either.
Listening to some random platform polling at Toowong on the radio this arvo, there are plenty of punters out there who still think John's the ticket. Poor fellow my country indeed.
I can see why many think it's just a sideshow and that they should just get on with governing the country except that I'd rather they kept away from this as everything they do, in my eyes, sends us down a path that will hurt us in the long run.
Anyway, there's a lot more and far better commentary everywhere else so I can't add to the noise. Megadeath do it so much better.
Update/reflection
geez it's hard to let go of this stuff. How many times have I said I'd let the rodent go and write about something more...meaningful?
It was interesting having a little trip down memory lane the other day to the home town, and thinking about the notion of memory, what and how we remember and what it means to us. And even while I write this, in true stream of consciousness style, to thinking about how this stuff stands up against the very informed and often academic discussion of similar themes or topics on other blogs.
Then I have to remember - it's not a competition...
So, back to the hometown memories. They are quite happy in general. Playing cricket on a Saturday afternoon, even though I was a hopeless cricketer. The hometown was sport mad, so there was no escape and all my friends played sport, in the main extremely well. We all swam and I used to get up and train before school. The bloke next door used to coach me - he was a natural sportsman, holes in one, all that stuff - and in return my mother helped his young wife out with their babies as they came along. He coached me at golf, where I was even worse, and never really got much better over the ensuing forty years.
Our street was gravel, with a couple of corner store type shops at the bottom - a general store, a butcher and one other I can't remember. I remember the stinking hot summers and the hours I used to spend up one of the pine trees, pretending to be a bomber pilot.
It was only 15 years after WW2 had finished and Australia was still quite militarised: we used to have to march once a week at school, which I used to hate. In retrospect, it was insane: if anyone invaded, all the children would immediately be out marching in rectangles. That should scare the piss out of any invader, or at least bamboozle them with the surreality of it all.
Naturally every morning we lined up and recited, "I honour my god, I serve my queen, I salute the flag." At the time - this was when I was about 8 or 10 - I didn't think about it all, that was just the way things were. After I'd grown up enough to develop at least some critical faculties, it made me a confirmed agnostic (well at least opposed to all organised religion), a republican and deeply suspicious of all those politicians with an unhealthy fixation on the flag. And at this point we will manfully resist temptation, and...
..move on. Life certainly was simpler, but we weren't well off so I imagine that life was a bit more complicated for my parents. I can remember talk of the credit squeeze of 1962 (? can't be bothered googling to check) and the newspaper. I cannot type its name or else we will lapse into ranting again. Any poisnal friends can ask me at an appropriate time...
The disengaged aren't interested in either the theatrics or even the very notion of leaders and deputies having the confidence of their party. As the little general has torn up pretty much every other vestige of the Westminster system, no reason why they shouldn't take an axe to this bit either.
Listening to some random platform polling at Toowong on the radio this arvo, there are plenty of punters out there who still think John's the ticket. Poor fellow my country indeed.
I can see why many think it's just a sideshow and that they should just get on with governing the country except that I'd rather they kept away from this as everything they do, in my eyes, sends us down a path that will hurt us in the long run.
Anyway, there's a lot more and far better commentary everywhere else so I can't add to the noise. Megadeath do it so much better.
Update/reflection
geez it's hard to let go of this stuff. How many times have I said I'd let the rodent go and write about something more...meaningful?
It was interesting having a little trip down memory lane the other day to the home town, and thinking about the notion of memory, what and how we remember and what it means to us. And even while I write this, in true stream of consciousness style, to thinking about how this stuff stands up against the very informed and often academic discussion of similar themes or topics on other blogs.
Then I have to remember - it's not a competition...
So, back to the hometown memories. They are quite happy in general. Playing cricket on a Saturday afternoon, even though I was a hopeless cricketer. The hometown was sport mad, so there was no escape and all my friends played sport, in the main extremely well. We all swam and I used to get up and train before school. The bloke next door used to coach me - he was a natural sportsman, holes in one, all that stuff - and in return my mother helped his young wife out with their babies as they came along. He coached me at golf, where I was even worse, and never really got much better over the ensuing forty years.
Our street was gravel, with a couple of corner store type shops at the bottom - a general store, a butcher and one other I can't remember. I remember the stinking hot summers and the hours I used to spend up one of the pine trees, pretending to be a bomber pilot.
It was only 15 years after WW2 had finished and Australia was still quite militarised: we used to have to march once a week at school, which I used to hate. In retrospect, it was insane: if anyone invaded, all the children would immediately be out marching in rectangles. That should scare the piss out of any invader, or at least bamboozle them with the surreality of it all.
Naturally every morning we lined up and recited, "I honour my god, I serve my queen, I salute the flag." At the time - this was when I was about 8 or 10 - I didn't think about it all, that was just the way things were. After I'd grown up enough to develop at least some critical faculties, it made me a confirmed agnostic (well at least opposed to all organised religion), a republican and deeply suspicious of all those politicians with an unhealthy fixation on the flag. And at this point we will manfully resist temptation, and...
..move on. Life certainly was simpler, but we weren't well off so I imagine that life was a bit more complicated for my parents. I can remember talk of the credit squeeze of 1962 (? can't be bothered googling to check) and the newspaper. I cannot type its name or else we will lapse into ranting again. Any poisnal friends can ask me at an appropriate time...
10 July 2006
some things come from nothing(*)
There is absolutely nothing I can add to today's revelations - or some more appropriate description - about the non-Kirribilli Pact. Just go to nearly every blog on my roll and then follow the links. All the parrots in the pet shop, to coin a cliche...
So let's just wait and see it out, eh? "No honour amongst thieves." Heh heh, it was always going to come unstuck.
So I'll have to find something else to rabbit on about. I've still got about a dozen cars, ownership and experiences thereof, to write up.
* they do, too.
So let's just wait and see it out, eh? "No honour amongst thieves." Heh heh, it was always going to come unstuck.
So I'll have to find something else to rabbit on about. I've still got about a dozen cars, ownership and experiences thereof, to write up.
* they do, too.
09 July 2006
in the air tonight
There I was, just doing the ironing and minding my own business this arvo when this advertisement comes on the TV about all the wonderful things the (Queensland) government has been doing for the disabled. Mention of lots of sums of money, some individual initiatives as I recall, not a lot of info about what people should do, apart from showing the website for the relevant agency.
"Hullo", I thought to myself, "that looks and very much sounds like a pre-election advertisement. Long on reassurance, short on practical advice."
Trouble is, we aren't in pre-election mode. No writs issued, for example.
On the other hand, it does fit with various rumours I have been hearing, although I always discount rumours depending on who's spreading them. I particularly am sceptical when facts seem to have been retrofitted to support someone's notion that an election is imminent. Especially 'cos lots of my friends and acquaintances are election junkies. Birds, feather, you understand.
That said, I have to say that I object to my tax dollars going on dodgy advertising regardless of which political party does it. And of course they all do - those unspoken rules (let's not even bother about what the legislation says and how it has been interpreted) about what is acceptable seem to disappeared in the dust of the Australia I grew up in.
Now you've got me all nostalgic. Because I did grow up in the dust - our town used to get 11 inches of rain a year. But the river flowed deep and brown and used to flood, before it was dammed. Now it's a series of waterholes. The town? The place is three times the size, the main street is much busier than it used to be. There are suburbs which are all new and, like all new suburbs, look the same as new developments right around the country.
Of course it's irrational to expect new houses in the style of the older ones, but some variation to take account of landscape and climate would be nice. But that would add to the cost of the houses and, not surprisingly, the aim is to make the housing as affordable as possible. But the sameness of residential developments, like the sameness of commercial centres with the same major chains in each one, is something else that gets me a bit depressed. It makes commercial and economic sense and simultaneously doesn't sit right in the gut.
It could be better, it could be different: but is the sameness of commercial development in Australia a direct result of the size and scale of our economy? Can we only sustain a certain number of major chains, and not tolerate a greater number of smaller operators? What price diversity? We know there are lots of people who want to run their own businesses - do they get a fair go at trying?
What was in the air tonight was the smell of an early election. Now it's the tang of a life lived 40 or 50 years ago. I can still smell it, I can still feel it.
"Hullo", I thought to myself, "that looks and very much sounds like a pre-election advertisement. Long on reassurance, short on practical advice."
Trouble is, we aren't in pre-election mode. No writs issued, for example.
On the other hand, it does fit with various rumours I have been hearing, although I always discount rumours depending on who's spreading them. I particularly am sceptical when facts seem to have been retrofitted to support someone's notion that an election is imminent. Especially 'cos lots of my friends and acquaintances are election junkies. Birds, feather, you understand.
That said, I have to say that I object to my tax dollars going on dodgy advertising regardless of which political party does it. And of course they all do - those unspoken rules (let's not even bother about what the legislation says and how it has been interpreted) about what is acceptable seem to disappeared in the dust of the Australia I grew up in.
Now you've got me all nostalgic. Because I did grow up in the dust - our town used to get 11 inches of rain a year. But the river flowed deep and brown and used to flood, before it was dammed. Now it's a series of waterholes. The town? The place is three times the size, the main street is much busier than it used to be. There are suburbs which are all new and, like all new suburbs, look the same as new developments right around the country.
Of course it's irrational to expect new houses in the style of the older ones, but some variation to take account of landscape and climate would be nice. But that would add to the cost of the houses and, not surprisingly, the aim is to make the housing as affordable as possible. But the sameness of residential developments, like the sameness of commercial centres with the same major chains in each one, is something else that gets me a bit depressed. It makes commercial and economic sense and simultaneously doesn't sit right in the gut.
It could be better, it could be different: but is the sameness of commercial development in Australia a direct result of the size and scale of our economy? Can we only sustain a certain number of major chains, and not tolerate a greater number of smaller operators? What price diversity? We know there are lots of people who want to run their own businesses - do they get a fair go at trying?
What was in the air tonight was the smell of an early election. Now it's the tang of a life lived 40 or 50 years ago. I can still smell it, I can still feel it.
sunday morning coming down
It is. And while I wait for Mrs v v b to digest coffee and paper preparatory to us going out and buying warmer pyjamas - why are the leafy western suburbs so frigging cold, this is Brisbane for fcuk's sake - some random thoughts.
The Curious Snail today leads with an apparent lapse by Honest John to abide by an apparent agreement to hand over to Costello after two terms. Now this doesn't surprise me and I don't think it'll do him any harm. In fact, nothing does him any harm, but let's not go down that path. It is of course reminiscent of the Kirribilli Agreement, and any lieutenant with a baton in his backpack would need to be cleverer than either Keating or Costello to be entirely comfortable that any such 'agreement' would be honoured. "Honour" - John Howard. I made a small joke.
If I was to revert completely to type, I'd make a claim that this news simply underlines the fact that no-one should trust Howard on anything. But that would be an unwarranted cheap shot and consequently I haven't made it.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall while the various factions of the non-factionalised Liberal Party do their polling and plotting. Has IR started to dent Howard's teflon reputation, and my comment above about not being harmed is wrong? What is the general populace's view of Costello? What is the party's view of Costello, and the potential effect he as leader might have on their chances at the next election as the natural party of government? (Like some claim for Labor at state level)? Or is this all just the usual winter recess's annual leadership story? Isn't there enough legs in the threat emanating from the Dear Leader?
Now there's a thought: could we have similar imposed names for our political leadership? What would we call Howard? How about Small Wonder?
Had an old mate around for din-dins last night. I've known this character for about 35 years and, apart from the rapidly greying locks, he hasn't changed at all. Quite amazing. He is one of those rare types who was born without a malicious bone in his body - something I can't claim, I'm sorry to admit. He is wonderful company except for being very softly spoken which, combined with my kind of declining hearing, often means I have to ask him to repeat stuff. He is a muso by inclination and, in the past, also as a paying pastime so he was keen to have a look and a play of the Aria and pronounced it good.
Update - well now afternoon so change post title.
A final reflection on my mate from last night - people like that restore your faith in the good things about people. There should be more of him about.
Now a small but necessary duty, to thank those who sent flowers and good wishes to us over the last week and a half. Toodle-oo.
The Curious Snail today leads with an apparent lapse by Honest John to abide by an apparent agreement to hand over to Costello after two terms. Now this doesn't surprise me and I don't think it'll do him any harm. In fact, nothing does him any harm, but let's not go down that path. It is of course reminiscent of the Kirribilli Agreement, and any lieutenant with a baton in his backpack would need to be cleverer than either Keating or Costello to be entirely comfortable that any such 'agreement' would be honoured. "Honour" - John Howard. I made a small joke.
If I was to revert completely to type, I'd make a claim that this news simply underlines the fact that no-one should trust Howard on anything. But that would be an unwarranted cheap shot and consequently I haven't made it.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall while the various factions of the non-factionalised Liberal Party do their polling and plotting. Has IR started to dent Howard's teflon reputation, and my comment above about not being harmed is wrong? What is the general populace's view of Costello? What is the party's view of Costello, and the potential effect he as leader might have on their chances at the next election as the natural party of government? (Like some claim for Labor at state level)? Or is this all just the usual winter recess's annual leadership story? Isn't there enough legs in the threat emanating from the Dear Leader?
Now there's a thought: could we have similar imposed names for our political leadership? What would we call Howard? How about Small Wonder?
Had an old mate around for din-dins last night. I've known this character for about 35 years and, apart from the rapidly greying locks, he hasn't changed at all. Quite amazing. He is one of those rare types who was born without a malicious bone in his body - something I can't claim, I'm sorry to admit. He is wonderful company except for being very softly spoken which, combined with my kind of declining hearing, often means I have to ask him to repeat stuff. He is a muso by inclination and, in the past, also as a paying pastime so he was keen to have a look and a play of the Aria and pronounced it good.
Update - well now afternoon so change post title.
A final reflection on my mate from last night - people like that restore your faith in the good things about people. There should be more of him about.
Now a small but necessary duty, to thank those who sent flowers and good wishes to us over the last week and a half. Toodle-oo.
06 July 2006
reflections
- The main reason everyone - well, Bush, Howard and Downer - are going nuts about North Korea's pathetic attempts to get a fireworks night rocket up is not the 'clear and present danger', to coin a cliche, but the uncertainty caused to capital markets, creating pressure on interest rates. That's a real clear and present danger to our best mates, and that's very important.
- My old mum was always going on about how good she was at history when she was at school: "1066, Battle of Hastings." But ask her what did it signify - blank. Julie Bishop is just another one, in a government full of 'em.
- Nice to see a bit more attention to David Hicks' treatment. Can they keep him in Guantanamo until after the next federal election?
- I was very disturbed to see people on TV acting just like me when I'm watching the news at home. Most unbecoming. Now I know what Mrs v v b has been on about for the last 10 years. And aren't nimbys ugly when they're angry. I definitely won't be carrying on any more.
On the other hand, I might just chuck this Mrs v v b's way and then duck for cover when the response gets launched. Also, I need to get her some more aprons. Heh, thanks Helen, you can expect some collateral damage:-).
05 July 2006
the same old song
So the PM thinks someone should take a pay cut for the good of the economy. Tell you what: I'll treat that comment with something other than derision when a business peak lobby comes out and says that an interest rate rise is needed for the good of the economy. Surely they understand that the Reserve Bank is independent and works for the overall good of teh economy including, when necessary, dampening demand.
That said, let's not be silly: they are just saying what they're paid to say. Interest is a cost of business and high rates preclude investment. But enough of the sanctimonious utterances that we usually get along the lines of 'the time is not right for a rate rise.' It never is.
That said, let's not be silly: they are just saying what they're paid to say. Interest is a cost of business and high rates preclude investment. But enough of the sanctimonious utterances that we usually get along the lines of 'the time is not right for a rate rise.' It never is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
