First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me. - Neimiller

I copied and pasted this on the 22/10 when Fuehrer Howard had announced his double-whammy attack on workers and terrorists (read: Muslims)
Typical wedging.

Whilst this attack on the workers has been playing out, I'm yet to hear one coherent & backed up argument on how the changes to the IR laws are actually going to improve things. I tend to agree with those about the 'Race to the bottom' in terms of wages. The market does not solve every problem.

What is the bigger picture here? What is Howard really trying to achieve?

• Is the bigger picture designed to reduce wages for more competive exports?
• Is the bigger picture to delineate further between employer/employee in the best tradition of conservative philosophy?
• Is the bigger picture simply that Howard's biggest contributors ARE employers and he is simply looking after his 'base'?

Lets be honest, to try something that pisses off so many of the Nouveau Liberal voters like this can only be achieved with a weak opposition. History will show Howard as an excellent politician, but a poor leader. History will show Howard got through the things he really wanted. It will also show that there wasn't anyone of note to stop him either.

Almost a near miss

Same intersection too. Its the corner of Stacey St, turning right into Rookwood Rd. Right near the Hume. Yagoona? Chullora? Some west suburb anyway.

This time, it was a truck. Straight through a red light. He saw me at least, not that it'd had made much difference. I was also further away. I reacted, but I didn't ever think I'd hit at all. Too far away. More a 'You're a stupid knob-end, aren't you truckie?' type of close.

SMS Bible is here

Get your deep & meaningful message from God in 160 characters or less!

Isn't it tops? If the bible wasn't written in an ambigious enough manner, you can now read the SMS version.

While in Pennsylvania, US, Creationism (oops 'Intelligent Design') and Evolution go head-to-head, at least the Bible Society in Aus has a more apples and apples comparison:

"The idea is that the Bible can be used and be relevant and up-to-date, just like getting a verse of the day or reading a horoscope." - Michael Grant, The Bible Society

Read the whole article

I'm no unionist but...

This article in the SMH this morning is a bit of a worry. The IR laws are being changed significantly. I understand this is a paraphrase by the reporter:

John Howard has promised conditions such as penalty rates and overtime will be protected unless specifically traded away under his overhaul of industrial relations.

Basically, you've got them unless you don't.

I'm a contractor in IT. I live by their 'enterprise bargaining' and have no affiliation to any form of collective. It has its pros and cons. I earn a lot when I'm working, but there is little security to it. The market for the type of IT work i do can fluctuate heavily of which I have little say in.
Working this way for me, was a choice. Being without dependants & a mortgage, I chose to accept the volatility of the market in return for more money.
Not everyone is in the same boat. Not everyone can trade that security. Not everyone is in a niche market where the employee can stand up to the boss easily without simply being replaced.
I would not like to be in a trade or such and having the boss pressuring you into a new agreement where you forgo you're benefits. The employer has too much of an upper hand. I can't recall where it comes from, but there was someone quoted "If you don't accept this contract, there is a line of guys out there who will." That isn't accepting an agreement. That is coercion.

If nothing else, these changes actually give relevance to unionism again. Unions have been slipping out of sight to the mainstream, and haven't really cottoned on that the shape & demographic of the working class has changed a fair bit. Office workers, who were traditionally middle & upper middle class are now as much the working class as the plumber and sparky.

Unions can re-invent themselves if they so choose. These IR changes tip the balance a little too far in the favour of business, at the expense of labour, whatever type it is. Relevant unionism could help bring back that balance.

Suicide Bombers: How do they get to that point?

No doubt, we all know what happened in Bali recently. More suicide bombers. Young men (primarily) who know they have explosives in their bags and aim to detonate it, with no plan to survive the attack.

How does one get to that point? How does one get to the point where that is an acceptable way to hit the perceived enemy?

I'm going to draw a local parallel. Give it a chance.

Our own history has Gallipoli. A landing site in WW1 where ANZACs were mowed down by Turkish gunners as they stormed the Turkish trenches.
Rows upon rows of young, healthy men were sent over the breach with the barest, slimmest chance of getting to the enemy's trench, let alone overrunning it.
Most of them must have known they were going to their certain deaths. Most saw what had happened to the previous row of soldiers, yet they still went.
The orders came from above, ultimately from the British who treated the ANZACs with a little less concern than our own. However, there was a chain of people in between, down to those who ordered the men over.

Why? Would we have done the same in their stead? Did many refuse? I don't know.

I assume the soldiers thought what they were doing was right, part of their duty in the greater fight.

Don't get me wrong. I do not in any way, shape or form equate the people who commited this act of terrorism with the ANZACs.
I hope I'm drawing a parallel in the mindset of those who could do such a thing to themselves.

How do the Bali bombers get to the same point? How do you reach out to the bombers themselves, and the ones who instruct them to commit such an act beforehand?

Personally, irrespective of who does it, religion is strongly involved. Religion, in its various forms, has been able to give some degree of comfort to us all in times of need, uncertainty and sacrifice. War is no exception.
Clearly, religion is being abused in the case of suicide bombers by giving the bombers a justification for the act, and a comfort that they will be heaven/paradise/etc sent when it's over and being one with their God.

=my2c

BC

Family First

I won't lie. I don't like the Family First party. Its a very nicely wrapped far right religious crowd.

As mentioned before in previous posts, I believe that Australia has had an extremely good run for low cost fuel. Cutting the excise on petrol as FF's Fielding suggest here doesn't really stack up in the medium to long term.

I'm not yet sure why a comparison between Aus and Europe is unfair other than that Europe already pays far higher for it's fuel and it won't do FFs arguement much good to compare that way. Comparing Australia to the US isn't really apples-and-apples either. They have the lowest level of fuel excise in the developed world.

In many regards, petrol and diesel can be split down the line of voters and industry. Cutting petrol excise will be attractive to the voting public. However, inflation would be better kept in check by cutting the diesel excise. Diesel is far more prevalent as the fuel for driving industry than petrol is.

Howard is also aware that any cut in the fuel excise for short term voter pain relief is going to be bloody hard to put back when(if?) the crisis is over. Howard knows that giving that cutting the excise now, that'd be kissing that $3.8 billion away, politically, forever.