Garden 29 November 2009

Nasturtiums and lettuce grown from seed, ready for planting today

Chilli from seedlings

Coriander from seeds

nner

Mint from a runner given by a friend

Chilli from a pot from bunnings

Basil from seeds

Cosmos from seeds

Flowers from pots

More flowers from some pots $2 each & seedling tray

A politician who nearly sounds real

Malcolm Turnbull, a politician in extremis, has lost some of his stridency, he is being almost statesman like on climate change by adopting a bi-partisan approach.

I have been dismissive of him up until now, but his determination to drag his climate change denying party members into the light of reason has lifted him up in my estimation.

But, like KRudd, he is still soft on the polluters, it is like rewarding bank robbers with faster get away cars

It is shame that principles are so rarely exhibited by our elected representatives.

Gardening

coriander

We have planted stuff in the garden.

Herbs and flowers, some as seedlings and others as flowers, the above is lemongrass.

beside the driveway, cosmos in the foreground

Flowers plus spring onion - we didn't plant it but somehow it is there

near front door

we are growing nasturtiums and lettuce from seed - these are seedlings 3 weeks old

Basil also being grown from seed

Chilli from seed

Mint from runner, chilli from a bought seedling and coriander from seed

We are very happy with the way stuff is growing - will update shortly

Mealy-mouthed non-apologies

The trite line "if I have offended anyone, I apologise" is such a crock.

The deliverers of the line have said something that people have objected to so strongly that even the thickhead who uttered the original statement knows that he did the wrong thing.

The apology is worthless when it is subject to such conditions.

A true apology would be along the lines of, "when said x about y, I was wrong, I have hurt the person and I am sorry that I hurt them."

Why does the injured party ask/demand an apology? Easy, because they have been hurt and/or offended.

A certain well-publicised case featured the classic phrase "{lawyer} apologised ''if she suffered any hurt or distress''" - I repeat, if she was not hurt or offended, she would not have pursued the issue  through the courts.

Further, it is interesting to note that the perpetrator offered no apology of any description.

An aged sportsman, notorious for attempting to be young by squiring nymphets, showed a disctinct lack of sportsmanship by not accepting the umpire's decision.

Meanwhile, his employers through their tame minions on a current affairs light entertainment show allege he is a good guy by providing a role model.  The sports chap has by revealing his prostate condition has apparently encouraged other men to be checked for cancer.

He is a good role model, yeah right!  This same buffoon says to ignore his fellow "stars" on his show when they exhibit drunken, violent behaviour because they aren't role models! Hypocrite!!

Big is not beautiful - urban sprawl

Our cities are growing like topsy. And that growth is creating problems for us, environmentally, socially and economically.

Those areas are intertwined; government says it can’t do something about the environment because they think it will be economically not optimal. Social alienation and economic disadvantage and can be linked to destructive behaviour like littering.

The “cars that ate Paris” have turned their attentions to Melbourne. The urban sprawl means that cars are being used excessively.
We need to get smarter.


Expansion horizontally into areas with no public transport and with large distances to anywhere is a recipe for disaster and it is being followed in Melbourne and Sydney even as I write.

Travelling 3 to 4 hours a day to get to work sitting in your car is bad for you, family suffers (because you are away from spouse and children), health suffers (being inactive in a stressful situation surrounded by fumes), wealth suffers (you and your spouse, and maybe kids, need more than just the “family” car) and it is bad for the rest of us as well – pollution, increased costs of production and costs of trauma via collisions.

If we could conveniently walk or take public transport to work, so many resources would be freed up.

Higher density housing closer to the CBD is a solution. Time to start thinking about having houses that more sustainable, not having a mansion miles from civilisation.

And using what is now productive farm land to grow bricks seems such a waste!

Bike helmets and fines

Police on bikes at the local station stopped a number of people for not wearing helmets. Fair enough, but then I considered the penalty these people faced, a fine of $50.

The riders, there were three of them, included a woman, probably in her fifties, who looked as though she may have been a pensioner - the bike was old, she was wearing a dress, and of course, no helmet.

Having been knocked off my bike and hitting the ground head first, I am glad I was wearing a helmet - the helmet shattered, I was concussed which is a far, far better result than skull shattered and dead! So I understand the value of helmets.

The less well-off would struggle to pay the fine - it represents a considerable slug of their income (most of which is probably not disposable anyway!).

My solutions:-

One, make the fine a percentage of income - the poor can afford the fine and if a highly paid person gets a high fine, well, you wonder why they are paid heaps when thy are patently stupid to not wear a helmet!

or

Two, just like cars with an unroadworthy sticker, the rider must present themselves at the local police station with a helmet (educative and not as expensive as the fine!) if it is their first offence, for subsequent nabbings, then hit them with the fine.

My ABC Widget

Myki

The continuing stupidity of government is highlighted by the sending of good money after bad.

The Myki ticketing "system" is overpriced and overdue, the government has tipped additional funds and allowed extended time to get this thing "working".

The current system, Metcard, has a huge flaw in government's eyes - it does not track users! Big Brother government wants to surveil our travel on an individual basis rather than on a group basis.

Also the user of the Metcard has the power to control their costs by picking the right combination of tickets - for instance, starting work before 7 am (using Early Bird ticket) and using a two hour ticket validated 1 minute after the hour (giving me three hours to get home) meant my daily commute cost $2.90 from Laverton to Elsternwick and return.

I have downloaded the 8Mb Myki 120 page ticketing guide, looks like the same system is available, do that is okay UNLESS the train is delayed and then the "touch off" will be after the 7 am point and a two hour charge will be made.

I can choose to be anonymous which I will.

A new "feature" is that no longer is there a Monthly ticket which can give 28, 29, 30 or 31 days travel - the new regime is 28-365 days so rather a ticket initially validated 7 October expiring 6 November costing $5.45 a day, under Myki 31 days is $5.56 per day.

The biggest issue though is the touch on/touch off requirement - the traveler is responsible for the process even if the machinery ias not working!!  This is bizarre - machines have no discretion, to say you can't use an airplane without a valid ticket is a spurious argument as your ticket is checked by the flight attendants before you board, maybe we need train/tram attendants to check tickets (we could call them conductors, maybe).

Australia & Immigration

I am the child of children of children of immigrants.

And so are most of us in this country.  After two hundred and twenty one years of immigration, there are very few residents of Australia that can claim that they have no immigrant blood in them.

So why are so many people anti-immigrants? Effectively, they are anti-themselves!

We started as a prison, and in New South Wales, it is a badge of honour to be related to First Fleeters, that is, to be descendants of criminals "worthy" of being shipped half way round the world. So we shouldn't be too precious about the backgrounds of new arrivals now.

A mono-culture is monotony - we are all contribute to the community with our ideas and lifestyle but we all need to work together

Infrastructure Finance and Political cowardice and veniality

Our society needs infrastructure so that we can go about our daily business. Electricity, water, transport (public, road and air), schools and hospitals are the principal examples of the areas where infrastructure is required to deliver services to the people.

Let's pick an oldy but a goody, Citilink, to examine some of the issues.

We, the people, needed a better(?) road system. Government decided not to provide us with the roads with our money, but chose the public-private partnership route. There was dodgy financing involved with stapled securities, special arrangements to "encourage" users to use the system and public guarantee of debt and income. The public sector, us, kept the risks and transferred the profits to the private sector.

The new road was tacked on to existing roads that we had paid for - we did not receive compensation for this.

The new water desalination is another example where the private sector is guaranteed income and we have to pay extra for the privilege.

It is government's responsibility to provide us with the fundamentals like water, however, they are frightened to do so because they would have to borrow to do this. And the opposition party of the day will bleat about inflicting debt on our children. So government says private sector is carrying the debt, but this is, in fact, extreme carelessness with truth. Government is guaranteeing the debt and paying the private company money so the private company can pay its interest bill and make a profit.

So, in reality, it is the government's debt, but without the debt appearing on the government balance sheet.

Debt is not necessarily bad, we all borrow to buy our homes, we even borrow to do renovations or extensions, and as long as we pay off that debt, we considered by banks and our friends and families as be eminently sensible.

But if government borrows to renew or increase infrastructure (effectively our home) then it is called irresponsible. It is not - the government is doing its job providing the essentials.

The misrepresentation that borrowing for infrastructure burdens our children with debt ignores the fact that the infrastructure has a lifespan. For the early part of its life, we are paying for it, then as our children get into the work force and use the item, then it is their turn to pay.

Conversely, with water, they are using the infrastructure without the means to pay for it when they are young, so at some stage they should pay for the water they consume.

The overall cost of the project via the private route has to be more costly to community in the long run because private sector has higher costs of borrowing and also has to ensure significant returns to their shareholders.

Public-private partnerships are flawed and a fraud on the community.