Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts

Saturday, September 23, 2023

VoteYES!

I got a No card out of my letterbox this morning. 
At first it just made me mad - I am voting YES. 
But I need to talk about what No has said on that card. 

They claim that "The Voice will divide Australians". It won't. They will divide Australians. The First Nation people belong in this country. It was their own country for tens of centuries. How do they think the Voice will divide this country? They claim that Aus isn't a racist country, but they keep making it that same way. Read the history!! The present Aus was "made" 250 years ago when the Brits arrived to make it into a jail for their own people. They killed too many Indigenous people, thinking they were making the country British. Why?? Why were Indigenous people not included in the constitution when it was set up?

They claim that it isn't fair to "change the national rulebook". What rulebook?? This country became a British area. What is now in the "rulebook"? British rules? Are Indigenous people included? They should be. They say that the Voice "will have special access to Ministers and the Public Service". Why shouldn't they? Why were Indigenous people excluded from voting until 1962? Why were they never accepted in the World War I and II wars, even though there were soldiers who were Indigenous? In May 1964 the Labor opposition leader, Arthur Calwell, set out a bill which would include the Indigenous people in the constitution, but the government didn't accept that. The Indigenous people were not even included in the federal full equality election lists until 1984!

They claim that compensation will cost Australia too much, yet they use capitalism to speak of that. They refer to "reparations and compensation for 'historical wrongs'". Why are they trying to deny that to Indigenous people? A&TSI people have been abused far, far too much. 

  • Their culture has been ignored and still is. Writers Taylor and Habibis said "White ignorance has a critical impact on race relations and is implicated in the maintenance of Aboriginal disadvantage. Addressing this ignorance is a largely overlooked capacity‐building opportunity within Australia's non‐Aboriginal population. It warrants consideration as a key component of strategies targeting Aboriginal disadvantage." 
  • There are too many Indigenous people who commit suicide when their culture is ignored. Creative Spirits wrote "Almost non-existent in the 1980s, the rate of suicide and self harm amongst Aboriginal people is at crisis levels and has reached "horrific proportions", particularly in remote communities and especially amongst youth." 
  • Their children were taken from their own parents! This must be considered today. YES can definitely help that!  
Looking into the history of the British into Māori has met much, much more than the white Australians. In New Zealand (Aotearoa), the Brits signed a treaty with Māori, and the meaning of the Treaty is specified in the NZ law. If the A&TSI had a treaty with the Brits, perhaps they would live much better than they are now. Just saying that.

They say that the Australia Day will be abolished, but this has been fought on for decades. Why are they saying that now? ABC posted an article about this in 2021. According to them, the "Australia Talks National Survey 2021 has revealed a majority of people now believe Australia Day should not be celebrated on January 26, given the historical significance of the date for Indigenous nations." The No vote people should realise that the activists for the change of the Australian Day might think different than the upcoming voters for the YES referendum, but many of them do support the YES vote! Why include them in your arguments? 

I am still rather angry at finding this piece of crap in my mailbox, but I suspect I have read much more history which should be considered when you think of voting No. 

#VoteYES


Thursday, July 27, 2023

Forgotten times

I only remembered today that I hadn't posted another blog since December last year. I can blame my aphasia... and also the recent person I discovered I did not like. He was just a tutor who didn't know any more than I do or may have known more than I did but never chose to discuss that with me. 'Nuff said. I've gotten over that! 

I finished the draft of my book, which I have been working on for 3 years, and I am feeling pretty stoked! Yesterday I found one beta reader; perhaps I should use more, but the first one is my first goal... get that goal and then I can go ahead with more beta readers. I spent too long looking at the different publishers, and I still haven't chosen one. This book is an historical non-fiction work... I just want it published! 

For the rest of this post I am talking about how people are treated over poverty and rent and where they want to live. That includes me - I'm a retired woman and I have been following the politics of rental since COVID. When I moved last year to be closer to my family, I chose a single bedroom unit for less than $300. Except I have been discovering what's not good of this unit for me. There is only one entry/exit which shares access with every other tenant on this level; there is no balcony on the other side of the unit; there are 15 steps up and down that I have to walk every day, and my legs are tired; the oven is rusty; the ceiling is peeling (even after being painted before I moved in); there is too much dust which just happens to come inside from the main road through this area; there are no sound limits through the neighbour's walls; there is no aircon; the mailboxes are very difficult to check - very low and in front of the garden that is too close. Months ago, I requested a permanent set of curtains in my bedroom to stop the afternoon summer sun actually getting into that side of the unit, and I am very grateful that the owner had them put in. That's pretty much the only excellent thing that has been done for me. 

When I reached retirement age, I had my name put on the Housing Dept list for a community unit. A couple of weeks later I got a notice from the property agent to ask if I was moving out. No, I was not! I only put my name on a list, and I might have to wait for a couple of years for a property to become available for me. At the beginning of this month, I received another email which informed me that my rent was going up when I reached the end of my two-year contract. It was going up by $60 a week!! Perhaps I should have ignored that notification, because my contract did not expire until 2024. But I have aphasia, and my brain works by itself and told me I should be upset/angry and start looking elsewhere now. 

I tried looking through property websites, most of which quoted rent for a one-bedroom unit or a studio unit as $350 a week, and some $450. Almost all of these were called a "granny flat", and I, seriously, am wondering how many landlords actually have their own "granny" who could never afford $350. Why, just why call a single bedroomed unit/flat a "granny flat"? 

I have my name on the lists with retirement villages, which have many people on their own list. To find something I can afford for the rest of my life would work for me, but the only one I attempted to get in to inspect, after telling me that I was definitely considered, was signed up by a person chosen by the private owner. I had already been into Housing Dept to arrange for the bond, and they had told me that, even though the rent for that unit included a meal a day, the cost was just over the limit the HD had placed on beneficiaries like me, but they were happy to support me. Which didn't happen. 

COVID has led to payments increased to workers, but very little to beneficiaries, which sees us move out if the rent goes higher than we can afford. That's what leads to homelessness. These days so many of the advertised units/flats are rented as furnished. I wonder why this is happening now, when it didn't happen a few years ago? I have my own furniture and belongings and I have the right to live with my own stuff. 

Very recently I completed a survey and a submission for the Queensland state government where they are looking into availability of housing. They have a website page which looks at Housing Support for Aged People (for people like me) and Housing Pathways for Young People (which probably includes everyone else). If you can provide your own submission then please do so, whether you need a home or already have your own. This suggestion is directed at people who aim to earn what they need to pay for rent, certainly not at the property owners (unless you will support us too!).

A year ago, when I moved closer to my family, I didn't really feel that I could be facing homelessness throughout my future life. I also never considered that the agent would tell me months in advance about the rent increase. But I already knew I could not afford $350. 

I think of anything I could do: speed up the publication of my book (but I can't guarantee an income from it); win the lotto sometime in the future (but I can't really afford that). I guess that, now, I can think about the useless stuff that people with too much money spend on.

I won't miss that stuff.



Tuesday, August 16, 2022

I am all & all is me...

Yesterday I was looking for something to blog about when I saw that the previous PM, Scott Morrison, had secretly taken on three departments without letting anyone else in this country know about it! I looked up other blogs and news articles. I found this picture on the Poll Bludger under the comments on “Roy Morgan, Morning Consult and JSCEM (open thread)”, dropped in there by the Dog's Brunch - and I loved it/hated it so much, but it showed, as "Wendy" had said, ScuMo had always thought "I am all & all is me". I hope - truly hope - that he has found his real position: in Hell's deep hole. Excellent time to find out his idiotic stuff! 

I went backwards to look at an ABC article dated 8 April 2022 which spoke about the Governor-General David Hurley who had personally lobbied ScuMo for funding for a "leadership program" which had only been set up last year. ScuMo gave it more than $18 million in the federal funding. Why did that happen? Labor did know about it - but they were, at that time, the opposition. Penny Wong questioned it. 

Very recently News.com.au said that "Scott Morrison breaks silence on secret ministry scandal as Anthony Albanese seeks legal advice", The Guardian told their readers that "Morrison took control of Keith Pitt’s portfolio to reject exploration licence in lead-up to election" and on 15 August The Guardian printed an article by Anne Twomey for The Conversation, and The Australian ($) wrote that "Scott Morrison was appointed by David Hurley to take control of the entire Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources" (no link because you have to subscribe to them - I don't). I have always had problems with how Morrison became a PM. Now I wonder if other LNPs standing for PM would have acted the same way. 

I have read that this over-extension is allegedly based on Section 64 of the Constitution. I looked it up. It says:

"64. Ministers of State

The Governor-General may appoint officers to administer such departments of State of the Commonwealth as the Governor-General in Council may establish.

Such officers shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor-General. They shall be members of the Federal Executive Council, and shall be the Queen's Ministers of State for the Commonwealth.

Ministers to sit in Parliament

After the first general election no Minister of State shall hold office for a longer period than three months unless he is or becomes a senator or a member of the House of Representatives."

To me, this gave no approval for the Governor-General to do this for Morrison. Hurley did not establish the "departments". This did not apply to him, nor to Morrison.

I wait with a bated breath for whether or not this will be taken to court. I don't think it was relative to S.64. Is Hurley still GG? Happy to hear from others readers.

Tuesday, October 16, 2018

Old age and work


This essay was the notes for the PowerPoint CQU presentation with my study partner in August 2012. Growing older myself has increased my thoughts from years ago. The government does not seem to seriously think about old age, but flicks it off

Old Age is not a Work-Related Illness
July 2012

In May 2009 the Government announced in the Federal Budget that the pension age would gradually be increased to 67 by 2023. That, along with the financial crises in global markets, is now seeing an unprecedented number of baby boomers either remaining in work or returning to work.

Australia’s population is ageing faster than we can keep up with it. The statistics are scary. 47A 2004 Treasury report noted that while there were more than 5 working age people to support each person over 65 in 2002, by 2042 25% of the entire population will be over the age of 65 and there will only be 2.5 working age people supporting each one of them.
 
To accommodate this phenomenon, Governments have to look carefully towards the future to try to develop policies which will integrate rather than alienate an elderly population. They would do well to start by looking at worker’s compensation schemes and the potential for wide scale misuse to provide medical treatment of the kind that was never the intention of the schemes.

While Australia was reasonably well placed in 2005 at 13th in the OECD for participation rates of workers over 55, COAG noted in 2006 that more people needed to enter or rejoin the workforce to avoid laying the burden on a shrinking number of people. Three years later the Bureau of Statistics reported that in 2007 only 40% of people aged 45 and older worked in paid employment.

The growing numbers of older people in the workforce is presenting a new challenge in the management of workplace health and safety.  The Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission in 2009 suggested that older workers have more accidents, and, according to Berecki-Gisolf et al in a 2012 paper produced for Work Cover Victoria, “A consequence of an ageing workforce is an expected overall increase in time off work due to work-related injury or disease.”

The National Occupational Health and Safety Commission in 2004 clearly defined “occupational injuries” and “occupational diseases”, but these definitions don’t appear to have made it into the various States’ Worker’s Compensation legislation in the same form. The Queensland Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 defines an injury as “personal injury arising out of, or in the course of, employment if the employment is a significant contributing factor to the injury”, and also includes aggravation of an injury, disease or medical condition “if the aggravation arises out of, or in the course of, employment and the employment is a significant contributing factor to the aggravation”.

What confounds and confuses the matter of “aggravation” is section 32(4), which says “to remove any doubt, it is declared that an aggravation mentioned in the provision is an injury only to the extent of the effects of the aggravation.”

Over the last several decades society has developed an understanding regarding the relationship between sedentary lifestyle and many chronic degenerative disorders. Woolf-May (2006) echoes the finding of many large epidemiological studies that found physical activity can reduce an individual’s risk of developing many of the following degenerative disorders that are often associated with the aging process.

Physiological & Biochemical         
Onset of Arthritis
Onset of Osteoporosis
Decrease in Cardiac index
Decrease in nerve conduction velocity
Decrease in acuity of senses

Cardiorespiratory    
Decrease in VO2 uptake
Increase in cardiovascular disease
Increase in hypertension

Muscular       
Decrease in strength
Decrease in size of muscle fibres
Decrease in Fast twitch fibres

Others           
Susceptibility to anxiety
Increase in reaction and movement times

Roy Shephard (1997 p.61) associated aging with progressive increase in body fat content, a decrease in lean muscle mass, atrophy of skeletal muscles, a loss of bone mineral and often a restriction of joint mobility. Aging is inevitable; however the rate of decline can be significantly inhibited by the physical activity level of individuals.

Berecki-Gisolf’s analysis of Victorian worker’s compensation claims identified that both the incidence and duration of work disability increased with age, and “50- to 54-year old persons had on average 5.7 times as many WorkSafe-covered compensated workdays as 15- to 19-year olds”.

Of concern, then, for older workers, employers and Work Cover is the natural progressive degeneration of age-related and pre-existing conditions, such as arthritis or osteoporosis and musculoskeletal conditions, asthma, cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, injury, mental health and obesity which are the 8 National Health Priority Areas.  Not mentioned as an NHPA is hearing loss, which in many jurisdictions has accounted for an increase in claims.  In the SA study “there was a strong and positive relationship between degree of hearing loss and average cost per claim. The median lump sum claim was $7,778 and of hearing aids was $5,860.” 

WorkCover routinely accepts claims as “aggravation of a pre-existing condition”, but while the cover under legislation is to the extent of the aggravation that is almost impossible, in many instances, to identify let alone to treat.

The definition in the legislation, rather than the NOHSC definition, of “occupational injuries” and “occupational diseases”, leaves the door wide open for claims that an aggravation of a pre-existing condition happened at work, even when the circumstances of the condition are such that an aggravation could have happened at any time, any place. I would not think that the intention of worker’s compensation was ever to provide medical treatment for age related conditions.

Cardiorespiratory - VO2 max is a widely used index for cardio-pulmonary fitness. It is calculated by using the Fick equation of Co x a-vo2 difference. Authors Taylor & Johnson describe a linear reduction between the ages of 30-65yrs. Suggesting that sedentary individuals Vo2 max declines at a rate of 10% per decade after the age of 25yrs.

Diabetes – In regards to type II Diabetes age is a primary factor. It is recommended that individuals over the age of 45yrs should have annual check-ups for the disease. A second and ever increasing factor for type II diabetes is obesity. Taylor & Johnson state that the number of people with Type II diabetes in the unhealthy weight range is double that of the population without diabetes.

Obesity - McAdle, Katch and Katch (2007, 845) associate obesity with hypertension, elevated blood sugar, postmenopausal breast cancer. Being overweight or obese increases an individual’s risk of musculoskeletal problems, complications from osteoarthritis. The increased weight causes joint pain, reduction in mobility and inefficiency in body movement, and is a primary risk factor for cardiovascular disease.

The American College of Sport Medicine sets out a risk stratification based on the presence or absence of the CAD risk factors set out below. The risk factors are a group of clinically relevant thresholds that should be considered collectively when making decisions about the level of medical clearance required for exercise testing and prescription. The following was taken from the ASCM (2006 p.22) Table 2-2 Coronary Artery Disease Risk Threshold for use with the ACSM Risk Stratification.

Family History - Myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, or sudden death before 55 years of age in father or other male first-degree relative (i.e. brother or son), or before 65 years of age in mother or other female first-degree relative (i.e. sister or daughter)

Cigarette smoking - Current cigarette smoker or those who quit within the previous six months

Hypertension - Systolic blood pressure of >140 mmHg or diastolic >90 mmHg, confirmed by measurements on at least two separate occasions, or on antihypertensive medication

Dyslipidemia - Total serum cholesterol of >200 mg/dL or HDL or, 40 mg/dL, or on lipid-lowering medication.  If LDL is available, use >130 mg/dL rather than total cholesterol of >200 mg/dL

Fasting Glucose - Fasting blood glucose of >110 mg/dL confirmed by measurements on at least two separate occasions.

Obesity - Body mass index of >30 kg/m2, or waist girth of >40 inches (102 cm) in men and >35 inches (89 cm) in women.

Sedentary Lifestyle - Persons not participating in a regular exercise program or meeting the minimal physical activity recommendations from the US Surgeon General’s report.

The risk stratification is used with the ACSM Pre-Participant screening algorithm for an individual that scores a moderate risk the ACSM TABLE 2-1 (2006 p.20) recommends “Medical examination and exercise testing prior to initiation of vigorous training.” According to Woolf-May this would equal daily accumulation of 30 min or more of physical activity greater than 60% Vo2max. However the ACSM suggests between 80-90% of Max Heart Rate.

World Health Report (WHO 2002) indicated that 60% of the world’s population are not active enough to benefit their health.

According to Kate Woolf–May in her Book for Exercise Prescription, “A Guide for health, sport and exercise professional” (2006 p.3), the US and UK governments now recommend the daily accumulation of 30 min or more of moderate-intensity physical activity.(40-60% Vo2max) for most health adults this is equivalent to a brisk walk around 4.8-6.4 k/hour.

The medical profession has a tendency to medicalise everyday conditions, and worker’s compensation makes it easy for that to happen. All a worker needs to say is it “happened at work”. So person with a degenerative back condition, scoliosis for instance, may claim they felt a twinge when doing their normal work, and their condition worsens until they require time off. What the medical professionals fail to make clear is that exactly the same result could have come about from something as simple as bending to feed the cat at home.

Low et al (2006) noted “Research in the United States has shown that physicians’ recommendations about limiting activity and work after musculoskeletal injury are often influenced by patients’ requests. It is likely that the situation is no different in Australia.”

The recent changes to the NSW Work Cover legislation included removing stroke and heart attack as compensable claims unless there was a definitive and significant connection to work.  The authors of those changes argued that coverage for strokes and heart attacks, which were not normally associated with workplace injuries, was not consistent with the principles of workers’ compensation. “It has been suggested this would provide a closer connection between work, health and safety responsibilities and workers compensation premiums through eliminating workers compensation costs arising in circumstances over which employers have limited control.”

Barnett et al (2008), undertaking research for the South Australia WorkCover Corporation, pointed out that because heart and lung capacity tends to decline with age, the tasks undertaken by older workers may need to be revised to take account of lower speed, intolerance of extremes of temperature and increased recovery time after physical exertion. 

S M Hangai et al (2008) concluded in the study of “Factors associated with lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration in the elderly” that aging, cardiovascular risk factors, particular physical lifting and sports activity were associated with disc degeneration. Participants in the study were aged between 51-86 years old.

Another study by Michele C. Battie et al (2008) The Twin Spine Study: Contributions to a changing view of disc degeneration found “Among the most significant findings were a substantial influence of heredity on lumbar disc degeneration”, noting surprisingly little disc degeneration associated with occupational and leisure time physical loading and factors such as BMI, muscle strength and smoking having a greater effect. No evidence was found to suggest exposure to whole body vibration through motorised vehicle leads to accelerated disc degeneration.

As noted in a submission in response to the Australian Law Reform Commission Issues Paper 41, the country needs to break down the barriers and get mature workers into the workforce, not “inadvertently create disincentives for employers to employ them”.

Workers compensation legislation, in its present form, is neither equitable nor sustainable long term unless changes reflect a moving away from acceptance of degenerative and age related claims for everyday conditions and a return to the original intention of the scheme.

References

Abhayaratna, J. and Lattimore, R. 2006. Workforce Participation Rates — How Does
Australia Compare?, Productivity Commission Staff Working Paper, Canberra

Ai Group. 20 June 2012. Submission in response to the ALRC Issues Paper 41, Grey Areas – Barriers to Work in Commonwealth Laws

Albert, W.A. and M, J, Michel. 2008. Physiology of Exercise and Healthy Aging. United States of America: Human Kinetics.

American College of Sport Medicine [ACSM]. 2006. Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription. Seventh Edition. USA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2009. Australian Social Trends 4102.0

Barnett, K., Spoehr, J. & Parnis, E. July 2008. Ageing and capacity to work: research findings, The Australian Institute for Social Research, prepared for The South Australian WorkCover Corporation

Battie, M. C., T. Videman, J. Kaprio, L. E. Gibbons, K. Gill, H. Manninen, J. Saarela, L. Peltonen. 2009. The Twin Spine Study: Contributions to a changing view of disc degeneration. The Spine Journal (9): 47-59.

Berecki-Gisolf, J., Clay, F.J., Collie, A., McClure, R.J. 2012. Insights from Workers’ Compensation claim records - Full article published in J Occup Environ Med. 54(3):318–27

Commonwealth of Australia.  12 May 2004. Budget Overview, p23

Commonwealth of Australia. 2004. Australia’s Demographic Changes
Exploring the Impact of an Ageing Workforce on the South Australian Workers’ Compensation Scheme: Chapter 3

Hangai, M., K. Kaneoka, S. Kuno, S. Hinotsu, M. Sakane, N. Mamizuka, S. Sakai and N. Ochiai. 2008. Factors associated with lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration in the elderly. The Spine Journal (8):732-740.

Low, John MBBS, GradDipOHS, FAFOM Lai; Roger, MBBS, GradDipOHS and Connaughton; Peter MBBCh, LRCP&SI, FAFOM,CIME. December 2006. Back injuries: Getting injured workers back to work, Australian Family Physician Vol. 35, No. 12

McArdle, W, D,.F,I, Katch and V, L, Katch 2007. Exercise Physiology: Energy, Nutrition & Human Performance. Sixth Edition. USA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

NSW Workers Compensation Scheme. 2012.  Issues Paper
Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission. December 2009. Compendium of OHS and Workers’ Compensation Statistics

Shephard, R,J. 1997. Aging, Physical Activity, and Health. United States of America: Human Kinetics.

Woolf-May, K.2006. Exercise Prescription, Physiological Foundations: A Guide for health, sport and exercise professionals. Philadelphia, USA: Elsevier.

Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003

Sunday, August 19, 2018

Rich man, poor man, beggar man... thief?

Back in 1960, New Zealand - 28.7 times smaller than Australia - had a population of 2.4 million. That was an excellent population - not looking overgrown, no billionaires and few millionaires. Australia, back then, had 10.39 million population and had more cities than NZ - capital cities of each state or territory. In 1960 New Zealand could just about fit into Victoria - almost the same size - and have the same population as Victoria had! In fact, Michael Robert Hamilton Holmes à Court, the media mogul and Australia's feared corporate raider, was Aussie's first billionaire before the stock market crashed in 1987. By 2018 Australia had 480 billionaires. And poverty has grown.

In New Zealand, John D. Todd, the CEO of Todd Corporation in Wellington was their first billionaire, reaching that in the 1990s. Now, 2018, there are 10 billionaires in NZ and the most rich person is Graeme Hart, who, since 1985, became an investor. And poverty has grown.

How do Kiwi and Aus billionaires live like that? How do Australian billionaires compare to NZ billionaires, and how do they - or can they - keep their home country out of poverty? This is, since the first billionaires in Aus or in NZ, only 30 or 40 years. How much has it changed before and after the 1987 sharemarket crash?

The first stock market crashes in the 1900s were in USA: 1901 - 3 years; 1907 - 1 year; 1929, the Great Depression on Wall Street - 4 years, affecting the globe. The Recession in 1938-39 was also in USA and lasted a year, but much of the world moved into a good financial situation after WWII. The first country other than USA, Brazil, crashed in 1971, leading to an energy crisis and the Latin American debt crisis in the early 1980s. In 1972 oil prices went skyward, causing UK and many other countries crashing. NZ fell too. The world recovered in the next decade, but Kuwait hit their worst crash in 1982. By 1987, Black Monday in October, the stock market crashed around the world, beginning in Hong Kong. Rio de Janeiro's Stock Exchange collapsed in 1989 and never recovered. 

At the beginning of the 1990s oil prices increased again after Iraq invaded Kuwait, causing an 8-month long recession. Japan hit the lowest of their financial situation from 1991, and didn't recover for 20 years. In July 1997 Asian stock markets had a mini recession when their overseas investors backed out, and that hit the globe in October 1997. Russia had their own financial crisis in 1998, and terrorism at the USA World Trade buildings in September 2001 caused global reactions. By 2002 the world hit their lowest since 1997-98.

China's Shanghai Stock Exchange fell, triggering large drops throughout the world stocks. For 2 years from 2007-2009, the USA Dow Jones, Nasdaq and S&P500 all fell, and in 2008 many USA financial institutions and many Europe banks fell over. In 2009 Dubai hit their own standstill, causing global stock markets to drop, and the same year S&P downgraded some countries in Europe, causing the European sovereign debt crisis. By 2015 the USA's Dow Jones fell substantially, rebounding back in the global market. It was estimated that 10 trillion dollars were lost from the global stocks.

And poverty has still grown. 

In New Zealand a report from the parliament in 2011 listed 15% of the NZ residents living in poverty since 2009. Australia's ACOSS provided a report in 2010 which listed 11.1% up to 2006. In their update in 2011 they said that "[u]sing the measure of poverty that is currently used by the European Union and the UK (less than 60% of median income), the number of Australians living in poverty would nearly double to 3.8 million, or 19% of the 2006 population." (My italics.) The Anglicare Australia graph shows the government benefits exist at around 25% under 'normal' income. Poverty has grown worse.

Do any millionaires or billionaires help the other population of their own country? Do they donate any of their income to homeless people, or do they have units built which people can afford? Do they support paying taxes before they make profits? Do they rally the government to increase the benefits so it's not 25% less than 'normal' income? Why is poverty still growing? When will Australia, New Zealand, or any country in this world which has millionaires and billionaires and poverty, resolve that situation? No one has ever asked for poverty. No one has ever asked to be homeless.

Have you asked yourself if you can help? Do you care?

Tuesday, July 3, 2018

Whether you think you can…


There is an election coming up. Either a by-election or, later, some time, a federal election. Who will win? It must not be LNP. Their behaviour in the past 5 years has been abdominal, especially their relation to any politician of any other party which has not supported their ‘new’ acts or bills. ALP – Bill Shorten – seems to be the top of those that LNP picks on. Why do they? Is their abuse relative to their positions in government?

I read a book after Julia Gillard was out-voted in 2013, titled “Bewitched and bedevilled”, by many authors who objected to what LNP and the media had done, both to Gillard and to women. Gillard was the first female prime minister and ran a very good government with a shortfall team of Labor, supported by Greens and independents, but LNP, behind Tony Abbott back then, abused her unthinkably. The most visual in my own mind is the picture of Abbott, Bishop and other LNP people standing in front of two extremely unacceptable posters: one said “Juliar…. Bob Browns (sic) bitch” over some drawn in flame, the other was “Ditch the witch” with a witch drawn in the middle, flying on a broom. Gillard? A witch? A bitch??

Who the hell did the LNP think they were? Abusers? Bullies? Anti-women? Why did Abbott and his chaos team stand in front of those posters?? 

Since they were voted into government in 2013, LNP has ruined Australia. The present PM, Malcolm Turnbull, is a rich man. He doesn’t care about poor people (“escalates his war on the poor and unemployed”, New Matilda). He doesn’t care about disabled people (“government's bid to link disability funding to welfare cuts has backfired spectacularly”, SMH). He doesn’t care what tax is used for (“sticks defiantly to business tax cuts”, The Guardian). He doesn’t care about ABC (“ramps up attack on public broadcaster”, The Guardian). He doesn’t care at all about ALP (“party-pooper trick of calling five by-elections on the day of the Labor Party's biggest celebration”, Fraser Coast Chronicle). He doesn’t care about women politicians (“politics is still not an equal place for women”, The Conversation). He does care what goes into his own bank account (“the highest paid politician in the OECD”, SBS). 

The following essay writers from “Bewitched and bedevilled” wrote about what upset them – what upset so many women. This abuse they wrote about was from the media, the LNP party – and yes, LNP women. If you have never read “Bewitched and bedevilled”, read these: they can make you angry, make you cry, make your hair stand up on your neck.

Emily Maguire, p14:     Political reporting has all but ceased to exist.
Jane Caro, p24:             See, the critics imply smugly, we told you women just aren’t up to it.
Kathy Lette, p35:         Perhaps it’s time all Australian women took up knitting, to enable is to impale misogynists on the end of our needles.
Helen Razer, p44:         Yes. Yes. Politicians have ALWAYS made empty promises with big smiles. The thing is, now, no one seems to care.
Helen Pringle, p75:       What is new is that the use of the pornography to incite laughter against women has migrated into the heart of political discourse, as a way of humiliating those who don’t know their proper place.
Eva Cox, p83:               On the wider questions, gender remains an uncomfortable fit with power politics.
Catherine Lumby, p90: Female politicians are seen as female before they are seen as politicians.
Claire Hawey, p100:     She has been a victim of frequent and often shocking nastiness – sometimes by people who were also grotty sexists.
Clementine Ford, p108:          These are the depths of sexism to which political discourse in this country sunk while wrestling with the challenge of a woman in charge.
Shakira Hussein, p120: …similarities in strategies that [women] adopted to negotiate the minefield of gender and power in which they found themselves.
Ruth Hessey, p125:      Another quick check of the image-makers’ guide to success reveals that a woman ‘diminshes her image as an expert or an authority figure’ if she ‘turns a man on’.
Tracey Spicer, p133:     [LNP] had described her as ‘deliberately barren’ and, as a consequence, ‘unqualified’ to lead the country. It wasn’t long before this slur was dragged back from the muckheap and slung again. And again.
Carol Johnson, p140:    Male politicians who replace existing leaders seem to be constructed as understandably ambitious, while women who do so risk being constructed as ruthless and devious.
Chloe Hooper, p156:    The relationship between journalists and a politician is a co-dependent but not a transparent one.
Tanya Plibersek, p187:  It is absolutely clear that the News Ltd media were extremely hostile towards the Labor Party under both Julia’s and Kevin’s leadership. It’s also true that the right-wing talk-back hosts have a very clear political agenda of their own.

There is an election coming up. Either a by-election or, later, some time, a federal election. Yes, I said this at the start of this blog, but it is winding me up. I am a very, very small part of everything that Turnbull and his party does not care about, does not like, but I did not choose to be here, I did not choose to be poor, I did not choose to be disabled and I wish I could work.

Who will win the by-elections and the federal election? 

It must not be LNP.


Trenoweth, S 2013, editor Bewitched and Bedevilled, Hardie Grant Books, VIC