Australian Politics.

What really irritates me is the dichotomy between stated belief and voiced complaints by much of the electorate.
A common theme is the Nanny State - axiomatically it is seen as bad. Yet, as soon as something happens which could have been prevented, the state or individual politicians are seen as blameworthy for not intervening.
If a child is abused in the home screams arise saying that it shouldn't have happened if there was more reporting by teachers/social workers etc and by implication more intrusion into the individual's life.
If a shonky worker installs insulation and a fire results the government is to blame.
I could go on much longer from old people falling in the home, perceived drops in education standards, youth drunkeness to radar and cameras on the road.
At one time it was always, "They should do something about it". Now it seems more satisfactory to lay the blame on a politician or political party while still somehow managing to decry the notion of a Nanny State.
Cheers,
Jim

I think some of your examples are a mix of social behaviour and the nanny state.
Socially we do not accept child abuse nothing to do with nanny state. the reporting of this and the following actions depend on how good the various departments act if at all.

The insulation matters relate straight to a government that did not do the proper planning of a project. Not a nanny state matter straight incompetence.

Internet filtering for all, secret web lists etc are nanny state matters. Its like a certain political party hinting at a tax on certain fast foods so we don't get obese.

The argument is not about child abuse per se. Any degree of accurate reporting requires intrusion in people's lives by government entities.

Insulation. Was the planning meant to include probity checks on installers? The fires were caused by individual installers. It could be argued that too much trust was placed on the common sense of those individuals. To argue that installers needed to be told not to put staples through live wires is pushing hand-holding to extremes.

It's a little late to worry about web lists etc. Ever since (and perhaps before) the twin towers terrorist attack internet activity has been monitored. We might be coming late to some things but countries like the UK have video surveillance that Hitler or Stalin could only have dreamt about.

Probably the best bulwark we have against an all powerful 'nanny state' is the incompetence of government:D
Cheers,
Jim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jimbur

I don't want to be an apologist for the two groups but the BOS do say that the figures are preliminary estimates. It is also possible that different time periods are being used - immigration figures quote 2008/9 whereas BOS quote year ending 31st December 2009.
That aside the figures do seem greatly at odds.
Jim

---

The Stats figures are preliminary as there can be considerable lag between the actual birth of a child and the registration of the birth; it's the same with deaths.

And it's not necessarily the public servants who come up with the silly ideas; most of the more boneheaded concepts result from trying to come up with something that meets the policy goals of the government, and, of late these policies seem to be aimed at appeasing small opinionated minorities in the marginal electorates - their attitudes seem to be driving the main points in the current debate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebastiaan56

The interesting thing will be the trend line. I know its dangerous to predict on spot data but a lot of the world is seeing the baby boomers retire and start to die off. They are the great lump in the demographic and will leave their children and grandchildren the bills to pay. I think negative growth (there you go, Ive learned the jargon!) is inevitable.

---

The term baby boomer is ambigious, with most usage refering to people born after ww2 until some time in the early 60's when the contraceptive pill was introduced. The precise year doesn't change the numbers much so lets assume 46-63.

3105.0.65.001 - Australian Historical Population Statistics, 2008

If you download the life tables for example and chart the number of people at each age point you find that the disparity between genX and baby boomers isn't that great, in fact teh curve is smooth. If you assume parity in immigration and current birth reates and life expectancy I can't see any point where there would be negative population growth. What there is is a period where the ratio of working age people to retired people drops from teh current 8:1 to about 2:1 or something. I don't have the numbers to hand and can't remember them precisely.

IMO when this happens we simply won't have an age pension anymore. They are already bumping the qualifying age up every few years. People now take social security for granted but it wasn't so very long ago that it simply didn't exist as a universal government care system.

Unless I have misunderstood you and your talking about negative economic growth ?

It's also worth remembering that until the first half of the 20th century government typically took up about 5-7% GDP. They are now around 25-27% GDP in the west. It's always possible that won't continue.

There is nearly 100% discrepency in the immigration figures, and that can't be explained by timeframe differences and projections. They ahven't responded but I THINK the difference is between total arrivals vs departures and our actual official immigration program, which encompasses NZ declared arrivals but not long term holidays, citizens returning after protracted periods abroad and other miscelaneous classes. See here:

Total Movements Data - Statistics - Publications, Research & Statistics

Note the all australia numbers. 12 030 973 arrivals 11 770 621 departures which makes about 260k discrepency. I think I don't understand the classifications and terminology.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jimbur

What really irritates me is the dichotomy between stated belief and voiced complaints by much of the electorate.
A common theme is the Nanny State - axiomatically it is seen as bad. Yet, as soon as something happens which could have been prevented, the state or individual politicians are seen as blameworthy for not intervening.
<SNIP>

Cheers,
Jim

---

I hear what your saying and don't totally disagree, but I submit it's a bit more complex than that.

Consider we live in a village based society. If uncle joe gets caught fiddling the kids (or driving recklessly, or whatever) he gets public humiliation and probably a good flogging. Everyone knows to keep an eye on him and if he reoffends he gets extracted from society (noose, exile whatever).

If you consider how things were handled in the 60's: Johhny plays up, Johnny gets a size 9 up the date and driven home to his parents with all the police car lights flashing and the car parked out the front. Johnny's parents take care of the situation and Johnny doesn't reoffend. If Johhny becomes a more serious offender Johnny goes to jail and even when he's released he's tarred and watched the rest of his life.

Now today the government has removed the communities ability to deal with people,in the name of political correctness and discrimination and also because we now live (mostly) in anonomous societies. The government has accepted the responsibility of protecting the community. The glaring problem with this is the means to achieve this is bureaucratic and poorly executed, and so it is both invasive and restrictive while also lacking effectivness. That is essentially the complaint people raise. If the government is going to take responsibility and we have to suffer their regulation to that end when the system fails we claim the right to complain.

Gun laws are an example close to my heart. Howard et al made owning my 13lb .22 single shot target rifle so onerous I sold it and abandoned my sport of poking holes in bits of cardboard with little metal blobs. I am prepared to be proven wrong but I am yet to see any convincing numbers to indicate the gun laws reduced firearms related crime as they were touted to. Thus I complain about the laws and I complain about the crime that continues despite the laws.

The filter is a similar thing. I'll aquire a vpn host offshore as a matter of principle. It won't curtail pedaphelia, nor any other criminal activity. It will inconvenience and cost every australian internet user.

2c.

Quote:

---

Consider we live in a village based society. If uncle joe gets caught fiddling the kids (or driving recklessly, or whatever) he gets public humiliation and probably a good flogging. Everyone knows to keep an eye on him and if he reoffends he gets extracted from society (noose, exile whatever).

If you consider how things were handled in the 60's: Johhny plays up, Johnny gets a size 9 up the date and driven home to his parents with all the police car lights flashing and the car parked out the front. Johnny's parents take care of the situation and Johnny doesn't reoffend. If Johhny becomes a more serious offender Johnny goes to jail and even when he's released he's tarred and watched the rest of his life.

---

:U agreed and to day the crim is the victim :?....BS

Quote:

---

Now today the government has removed the communities ability to deal with people,in the name of political correctness and discrimination and also because we now live (mostly) in anonomous societies. The government has accepted the responsibility of protecting the community. The glaring problem with this is the means to achieve this is bureaucratic and poorly executed, and so it is both invasive and restrictive while also lacking effectivness. That is essentially the complaint people raise. If the government is going to take responsibility and we have to suffer their regulation to that end when the system fails we claim the right to complain.

---

The Govt seems to want to have the right to interfere when it chooses but not the responsibility if it stuffs up of which it does often.

Quote:

---

Gun laws are an example close to my heart. Howard et al made owning my 13lb .22 single shot target rifle so onerous I sold it and abandoned my sport of poking holes in bits of cardboard with little metal blobs. I am prepared to be proven wrong but I am yet to see any convincing numbers to indicate the gun laws reduced firearms related crime as they were touted to. Thus I complain about the laws and I complain about the crime that continues despite the laws.

---

Couldn't agree more.The round up of guns effected the law abiding citizen and did nothing to stem the tide of illegal importation and usage of guns.

Quote:

---

The filter is a similar thing. I'll aquire a vpn host offshore as a matter of principle. It won't curtail pedaphelia, nor any other criminal activity. It will inconvenience and cost every australian internet user.

---

Yep, can't fault that

True Damian it is more complex than that but that is how things tend to be portrayed especially in this election period. I'm doing the same thing now by blaming the media for not reporting anything with any depth but there does seem to be a general dumbing down. Short bites are all the go.
The 'debate' was advertised as being a media event just the same as that cooking competition, yet the first will affect our lives for the next few years whereas the second might just cause a few cases of indigestion.
Cheers,
Jim

I swear people are dumber now than in the 70's.

The standard of journalism has fallen, or at least they are less covert in patronising us, but unless the audience demands a better standard why should they lift ?

I have thought for a long time that funding should be attached to students rather than institutions and assessment should be cross institutional and double blind. You then have schools/universities etc competing to produce results and attract students. Assessment should be on improvment not raw scores because we need teachers for challenged students as well as they gifted.

Only then when you have taught people to think and learn will you get a more discerning electorate and hopefully a better government.

Of course if your a conspiricy advocate you might say they are deliberately dumbing people down. Personally I don't think they are that well organised :)

Life was just much simpler.
We were all idiots then as well.
Knowledge came from Funk and Wagnells.
There were only 4 beer choices and one sexual preference.
The only foreign restaurant was Chinese
Pornography came along with buck's nights as a once in a year special treat
Hunting and shooting were fun.
Mobile phones, calculators, faxes and computers only existed at Universities and were about the size of your bedroom.

There is just a great disinterest as there are to many options, too many holiday destinations, too many restaurants of too many varieties and everyone has too much money.

I blame the Liberals, It's their fault for increasing our personal wealth.

.......Pity we can't use any of it to purchase a house any more, due to their stupid prices; a fact for which I also blame the Liberals.

In fact it's all their fault!

Greg

I remember 4 wheel drum brakes and manual (vague) steering and people not running into one another nearly as often as they seem to now. I lived in sidinee with bumper to bumper traffic yet I saw more crashes happen right in front of me the first 12 months in Brisbane than I'd seen in 30 years in Sydney. There were multi nose to tails 2 days in a row at the end of my ladyfriend's street last week.

Maybe it's choice. Maybe people just don't care anymore. Dunno.

Poverty (%) in Australia doubled between 1984 and 1994. I will never forgive Hawke.

I just got my first bits of pollie puke in the letterbox today. An addressed letter from the Liberal hopeful and another claiming she is seat shopping. Dirt and mud seems to be the name of the game. How do I get off these goons' mailing lists, is there an conscientous objectors objectors register?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebastiaan56

I just got my first bits of pollie puke in the letterbox today. An addressed letter from the Liberal hopeful and another claiming she is seat shopping. Dirt and mud seems to be the name of the game. How do I get off these goons' mailing lists, is there an conscientous objectors objectors register?

---

It is something called the electoral roll:2tsup::D

It's times like this it's good to live in a safe seat. They ignore you...:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebastiaan56

I just got my first bits of pollie puke in the letterbox today. An addressed letter from the Liberal hopeful and another claiming she is seat shopping. Dirt and mud seems to be the name of the game. How do I get off these goons' mailing lists, is there an conscientous objectors objectors register?

---

You're lucky only just getting the advertising now. We've been getting it for a week or two even one from a candidate who isn't standing in our electorate. That bodes well for the future.
As Damian points out we must be in marginal seats.
Cheers,
Jim