Mr Medved

Advanced members
  • Content count

    3221
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mr Medved

  1. They won't stop the deficits. If they tried to it would induce an economic recession and the housing balloon will finally pop, which will cause major problems for the banks, which will land the government deeper in debt, etc. So I wouldn't expect any genuine intent to "balance the books". I'm surprised the government hasn't flogged off any more major assets... perhaps because there's nothing more to sell. I'm pretty confident they'll look to sell off NBN Co. once it is rolled out to most of the population.
  2. Holy sh*t! The debt/GDP ratio for Luxembourg is off the charts! Even taking into account the size of the banking sector there, that is still crazy (6,731% / $6.7m per capita).
  3. I thought Abbott was more of a case of "anyone but Rudd". And he only led the Liberal Party only because Hockey had no balls. But to be honest I don't know because I avoid MSM almost completely and when election cycle comes around again I'll use my VPN to avoid youtube ads.
  4. Hey Tor, have you become the half arsed blogger? It's always nice to read your trip reports, sounds like you've been on the road a bit lately.
  5. You should drop by this forum more often! Thanks
  6. Totally disagree. Lawyers and sheriffs were banned from British parliaments for almost 500 years because they have a conflict of interest. They create additional work for their peers by mounts of legislation. Lawyers are officers of the Supreme Court (re-present the Crown, not the people) whereas parliamentarians are supposed to re-present the will of the people. You can only serve one master, lawyers don't serve the people which is the role of parliamentarians. Since Menzies, with the exception of Rudd (career bureaucrat sociopath), every Australian Prime Minister has either been a lawyer or legally trained. In the corresponding time the amount of legislation has ballooned. You just need to visit a public library and see the volumes of statutes explode since the early 1950s. McClellan was one of the worst, he was appointing High Court justices as A.G. while running his private business. You don't need lawyers in parliament, just lawyers in the A.G.'s department to ensure bills are not in conflict with law. They don't even do that properly today. And most bills are drafted by committees anyway that are fed by vested interest groups (like multinationals). Parliaments definitely don't need lawyers. One of the best things to do is kick lawyers out of parliaments. They should only be in the judiciary/judicature. Not sure if it was coincidence, but the Statute Law Revision Acts (1873-5) were introduced to UK parliaments at the zenith of the British empire. They let lawyers into parliaments and it's been downhill ever since. And lawyers are pretty slimy creatures at the best of time. I've spent quite a few years studying how the courts actually work and it's a racket. Not all lawyers are scumbags but they are the exception to the rule.
  7. Do you mean 485 visa?
  8. Sounds like a bizarre experience. Do you live on the wrong side of the tracks?
  9. The rail line is pork for mates. There's a lot of waste in the CSIRO (based on feedback from someone who worked there) but there are plenty of other things I'd cut first.
  10. Happy for it to pump along for a few more years... I'd like to bank a bit more savings before the next depression hits...
  11. In Victoria (not sure for the rest of Oz) lawyers are officers of the Supreme Court and swear an oath. You can only serve one master, so ultimately they don't serve you. I was also told of either a letter or judgement from a High Court judge that said they need to "uphold the system". You only get justice if you're not up against the system. I met a guy who lived under Tito. He said justice existed if you had disputes with other people (i.e., someone stole my chickens), but if you challenged the system it would come crushing down on you. It's the same in Oz, it's just not many people pay attention to it or acknowledge it.
  12. Yeah I didn't realise how crappy the scheme was. Seems like a lot of effort for 6k. I'd rather work more or get a high-paying gig.
  13. Looks like my meeting room is actually on a different network. We had an ISP-related outage but there were some ethernet points that were not impacted.
  14. IIRC the FIRE sector constitutes 60% of lending. Banks are stuffed when property prices go south.
  15. All I can say is, good luck with that! What are they going to do, revoke a passport?
  16. Private debt is a far bigger concern than public debt IMO. Young people don't have to worry, just get a HECS-funded education and move overseas. I'm tempted to do a masters degree and then a runner, but I'm not sure what I'd want to study.
  17. I hope the FHB grant is valid for overseas properties. Then I may be interested. Even in remote suburbs an average house costs $600-700k which is obscene for what you get. I'd get a luxury flat in the centre of town in Russia for half the price.
  18. Heh... I think I've discovered a meeting room that doesn't through the company firewall...
  19. Media is under upheaval, but the spectrum still has a value so they should be charged for it (like telco companies). I had no idea about this as I don't own a television. It also plays a mass conditioning role so should have some level of regulation. My little ones have never grown up with a television in the house. They are used to basically on-demand anything. Nothing like my childhood experience of waiting for a show at a particular time. As far as I know you can get live sport on the internet... Telstra has live AFL, NRL doesn't it? There will be a mass-adopted technology like torrents to stream it in the future. I remember Max Keiser saying years ago that digital content will diverge to its 'intrinsic' value - zero. So don't expect to make money from it but from other sources. A band I've listened to for years called Integrity give away their music now for free and make money from merch (and live shows). I know that's all a bit 'blrr' but I just woke up from a long afternoon nap. Hope it makes sense.
  20. My experience in Eastern Europe and Central Asia is to always negotiate the fare before stepping into the car. Never rely on the meter as you get ripped off (happened to me once in Moscow and I learned my lesson). Not sure if the likes of Uber, Yandex etc. have changed things as I haven't been there in a few years. I'm surprised they're going after tourists because it may lead to less and less deciding to travel there.
  21. Title track from Dead Dawn album.
  22. One of the singles from Dead Dawn album. I think Tor may like the video.
  23. Entombed A.D. hit Australia next week. Dead Dawn is a seriously good album, this is probably my favourite song off the album (Down to Mars to Ride).
  24. 51% Of Murders In The U.S. Come From Just 2% Of The Counties http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-05-01/51-murders-us-come-just-2-counties Authored by John R. Lott, Jr. via Crime Prevention Research Center The Distribution of Murders The United States can really be divided up into three types of places. Places where there are no murders, places where there are a few murders, and places where murders are very common. In 2014, the most recent year that a county level breakdown is available, 54% of counties (with 11% of the population) have no murders. 69% of counties have no more than one murder, and about 20% of the population. These counties account for only 4% of all murders in the country. The worst 1% of counties have 19% of the population and 37% of the murders. The worst 5% of counties contain 47% of the population and account for 68% of murders. As shown in figure 2, over half of murders occurred in only 2% of counties. Murders actually used to be even more concentrated. From 1977 to 2000, on average 73 percent of counties in any give year had zero murders. Possibly, this change is a result of the opioid epidemic’s spread to more rural areas. But that question is beyond the scope of this study. Lott’s book “More Guns, Less Crime” showed how dramatically counties within states vary dramatically with respect to murder and other violent crime rates. Breaking down the most dangerous counties in Figure 2 shows over half the murders occur in just 2% of the counties, 37% in just the worst 1% of the counties. Figure 1 illustrates how few counties have a significant number of murders. Figure 3 further illustrates that with a cumulative perspective. 54% of counties have zero murders, 69% have at most one murder, 76% have at most two murders, and so on. To put it differently, only the top four percent of the counties have 16 or more murders. If the 1% of the counties with the worst number of murders somehow were to become a separate country, the murder rate in the rest of the US would have been only 3.4 in 2014. Removing the worst 2% or 5% would have reduced the US rate to just 3.06 or 2.56 per 100,000, respectively. Even within the Counties with the murders, the murders are heavily Concentrated within those counties When you look at individual counties with a high number of murders, you find large areas with few murders. Take Los Angeles County, with 526 murders in 2014, the most of any county in the US. The county has virtually no murders in the northwestern part of the county. There was only one murder each in Beverly Hills, Hawthorne, and Van Nuys. Clearly, different parts of the county face very different risks of murder. The map below shows the distribution of murders in Indianapolis, with 135 murders. Although the city extends well beyond the 465 Highway that encircles downtown Indianapolis, there are only four murders outside of that loop. The northern half of the city within 465 also has relatively few murders. Washington, DC has large areas without murders. 14th Street NW divides the eastern and western parts of the district, with murders overwhelmingly limited to the eastern half. The area around the capitol is also extremely safe. Here is the murder map for Dallas. Gun Ownership According to a 2013 PEW Research Center survey, the household gun ownership rate in rural areas was 2.11 times greater than in urban areas (“Why Own a Gun? Protection is Now Top Reason,” PEW Research Center, March 12, 2013). Suburban households are 28.6% more likely to own guns than urban households. Despite lower gun ownership, urban areas experience much higher murder rates. One should not put much weight on this purely “cross-sectional” evidence over one point in time, but it is still interesting to note that so much of the country has both very high gun ownership rates and zero murders. Conclusion This study shows how murders in the United States are heavily concentrated in very small areas. Few appreciate how much of the US has no murders each year. Murder isn’t a nationwide problem. It’s a problem in a very small set of urban areas, and any solution must reduce those murders.
  25. if you don't like Trump you might like this track.