Australia Day: A Movable Feast?

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

Another Australia Day has come and gone.

Do you remember when Australia Day was a public holiday? A day on which Australians sat around enjoying themselves, perhaps having a barbie with friends, perhaps just extending a long weekend?

That was when Australia was a great place to live -- and we all knew it.

Now, we're not so sure...

Is it un-Australian to just be Australian?

Is Australia still "the lucky country"? Have we finally understood that the reference to Australia as "the lucky country" was sarcasm? For years, we -- the uneducated masses -- really believed that we did live in the lucky country...

We believed it, because it matched our own enjoyment of all that made Australia lucky.

Now, thank goodness, we realise that Australia is really a miserable place to live.

So, once a year, every Australia Day, we have to be reminded to stand around in huge crowds and shout, Australia is sort of okay as long as you're rich and employed and part of the mob mentality which believes that we all have to be seen being happy before we can be truly happy!

Just One Eye Wide Shut

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

A typical day for letter-writers in The West... A series of one-eyed rants which ignore the possibility of an alternate viewpoint...

(In this blog I am willing to rant from both sides or either side of the argument. Whichever needs more support.)

Take, for example, the two letters which the Editor has placed under the common heading of, "We Disagree":

Taking Coal from Margaret River

Article Flags False Premises

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

In a post-Australia day article reporter Andrew Tillett writes about the annual "flag debate" (McKeon backs republic, PM stands by flag, The West, 27 Jan 2011). The article contains an obviously false statement:

Fifteen former Australians of the Year launched a campaign yesterday to coincide with Australia Day to demand a new flag.

One or two days earlier there was a report which presented a different version of "the truth": The Change the Flag Committee (or whatever it's called) asked every (past & present) Australian of the Year if they would support the move for a new Australian flag. Most of them said, Yes.

So the truth appears to be that an established group which wants to change the flag has recruited fifteen new supporters. These new supporters are speaking in favour of an existing campaign -- a campaign being run by a long-established group -- to have the flag changed.

These new recruits have not "launched a new campaign". They have supported an existing and long-running campaign.

"Added their support" is true. "Launched a new campaign" is not true.

Is this a case of sloppy reporting by Tillett? Or is it "spin" -- false claims -- by the Change the Flag Committee?

Either way... read the newspaper with a pinch of salt.

Independent thinking & independent analysis of your problems by Agamedes Consulting. Support for your thought: email nick leth at gmail dot com

Try Not to be Confused by Drugs

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

There seem to be two camps in the drug legalisation debate: Those who want addicts treated, and those who want criminals punished.

That's not very clear, is it.

Those who want addicts treated will say, addicts are only "criminals" because drug use is a "crime". Which is true. But misses the point.

Those who want criminals punished point to violence, theft and robbery which are perpetrated by drug addicts who need money for their fix. Which is true. But misses the point.

Make drug use -- any drug use -- legal. Violence, theft and robbery are still crimes. Punish the criminals. Treat the addicts. Addicts who commit crimes -- other than simple use of drugs -- are still criminals.

A drug addict may also be a criminal. A non drug addict may also be a criminal. Both should be treated as criminals.

Make drug use legal. A drug user is not a criminal just for using drugs. They may need treatment. They do not need punishment.

There is only one point of view in the drug legalisation debate: Those who do not want either drug users or non drug users to commit crimes against other people.

What remains for debate is "self harm". As long as it does not affect anyone else, should "self harm" be a criminal act?

Independent thinking & independent analysis of your problems by Agamedes Consulting. Support for your thought: email nick leth at gmail dot com

CHOGM Legal Challenge

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

It seems that our current legal system is not enough to protect CHOGM delegates:

"Police need greater powers of stop and search so that they can head off any potential trouble or danger before we have a serious incident." That's the WA Police Union president Russell Armstrong, reported in The West, "Stop, search law in for CHOGM", 24 Jan 2011.

In the same article, Police Minister Rob Johnson is reported as saying that new legislation will be introduced including "the right to randomly stop and search people in designated security areas". That's the reporters' words, not necessarily the minister's. Shadow police minister Margaret Quirk would support the new laws, "provided they were limited to CHOGM" (reporters' words) and were not more general stop and search laws introduced by stealth.

So what is it about CHOGM that necessitates new laws?

Are all the CHsOG law breakers?

Apparently not. It seems that CHOGM brings lots of protesters and troublemakers to Perth. "There will be lots of protesters and troublemakers that will be coming to Perth to try and create some headaches." That's Armstrong again.

CHOGM logic failure

Down below, I'm going to throw in a simple solution to the CHOGM law enforcement problems. But that was not what set my Bad Logic Alarm clanging...

We have laws which are adequate for public safety. So we are told. So why does CHOGM require more laws? Are existing laws suddenly inadequate?

Companies Argue so Workers Miss Pay

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

Is it true that contracted payments are optional when they are between an employer and an employee? That's the clear implication of an article in today's newspaper...

In the article Daniel Emerson writes that, "builder [P1] claimed it had paid contractor [P2], which claimed the opposite, with the result that workers had not been paid" (Workers angry over pay confusion, The West, 18 Jan 2011). Let's get that straight:

Justice is Blind but has a Strong Bias

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

There's something rather odd about an inquest report written by Georgia Loney (Jail law call for careless drivers, The West, 18 Jan 2011). Loney reports that State Coroner Alastair Hope made an "open finding" as to whether a pedestrian died due to "unlawful homicide [caused by the driver of the car that hit him] or as a result of an accident".

The report also says that, "Mr Hope said two possibilities were that [the driver] was either looking out of his car's rear-view mirror or had fallen asleep before the collision." The coroner recommends that the law be changed to allow the driver to be charged with "causing death".

Let's get this straight.

Housing Choice beyond Giant Boxes of Ticky-tack

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

"Housing choice needed". That's a headline in today's editorial in The West (14 Jan 11). The story begins, "Housing Perth's growing population has for years meant more big homes on big blocks."

Where does the editor live?!

Decades ago, the standard Perth suburban block was a "quarter acre", just over 1000 square metres. Today, if you own 1000 m2 you will be subdividing... Dividing the block into two or possibly more blocks And each of those smaller blocks will soon hold a McMansion.

In Subiaco, for example, from the list of houses for sale or recently sold:

Ivory Tower Ignorance

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

Bob Birrell is, "a reader in sociology and a member of the Centre for Population and Urban Research at Monash University." According to Birrell, "Opinion in WA is firm that the State needs more migrants." With that as an opener, why would you trust the rest of his article? (Cut permanent migration to east cost, says academic, The West, 13 Jan 2011)

Oh, but we need more people to work in the WA mining boom, claim the money-before-everything mega-rich mining companies.

In the same edition of The West, Retail trade beats mining as biggest driver of jobs, reports Nick Butterly. So tell me again why "the mining boom" needs more people for its workforce?

Big business, in paid publicity releases, cries for more people. A steady trickle of letters to the editor point out that WA is -- along with the rest of the world -- already past its sustainable level of population.

If you're rich, you can buy your own island. And destroy a bit more of the natural environment, while protecting your own standard of living.

Much Ado about Marketing

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

Sucked in by Harvey Norman

There's been a bit of fuss and bother lately about online shopping. It seems that major retailers -- having successfully squeezed out smaller retailers -- are now upset by the perceived competition from online retailers. Times are tough, so it's time to attack the competition.

Now here's an interesting memory... No facts, but a memory from ten or twenty years ago. A memory that stuck in my mind. A reason for my continuing reluctance to buy anything from Harvey Norman...

Air Con Fusing

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

Naturally enough, as a modern household with environmentally destructive aspirations, we have a reverse cycle air con. Air con? For those in a colder climate, that's an air conditioning unit. Reverse cycle? Means that it both heats and cools.

So we want the room temperature to be at a constant twenty three degrees celsius. When I say "we" I mean, my wife likes 23 and I'm happy to wear more or less clothes to suit.

What happens if the room temperature starts at 28 degrees? The air con has to cool the air. What happens if the room temperature starts at 18 degrees? The air con needs to warm the air.

Is that so very difficult?

Well, it must be a very difficult concept for someone.

Alinta Gas and Other Hot Air

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

Lead’s Lessons Lost

According to the Editorial in The West of 4 Jan 2011: “One of those lessons [for the Barnett government] must surely be the importance of assuring the public that strict control is being maintained over the export of lead through WA ports.”

I would hope for an even more important lesson:

Actually maintain strict control.

Theatre of the Absurd

Bill Proude of Mt Lawley wrote to The West: “How can a bloke take a girl to the theatre without being able to offer her a drink during the intervals?” (4 Jan 2011)

How, indeed?

How can you expect to get laid, if you can’t get her pissed at the play? Poor Bill Proude.

All Animals are Equal, but... only in your dreams

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

Unexciting factoid: “The median ATAR for students who used one stage 2 course in their admission rank was 68” (Bethany Hiatt reporting in The West, 4 Jan 2011). This -- according to Hiatt’s headline -- is evidence that Easy courses shatter uni hopes.

Let’s have a look at the logic:

• A student may study for the regular exam which is tailored for university entrance. Or they may choose to study an easier course with an easier exam.
  
• Students studying the regular course were given a 15-point bonus. Which means, at a guess, that the regular course was considered to be 15% tougher than the easier course. In other words, a student who could achieve a 60% result in the regular course would be expected to achieve 75% (ie 60+15) in the easier course. So the 15-point “bonus” is, in fact, an equaliser.
  
• With the equaliser, students can study either course -- regular or easier -- and expect to get the same final percent.
  

Except -- and here’s where Hiatt comes in -- students choosing to study the easier course are getting final marks that are lower than students studying the regular course.