I was about to make the chronic condition caveat. It’s crazy that people with lifelong conditions that will require medication for the rest of their lives need to go to their GP to renew their script every couple of months. Make that twice a year and ad-hoc as required and pharmacists can assist with the middle ground.
I’d trust then to mostly manage repeats. I’m not so sure about diagnosing and prescribing meds though.
Moving states helps a lot! When I moved to Melbourne, I offloaded so much! It was so easy to justify when the cost of transporting a thing exceeded its value.
Ten years later now with a wife and two kids moving back to Perth with me - same deal. Another huge downsize.
We still have too much stuff. Our last move was a downsize to three bedrooms and there are a few boxes in the garage that can’t fit in the place. I’ve pretty much forgotten what’s in them.
It’s weird: you go on holiday somewhere and live in a quest apartment with barely anything in it for a week and don’t miss your stuff at all.
Sell. Flood that market!
People want an alternative to Labor. The lazy strategy of vaguely catering to boomers is no longer working for the coalition - that base is simply dying out and they’ve never gotten around to appealing to anyone else.
Now their voters are splintering and ONP is picking up the nutters.
You’d think compulsory voting in and of itself would be a smarter early policy to aim for if you want a US political shit show. Then you make elections a workday. Then you make it so you fall off he roll every year or so. Finally you make it difficult to get onto the roll itself.
Even in the USA, if you divide the population into categories, the ‘did not vote’ cohort would win every election.
We are not anywhere near as religious a nation as the USA. Abortion just isn’t really a topic here, because the 10% who’d be against it wouldn’t stand a chance of passing such a change. I think getting rid of compulsory voting would be a more popular policy to start with.
It probably isn’t actually $7k from those 3.7 million people. It’s more like $1k from every Australian. They haven’t only taken from the poorest among us.
It’s a strange world. It isn’t that there aren’t enough houses - well not just that. It’s that too many houses are owned by people who do not live in them.
Mr. and Mrs. Boomer and their property portfolio of seven homes are suppressing supply for six other people/families.
Then you have Mr. Foreign who has a place or two in Australia as a safe way to secure wealth in a place out of reach of his own government who might one day decide to simply take over all his assets.
50 years of successive Australian governments have been encouraging investment in real estate. I’m sure there were great reasons for it initially like keeping wealth within the nation. But now we’ve gone too far.
If we could get all those property investors to sell their properties, we’d go a long way toward meeting housing demand with existing supply.
It’s 2026, Earth’s pop. is 8.3 billion people. I genuinely think we are going to be 2/3 this in ~5 years.
You think that 2.75 Billion people are going to die in the next 5 years?
Sorry - I can’t get past that. It’s possible I’d read an article that had this conclusion, as shocking as that would be - if it had a more credible bit of evidence than “I genuinely think”. I also don’t know what WHS is. I would normally google that if I wanted to be informed by the article, but yeah - I’ve already dismissed its contents as crazy and stopped being interested.
I’m being harsh, I apologise about that. Normally I’d have closed the tab and never thought about it again. But you’re asking for criticism and appear to be new at this. As a reader of lots of articles, I approach them something like:
Is this plausible? No? Who is saying it? Some random on the Internet? What’s their source? “Trust me bro”?
If you have bona fides on the topic, be clearer about what they are. If you have data to back your conclusion up, be clearer about that before you drop a bombshell like ‘3 Billion people are going to die in the next few years’.
From the bits I read/skimmed, you appear to be saying that present levels of food production are relying on artificial fertiliser, which in-turn relies on LNG to be produced. But you haven’t made clear is what’s changing, why this is a problem, why we can’t use alternate fertiliser sources, what trends you are already seeing to demonstrate that you’re not projecting everything.
It’d depend on whether you liked it for its engine or other aesthetics. I loved the look of late 90’s Celicas. Couldn’t care less about the engine in them, I just thought they looked cool. In some other life where I had the time and resources for such a project, I could see myself giving them such an upgrade.
I think I read that Arnie put an electric motor into one of his Hummers.
As much as I love Beached Az, it was made by Australian guys taking the piss. It’s not actually Kiwi.
I think the quintessential NZ video involves how Dumb Monique thinks you are, and whether you’d like some Ghost Chups.
Yep - I read an ABC article this morning about the same topic.
tldr; it’s about how the government just yoinked a chunk of Arnham land away from Aboriginal people to make mines. Because the land is only reserved for first Australians until rich people have a use for it.
Except the federal government has spent the last 50 years telling people to buy real estate. Two thirds of Australians own or have mortgages on their homes. Frankly, anything to rock the boat is going to need to walk the line of what the electorate will accept. You can’t just dictate all your wishes to them, the changes will just get repealed and we will be back to square-one.
It’s funny how both you and naevaTheRat used the same phrase, whilst talking about different parties. I actually agree with both of you - you can’t start up front with a hard stance of everything you demand. We need to compromise to get the ball rolling as a starting point. It is so much easier to progress a policy further once it is moving in the right direction than it is to get the whole electorate to get behind too much too soon. Otherwise you see stuff like repeal of the Emissions Trading Scheme. Yes, the scheme was imperfect - but it was a start; and it was overturned because it didn’t ‘go far enough’ for the Greens. And now we have nothing.
Same goes for the Republic debate.
Same goes for the Voice.
We’ll see it with changes to housing costs as well if we don’t get behind progress - any progress on the matter.
My wife and I each earn over the Median Australian salary of ~$74k. We should easily be able to afford a house. But there are barely any 3+ bedroom homes within a 10-15km radius of the CBD under $1Million. That’s ludicrous. Even assuming we had $200k saved for a deposit, an $800k mortgage over 20 years means repayments of about $74k/year at ~7% interest. It should not cost 100% of a median salary to buy a home. Instead, we rent a 3-bedroom townhouse for 60% of median salary. Which is also ludicrous. The kids have no yard, just a brick courtyard. There are jobs advertised full-time for less than what we pay on rent. I have no idea how someone earning $40k/year survives in this economy.
The present housing situation is simply unsustainable. We either start doing something about it now, or we face some sort of serious crisis down the line.
The Greens need to stop this ‘hard bargain’ stance of theirs. It has cost us progress on important matters in the past and would cost us progress on this topic now.
“Le mieux est l’ennemi du bien” --Voltaire. In english: ‘The best is the enemy of good’. Don’t prevent progress in the direction everyone needs in pursuit of the perfection up front. You won’t get perfection and you styme any progress in its pursuit.
Well, to defend the politicians a bit: The ones who built the facility are still in power and haven’t caved to the ones calling for the facilities to be repurposed. Yet.
Hopefully after this incident, they won’t, either.
I mean, was this not obvious from the beginning?
I don’t know whether it’s the reason, but a super obvious one would be to be able to measure how many people consume different shows etc.
If you read their articles or listen to their shows on third-party feeds, they have no way of knowing. Before you claim this is a good thing, some show you love might get cut because they don’t know it’s actually popular.
I just use their apps, so I’m not affected. I can see how people who prefer aggregate apps would dislike this, however.
That one in five may also be a bit nuanced. Every time Bibi gets in, it’s by a bee’s dick. That tells me that perhaps not all Israelis are in fact arseholes.
As a citizen of a nation whose government has embarrassed me and made me ashamed of my nation in the past, I get it.
Their government and any who support it’s actions - Arseholes. Israeli kids burning their national service letters - they’re all right.