|
oh gently caress off who the gently caress wrote that? quote:’I begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land on which we are meeting and pay my respects to their elders past and present.’’ 
i got banned fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Jun 4, 2014 |
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 05:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 00:26 |
|
|
Ex-ALP politician / IPA member Gary Johns I think?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
Guessing it's a Bolt piece.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
Gary Johns for the Australian.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
He was president of the Bennelong Society, an organisation that advocated the provision of welfare for Indigenous Australians under the same rules as for all other Australians.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
Christ, that's noxious. Re business/finance and statistics: when I was doing my Maths degree, a lot of our stats classes were compulsory for other students, including psychology, education, and business. My fellow Maths students and I dreaded having to pair up with business students in particular because they are, almost without exception, absolutely abysmal at it. Where the actual Maths students generally have it as a rule to never study for stats exams (I didn't turn up for lectures and got straight HDs), the business students failed it left, right and centre.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 05:53
|
|
|
quote:Other than professional Aboriginal leaders, Pilger did not interview any successful Aborigines. He did not seek to understand the pathways by which Aborigines become successful I think he means success as a white person, money = success. More money = better person. I find it astonoshing that the Aborigines don't understand or want to be involved in a society that kidnapped their children from them, killed their ancestors and buried their bodies in mass graves, deceitfully stole land from them and to this day denies any of this happening and shirks any responsibilities of taking ownership of the problems. I just don't understand why you wouldn't assimilate into a society that does that. How also do they not understand the concept of money that was introduced into their society 200 years ago. The fact that we paid them with alcohol for most of their working lives not even 50 years ago wouldn't have anything to do with them being successful, right? I mean that's the only thing that you can base a persons success off of, it certainly isn't any personal qualities because have you ever met a successful person that didn't literally kill their own children for the blood sacrifices to the corporate gods. i got banned fucked around with this message at 06:00 on Jun 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
CROWS EVERYWHERE posted:the business students failed it right, right and right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
Who the hell can write something like "Aboriginal overlord" and not have their brain spontaneously combust?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
i got banned posted:I think he means success as a white person, money = success. More money = better person. I was confused about this because he certainly interviewed "successful" Aboriginal people - filmmakers, journalists, etc. But I guess they're not white so it doesn't count!
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:the Aboriginal industry A thing someone actually believes
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 06:01
|
|
Waaaah the Christians are out to get me
|
Only CEOs and merchant bankers are successful duh. They are the purest of the ~*Neo-Liberals*~. Also introducing a bunch of diseases to a population that never had them before is pretty a-ok! i got banned fucked around with this message at 06:07 on Jun 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
Latika Bourke posted:Clive Palmer says he has written to PM Abbott's CoS to apologise is he caused her any anguish by singling her out in parental leave debate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
I see you were also trying to find Utopia online.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 06:25
|
|
|
Lowy Institute Poll of Australian attitudes to stuff.quote:Key Findings
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
To be fair Australians won't realise global warming is a thing until we're all dead. But I take my opinions from pub talk and most people think Abbott is doing a better job than Juliar because Labor waste.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Lowy Institute Poll of Australian attitudes to stuff. Muyb better get started on the almost 3 in 4 Australians.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 06:41
|
|
|
Gough Suppressant posted:Please describe the market mechanisms which you believe will lead to universities implementing only a modest increase in fees, preferably referencing why these did not lead to any of those universities not implementing the maximum allowable fee increases under the Howard reforms. I found the universities' modelling so I can use their analysis: They model three scenarios - one where there is a simple offset, one where they charge the international student fee (thereby pocketing 100% of the government contribution as a surplus) and the middle one where they charge a fee in between. https://www.universitiesaustralia.e...ts#.U46hYDeKD7R Page 2 shows the changes to fees by degree with a 29% average increase in fees across the university. Law, Accounting, Admin, Economics and Commerce Students get a 3% decrease in fees in real terms. (assuming 2.5% non-compounded CPI pa) FTW!  The only doubling is in Environmental Studies 110% and this is because of cancellation in environmental assistance (which is yes hosed by the government). Flaws in salary modelling On P2 of the Universities' Australia report they noted that they used the latest edition of Graduate Careers to get the starting salaries to do their repayment calculations. (That's the FY13 edition) I know that you might be thinking that I am going to accuse them of using the FY13 numbers here instead of the FY16 numbers. Nope! The reported FY13 starting salary number $77.5K in Graduate Careers and the starting salary number that Universities' Australia used was $58K. This is the FY10 number. So Universities' Australia is comparing FY16 fees with FY10 wages. Well done!  Also surprised to see that the starting salaries for women in engineering was $78K compared to men at $77.5K. Source: http://graduatecareers.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Beyond_Graduation_2013_(final).pdf Growth in salaries rate: According to the Graduate Careers, median salary growth rate from FY10 to FY13 has been $50K to $67K or some 34% (they had a typo of 32%) or slightly more than 10% pa. The salary growth rates for Engineers has been reported to be higher than this. Meanwhile Universities' Australia report states "Income is expected to grow at 4% pa". Well that's interesting because their report uses 6.4% growth in Nursing salaries over 8 years. It does not show what it does after that. While suggesting that they base their numbers on the Graduate Careers data. Fantastic guys! No income progression events One of the great things at being at work is when you get a new job that pays more. ie a promotion or an income progression event over and beyond the continuing LPI based increases in pay. The Universities' Australia report does take into consideration these events. In some of their scenarios and only at year 3 for Engineers and only a single event in nursing at year 2. The scenario B for nursing shows 6.4% pay rise per year for 8 years. Which is the first year? The modelling makes year 1 the year you enrol in university. By "taking 11 years to pay it off" it means 11 - length of degree to pay it off. See footnote 3. Maybe if I am bored I will redo the modelling myself using the Graduate careers data and the Universities' Australia fee data.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 06:48
|
|
|
Quoting this for the new page as it's beautiful. What was that herd song? 77%? Doesn't look as though it's changed much according to the Lowy Institute thing Dr. Spaceman linked.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:13
|
|
|
norp posted:http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/04/tony-abbotts-delayed-departure-for-indonesia-blamed-on-labor quote:The fleet includes two leased Boeing Business Jets and three Bombardier Challengers operated by the RAAF's 34 Squadron and based at Canberra International Airport. They do know this poo poo is recorded, right ? http://www.aussieairliners.org/b-737/raaf/a36001.html code:code:
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:15
|
|
|
Is the lowy institute one of those places that only poll boomers silly enough to have a phone line?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:16
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Lowy Institute Poll of Australian attitudes to stuff. Gotta keep an eye on those loving Kiwis, you never know what they're up to. I will refrain from commenting on the rest of it because gently caress Australia. e: ONLY (!) 42% "agree that ‘no asylum seeker coming to Australia by boat should be allowed to settle in Australia’."
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
Tokamak posted:Aren't you talking about the mode? You can't even keep your bullshit statistics straight. The median is the mode (and mean) in normally distributed data. Surprise Uni fees are not normally distributed. gently caress your maths is terrible, and you're a finance/business lecturer? No the Mode is the item that occurs the most irrespective of where it occurs: Assume 9 people paid the following: 1, 3, 3, 3, 5, 8, 9, 11, 200. Mean = (1 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 5 + 8 + 9 + 11 + 200) / 9 = 27 = average. Mode = 3 (repeated 3 times) Median = 5 (four larger numbers and 4 smaller) So More people pay the mode than any other number, but typically the number of people paying the mode is very small in any 'real' distribution like maybe 1% might pay the mode and 0.2% pay some random number from the sample. In this case 3/9 or 1/3 of the people pay the mode. ie not most. In this case the average person pays 5 or less, no one pays the average 27, the average is very heavily weighted by a single data point - the 200. The mode occurs randomly in a distribution. Hypation fucked around with this message at 07:22 on Jun 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:19
|
|
|
nogthree posted:Is the lowy institute one of those places that only poll boomers silly enough to have a phone line? quote:Methodology
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:20
|
|
|
Meanwhile, the guy behind me while I was waiting at the lights when I went to get my groceries was talking to what I assume to be his female significant other, about "the Arabs" coming over here as refugees and "taking our jobs". I felt like saying something but I didn't feel like getting pushed in front of a bus.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Doesn't seem like it. I can't rationalize my way into it being incorrect then. gently caress Australia.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
Meanwhile in today's most fun line in the news.quote:The two minutes of "madness" ended when Ramon crashed into the rear of a car, was thrown from his bike and lacerated his testicles, which hit the fuel tank.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:27
|
|
|
CROWS EVERYWHERE posted:Meanwhile, the guy behind me while I was waiting at the lights when I went to get my groceries was talking to what I assume to be his female significant other, about "the Arabs" coming over here as refugees and "taking our jobs". I felt like saying something but I didn't feel like getting pushed in front of a bus. Dumb argument we need more positive net immigration to boost the economy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:27
|
|
|
Hypation posted:No the Mode is the item that occurs the most irrespective of where it occurs: The mode occurs randomly in a random distribution. It's relatively predictable in certain important types of distribution, particularly the normal distribution.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:28
|
|
|
Hypation posted:The reported FY13 starting salary number $77.5K in Graduate Careers and the starting salary number that Universities' Australia used was $58K. This is the FY10 number. So Universities' Australia is comparing FY16 fees with FY10 wages. Actually they used a starting salary of $56k. Median reported salary was $78k which means that half of engineering graduates would be earning less than that. Hypation posted:According to the Graduate Careers, median salary growth rate from FY10 to FY13 has been $50K to $67K or some 34% (they had a typo of 32%) or slightly more than 10% pa. The salary growth rates for Engineers has been reported to be higher than this. According to this, median growth for the industry is around 4% and similar to national average. http://www.apesma.com.au/workplace/market-salary-rates/survey-reports/engineers/june_2013_summary.pdf The numbers you're comparing are the reported median starting salaries of ~250 grads in 2010 and a fresh ~250 grads 2013; not their salary progression in the 3 years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:31
|
|
|
Sanguine posted:What was that herd song? 77%? Doesn't look as though it's changed much according to the Lowy Institute thing Dr. Spaceman linked. They are @itstheherd on twitter, I've already poked them about the poll. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQnGqdFO9EY
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:40
|
|
|
Quantum Mechanic posted:The mode occurs randomly in a random distribution. It's relatively predictable in certain important types of distribution, particularly the normal distribution. And in that case it is also equal to the average. Assuming something is normally distributed is a neat trick to cut down the analytical work required but dangerous if the actual distribution is skewed or has multiple peaks. Ragingsheep posted:Actually they used a starting salary of $56k. Median reported salary was $78k which means that half of engineering graduates would be earning less than that. ....and half more. In any case you'd expect a right skew due to the minimum wage kicking in at around $30K and the fact you don't see too many (employed) engineers on the minimum wage. So however they did it, the $56K number is low and they cannot claim that their data represents the typical case then. Ragingsheep posted:According to this, median growth for the industry is around 4% and similar to national average. http://www.apesma.com.au/workplace/market-salary-rates/survey-reports/engineers/june_2013_summary.pdf I assumed a grad with 3 years experience would be paid more than a fresh grad. So their pay rise should be more than starting FY10 compared to starting FY13.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:49
|
|
|
Hypation posted:The mode occurs randomly in a distribution. I think you missed a couple of words in that sentence. edit: beaten like an unemployed under-30
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:50
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Lowy Institute Poll of Australian attitudes to stuff. you forgot this one: 63% of Australians say the government ‘should take a leadership role on reducing emissions’, while only 28% say ‘it should wait for an international consensus before acting’.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:51
|
|
|
Hypation posted:you forgot this one: I literally quoted that exact bit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:53
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:I literally quoted that exact bit. On second view, yes you did. But 63% think proactive climate, 28% say wait for global consensus and presumably and that leaves almost 1 in 10 people who think we should say gently caress the rest of the world lets do nothing anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
Hypation posted:And in that case it is also equal to the average. Assuming something is normally distributed is a neat trick to cut down the analytical work required but dangerous if the actual distribution is skewed or has multiple peaks. The distribution being skewed doesn't suddenly make the mode random. It changes its position relative to the mean and median, yes. That's actually one of the ways you can quantify and measure skew.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 08:02
|
|
|
Jesus Christ, let me review the maths in a bit, I do have a degree in it after all  First of all the discussion of university funding has come up. The very idea that universities would not be increasing fees due to the free market and competition is laughable. Every university is buckling under severe financial pressure, why is this you ask, could it be because of gross public mismanagement that glorious private enterprise would fix? No, it's because starting in 1996 and continuing from then Howard and following governments have hosed universities funding, so every year they have had to do more with less. Don't take my word for it though, lets have a look at some graphs! I made these myself with data I trawled from the ABS website. First of all, funding against student numbers. Lots more students, lots more dollars!  See that doesn't look too bad, what are all these privileged unis whinging about students go up, funding goes up right? Except oh wait a second. I forgot to account for inflation. Silly me, I'm just an engineer, what the gently caress do I know about economics! Thanks Zabernist for that help.  Ah poo poo, that looks less good, you can see the big bight that Howard took out of the sector. This is because he ceased to index funding in 1997 from memory, so every year universities had to do more with inflation % less dollars. This went on for a long time. You can see though that Labor actually tried to fix this and pumped some money desperately needed back into the uni sector. It wasn't enough though, they haven't "caught up" from that long freeze. Here's the final graph, this is the important one, it shows the %change in students and in inflation adjusted funding since 1992.  Student numbers up 90%, funding up about a 35%. Before you make any arguments about economy of scale, most of the universities costs aren't from building new buildings, they mostly have the infrastructure already there from 1992. It's about teaching aids, lecturers, labs, tutors, demonstrators which while yes can have some economy of scales, when you nearly double your student population poo poo gets hosed really fast.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 08:10
|
|
|
Hypation posted:I found the universities' modelling so I can use their analysis: Does not answer the question Gough Suppressant posted:Please describe the market mechanisms which you believe will lead to universities implementing only a modest increase in fees, preferably referencing why these did not lead to any of those universities not implementing the maximum allowable fee increases under the Howard reforms.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 08:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 00:26 |
|
|
The VC of UWA (who is paid >2x as much as his counterpart at Oxford) had this to say about it:quote:The first is the deregulation agenda, including allowing universities rather than government to set their own fees. This we welcome. We believe the greater autonomy will help us better compete in a globally competitive market by being able to enhance our student experience, conduct more high impact research, and attract the best academics from around the world. hooman posted:Before you make any arguments about economy of scale, most of the universities costs aren't from building new buildings, they mostly have the infrastructure already there from 1992. Mr Chips fucked around with this message at 08:19 on Jun 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 08:14
|
|