Auspol June/Election - hang parliament - The Something Awful Forums

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Auspol June/Election - hang parliament

«‹›3 »

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

iajanus posted:

Surprising to see reporters doing their jobs for once.

Taht was great hope they dont lose their job now

# ¿ Jun 1, 2016 00:40

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 22, 2024 17:28

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Doctor Spaceman posted:

https://twitter.com/ellencoulter/status/737810543235371009

Fight fire with fire fight fur with fur. maremmas at every beach

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZJwWDmclSk

# ¿ Jun 1, 2016 04:53

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Byolante posted:

Maybe, and this is just a guess, if Labor's leadership ranks weren't amoral scumbag lawyers who do hostile takeovers of small unions to become players and instead were actually representing the majority of Australians then the general public might vote for somebody who isn't a complete rightwing shitlord. As it is you have a choice of rightwing shitlords in the rightwing shitlord party, rightwing shitlords in the notionally leftwing party, anti-science lunatics who hate organised sport and vaccinations but coast by on inner city melbourne being filled to the brim with middle class pearl clutchers and an assorted batch of insane or pointless independants. Its another election voting for the sting-ray that got steve.

What? Where

# ¿ Jun 1, 2016 07:37

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

you listed the lnp twice? Idgi

# ¿ Jun 1, 2016 07:39

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Anidav posted:

Abbott has shown, through his circumspect comments and writings in recent

# ¿ Jun 1, 2016 09:00

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Starshark posted:

No. I'm not even surprised he's doubling down.

(I have no idea how to embed tweets, you'll have to take my word on this one)

E: Let's try this...

https://twitter.com/corybernardi/status/737886834362097664

What events of last week is bernardi talking about?

# ¿ Jun 1, 2016 21:23

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

160,000 people are turned down for legal aid every year because of tightened restrictions due to funding cuts. England spends twice per capita what we do on legal aid. The productivity commision said it had been cut so much it was having a negative affect on the rest of the legal system and increasing the funding by 200 million dollars would save money because judges would no longer have to play defense advocate for people representing themselves.

Richard Ackland: 'Where is George Brandis?' – Behind the Lines podcast

http://gu.com/p/4jqjc

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN fucked around with this message at 06:37 on Jun 2, 2016

# ¿ Jun 2, 2016 06:25

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

hooman posted:

"The Institute of Public Affairs has accused the Coalition of relying on the same language as Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn to defend its superannuation changes.

The free market thinktank also says the public is seeing the fruits of the campaign it began waging against the government’s super changes three weeks ago, as more Coalition MPs start to understand how unfair the proposed changes are."

I can only boggle.

...what?

# ¿ Jun 2, 2016 09:18

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Doctor Spaceman posted:

https://twitter.com/MarkDiStef/status/738288685230129152

# ¿ Jun 2, 2016 10:58

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

turdbucket posted:

even greens voters I know believe it because of the way di natale presents himself, why is this thread so reactive against anyone criticising an MP just because he's from a progressive party? not criticising the MPs is why labor is full of hacks. hardly splitting the party to say a couple of the MPs are poo poo boo loving hoo

People can disagree. I think nucleae power is a good idea

# ¿ Jun 3, 2016 09:23

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Halo14 posted:

Colour me suprised...

Baird budget cuts spark ICAC 'funding crisis'

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/baird-budget-cuts-spark-icac-funding-crisis-20160603-gpb1a9.html

Rheese muldoon has a lot to answer for imo

# ¿ Jun 4, 2016 03:27

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

*stuffs several plums in mouth*

I love my local member, malclom turnbull

# ¿ Jun 5, 2016 01:33

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

apparently the lnp has reached an agreement with pathology groups over the medicare rebate?

# ¿ Jun 6, 2016 07:02

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Stoca Zola posted:

Phone posting but wtf greens is this real? "This morning we announced our plan to put solar panels on the rooftops of every household and every business."

Aren't photovoltaic panels still fairly environmentally damaging to manufacture (silicon tetrachloride) and increasingly panels are made in the countries less likely to look after the environment and their workers? Has that changed? What happens years from now when the panels wear out and need replacing? Can you recycle them (apparently yes if the facilities are available) or does this policy generate a huge pile of trash for future people to worry about? It's a problem if they aren't considering the full life cycle of the panels.

I've always believed in centralised large scale power generation so that repair, maintenance and end of life site clean up aren't the direct responsibility of the homeowners. Solar thermal for example. Putting panels on every roof seems like an incredibly inefficient way to do it. Maybe that's part of the plan though, this inefficiency creates more work for more installers and more maintenance jobs for post installation panel cleaners, recycling facilities etc?

I'm interested if there is any evidence that they've thought this through.

Where is this from, do you have a link? google doesnt help

# ¿ Jun 6, 2016 09:25

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Thanks for the links. I agree with you, the stuff in the pdfs sounds cool but the idea of just throwing solar panels on things sounds dumb. Maybe theres more to it than that but it sounds dumb as is

# ¿ Jun 6, 2016 10:18

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

The long wind up time for nuclear is mostly a result of regulatory issues and waste isnt an issue with breeder reactors. I dont think renewables are ever going to be able to meet the worlds power demands, at least not in the next few decades. Of the feasible options nuclear looks the least horrible imo. More people died as a result of the evacuation of fukushima than would have had they stayed.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/09/22/science/when-radiation-isnt-the-real-risk.html?smid=tw-nytimesscience&smtyp=cur&referer=

quote:

This spring, four years after the nuclear accident at Fukushima, a small group of scientists met in Tokyo to evaluate the deadly aftermath.

No one has been killed or sickened by the radiation — a point confirmed last month by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Even among Fukushima workers, the number of additional cancer cases in coming years is expected to be so low as to be undetectable, a blip impossible to discern against the statistical background noise.

But about 1,600 people died from the stress of the evacuation — one that some scientists believe was not justified by the relatively moderate radiation levels at the Japanese nuclear plant.

Epidemiologists speak of “stochastic deaths,” those they predict will happen in the future because of radiation or some other risk. With no names attached to the numbers, they remain an abstraction.

But these other deaths were immediate and unequivocally real.

“The government basically panicked,” said Dr. Mohan Doss, a medical physicist who spoke at the Tokyo meeting, when I called him at his office at Fox Chase Cancer Center in Philadelphia. “When you evacuate a hospital intensive care unit, you cannot take patients to a high school and expect them to survive

Among other victims were residents of nursing homes. And there were the suicides. “It was the fear of radiation that ended up killing people,” he said.

Most of the fallout was swept out to sea by easterly winds, and the rest was dispersed and diluted over the land. Had the evacuees stayed home, their cumulative exposure over four years, in the most intensely radioactive locations, would have been about 70 millisieverts — roughly comparable to receiving a high-resolution whole-body diagnostic scan each year. But those hot spots were anomalies.

By Dr. Doss’s calculations, most residents would have received much less, about 4 millisieverts a year. The average annual exposure from the natural background radiation of the earth is 2.4 millisieverts.

How the added effect of the fallout would have compared with that of the evacuation depends on the validity of the “linear no-threshold model,” which assumes that any amount of radiation, no matter how small, causes some harm.

Dr. Doss is among scientists who question that supposition, one built into the world’s radiation standards. Below a certain threshold, they argue, low doses are harmless and possibly even beneficial — a long-debated phenomenon called radiation hormesis.

Recently he and two other researchers, Carol S. Marcus of Harbor-U.C.L.A. Medical Center in Los Angeles and Mark L. Miller of Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque,petitioned the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to revise its rules to avoid overreactions to what may be nonexistent threats.

The period for public comments is still open, and when it is over, there will be a mass of conflicting evidence to puzzle through.

A full sievert of radiation is believed to eventually cause fatal cancers in about 5 percent of the people exposed. Under the linear no-threshold model, a millisievert would impose one-one thousandth of the risk: 0.005 percent, or five deadly cancers in a population of 100,000.

About twice that many people were evacuated from a 20-kilometer area near the Fukushima reactors. By avoiding what would have been an average cumulative exposure of 16 millisieverts, the number of cancer deaths prevented was perhaps 160, or 10 percent of the total who died in the evacuation itself.

But that estimate assumes the validity of the current standards. If low levels of radiation are less harmful, then the fallout might not have caused any increase in the cancer rate.

The idea of hormesis goes further, proposing that weak radiation can actually reduce a person’s risk. Life evolved in a mildly radioactive environment, and some laboratory experiments and animal studiesindicate that low exposures unleash protective antioxidants and stimulate the immune system, conceivably protecting against cancers of all kinds.

Epidemiological studies of survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have been interpreted both ways — as demonstratingand refuting hormesis. But because radiation regulations assume there is no safe level, clinical trials testing low-dose therapy have been impossible to conduct.

One experiment, however, occurred inadvertently three decades ago in Taiwan after about 200 buildings housing 10,000 people were constructed from steel contaminated with radioactive cobalt. Over the years, residents were exposed to an average dose of about 10.5 millisieverts a year, more than double the estimated average for Fukushima.

Yet a study in 2006 found fewer cancer casescompared with the general public: 95, when 115 were expected.

Neither the abstract of the paper nor of asecond one published two years latermention the overall decrease. (The authors speculated that the apartment dwellers may have been healthier than the population at large.) The focus instead was on weaker results suggesting a few excess leukemia and breast cancer cases — and on a parsing of the data showing an overall increased cancer risk for residents exposed before age 30.

More recently, a study of radon by a Johns Hopkins scientist suggested that people living with higher concentrations of the radioactive gas had correspondingly lower rates of lung cancer. If so, then homeowners investing in radon mitigation to meet federal safety standards may be slightly increasing their cancer risk. These and similar findings have also been disputed.

All research like this is bedeviled by “confounders” — differences between populations that must be accounted for. Some are fairly easy (older people and smokers naturally get more cancer), but there is always some statistical wiggle room. As with so many issues, what should be a scientific argument becomes rhetorical, with opposing interest groups looking at the data with just the right squint to resolve it according to their needs.

There is more here at stake than agonizing over irreversible acts, like the evacuation of Fukushima. Fear of radiation, even when diluted to homeopathic portions, compels people to forgo lifesaving diagnostic tests and radiotherapies.

We’re bad at balancing risks, we humans, and we live in a world of continual uncertainty. Trying to avoid the horrors we imagine, we risk creating ones that are real.

# ¿ Jun 6, 2016 11:55

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Concrete cancer is the 4th sign in the concrete zodiac. It is represented by a concrete crab

# ¿ Jun 7, 2016 02:51

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

starkebn posted:

How about the countries in the last couple of months that have had several days with 100% of their power coming from renewables? Not perfect yet obviously but you don't think can get there in decades?

I hope so but i doubt it. We're probably going to end up in a highlander 2 situation where the earth is ruined but livable and the living envy the dead

# ¿ Jun 7, 2016 03:11

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Sludge Tank posted:

posting for sub but have an excellent facebook meme

thats a really good ad

# ¿ Jun 7, 2016 11:26

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

It would be a perfect anti lnp ad for labor or the greens, i mean. No joke its strong as hell

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN fucked around with this message at 12:56 on Jun 7, 2016

# ¿ Jun 7, 2016 12:52

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Does greg jennett remind anybody else of a chicken?

# ¿ Jun 8, 2016 04:39

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Vote 1 mercurius goldstein

# ¿ Jun 8, 2016 07:50

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

"I have just paid over $100,000 in stamp duty for the home I live in and my money is going to schools and everything."

# ¿ Jun 9, 2016 02:57

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Sludge Tank posted:

posting for sub but have an excellent facebook meme

Seriously put this on billboards and enjoy your election win

# ¿ Jun 9, 2016 05:23

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Quantum Mechanic posted:

If your hero Senator had spent the last three years organising his party, campaigning, building stakeholder relationships, setting up a party and volunteer apparatus or basically anything except being a painfully unfunny poo poo-for-brains racist fuckwit, he'd be comfortably re-elected. Fortunately for us, he hasn't.

thats strange because everything lyonhelm does makes him seem like a man with too much time on his hands

# ¿ Jun 9, 2016 05:33

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Tokamak posted:

There is merit in having to disclose whether the foundations of a property is built on stone, clay, a swamp, a drainage basin, sand etc. There is even merit in having to disclose natural regional hazards such a bush fires, flooding, tornadoes, etc. But I thought they already did something like that anyway, given how scummy real estate agents and their penchant to legal the poo poo out of everything. Maybe I'm mistaken though since I have never looked into buying property.

If there is a long dry spell of weather and the clay shrinks and destabilises the foundation. You will end up with an expensive underpinning and repair bill. Many homes are built on clay soil and damage from it a common problem. However, it isn't something that I'd expect the average person to be educated about, or even consider until it happens to them. You can't exactly legislate the problem away, or blame the real estate agent or previous owners. It is simply a consideration that must be made in the process of buying a home.

As long as you are properly informed as to the soil type and geography, then there isn't much more you can do about it. In this case it is humorous because it is fairly obvious the house is on sand and located next to the ocean. And that the owners disregarded the dangers in order to own a piece of expensive waterfront property.

One of the articles mentioned something about a paragraph on the dangers of coastal living and who to talk to if youd like to know about building a sea wall in the fine print when they bought the house

# ¿ Jun 9, 2016 07:51

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Its rhymes with creatine

# ¿ Jun 10, 2016 04:08

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Labor removing natural alternative health scams from private insurance rebate lmao nice

# ¿ Jun 10, 2016 04:17

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Still banging on about budget repair tho

# ¿ Jun 10, 2016 04:19

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Recoome posted:

DO YOU AGREE / DISAGREE? Let us know. Keep your comments clean.

1. Australia is a young & free Democracy; the greatest country in the world.
2. It doesn't matter what colour you are, so long as you embrace Aussie culture, you're an Aussie too.
3. STOP the spread of Islam.
4. EXPEL the Left-wing traitors.

1 no
2 yes
3 no
4 no

# ¿ Jun 12, 2016 03:01

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Im defining aussie culture as secular humanism and you can gtfo my country if youre not down with that

# ¿ Jun 12, 2016 03:02

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

cum_dumpster posted:

talk about your first world problems.

diddums

Senor Tron posted:

Almost like we live in a first world country.

# ¿ Jun 13, 2016 06:40

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

First world? My australia?? No THANKYOU!

# ¿ Jun 13, 2016 06:42

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

cum_dumpster posted:

guess where the irony lies?

i dunno, i mean, its kinda funny how you to dont wanna join in an adult conversation

cum_dumpster posted:

standards obvs slipped heaps around here if this is what constitutes a burn

cum_dumpster posted:

mystery av buyer you've accidentally grouped me in with the poo poo posters

Nice meltdown

# ¿ Jun 13, 2016 08:23

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

If only we had blamed radical weirdos, wets and losers then port arthur might have never had to happen again and again wait

# ¿ Jun 14, 2016 04:14

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Getting real sad thinking about those poor guns who never got a chance to shoot things because we were too bigoted and scared to let them into the country

# ¿ Jun 14, 2016 04:17

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Theres a wordfilter in my brain that changes "Such is life' to "im an idiot" and i cant turn it off

# ¿ Jun 15, 2016 03:02

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Libs in lower house for economy
BUT NOT FOR SENATE

# ¿ Jun 15, 2016 04:48

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

Starshark posted:

I've got soooooooo many choices this election.

CONROY Pat Labor
BARRIE Jenny Liberal
MacFADYEN Ivan The Greens
COX Morgan Christian Democratic Party (Fred Nile Group)

Who should I put last?

Barrie

# ¿ Jun 16, 2016 07:31

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 22, 2024 17:28

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

TheMightyHandful posted:

https://twitter.com/markdistef/status/743306886720552961

https://twitter.com/markdistef/status/743307328397545472

I thought it was an obtuse burn by the local greens until about 3/4 through the article. Theyre not ironic?

# ¿ Jun 16, 2016 10:20

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Auspol June/Election - hang parliament

«‹›3 »