What's what?

"I might be wrong but since existing policies have catastrophically failed large parts of the developed world "

Aren't you a proponent of globalisation BB?

That is the one undisputed success of free market capitalism: the vast transfer of wealth into the developing world and the number of people lifted out of poverty.

edit: do you mean developed or developing world? The context of your post implies developing world. Apologies if that is not your meaning.

China the biggest human migration in the history of man kind, thought i just say that makes me feel better

Agree with Freeride rather get fu(ked over by another western democracy (we do have to ask permission from the US continually) than shredded by an racists
Asian authoritarian regime.

But agree with BB currently China is not an immediate thread not to say it wont become one god help us if that happens by then its likely the US wont be.

Remember the current period is know as the great peace wont last for ever.

Auto correct got me there freeride, so I meant developing. I am in favour of globalisation as I don't see any positive alternative to it. Trade is the solution. The problem, and not just in the developing world, is the economic distortion caused by the near total deregulation of financial markets combined with the massive tax avoidance of wealthy corporations and individuals as shown in the Panama and Paradise papers. Tax avoidance in Africa? Greater than the combined national debt of all African nations! Until those issues are sorted out we are all less wealthy than we should be but most tragically in the developing world.

Seventy trillion US dollars locked away in shell companies by those who have no moral compass and believe only the little people pay tax. Even a well known Australian former golden boy tennis champ now coach for up and comers has reportedly much tied up in Monaco. The tax crimes of the hyper wealthy go on with impunity.

The US was the first country to start utilising the cooly labour which was Chinas economy. It was this capital injection that got China off the floor. That’s why China now has any money , you’ve said it yourself.

Totally contradicts your hagiography of China as a successful nation due to its authoritarian rule. China is relatively wealthy ONLY because of the excessive greed of Western democracy, not because of its own intrinsic traits.

Now you think the corrupt , oppressive fascist authoritarians running China are a better option as global leaders than the Western societies who did their heavy lifting. China ‘s admirable dictator ....who would still be overseeing a nation of destitute rice farmers if it wasn’t for the West.

If you have any evidence for any of that Wikipedia would prob ably like to hear from you.

“ The United States banned trade with China until the early 1970s. Thereafter trade grew rapidly, and after the full normalization of diplomatic and commercial relations in 1979, the United States became the second largest importer to China and in 1986 was China's third largest partner in overall trade. Most American goods imported by China were either high-technology industrial products, such as aircraft, or agricultural products, primarily grain and cotton.
Western Europe has been important in Chinese foreign trade since the mid-1960s. The Federal Republic of Germany, in particular, was second only to Japan in supplying industrial goods to China during most of this period. China followed a policy of shopping widely for its industrial purchases, and it concluded deals of various sizes with nearly all of the West European nations. In 1986 Western Europe accounted for nearly 18 percent of China's foreign trade, with imports exceeding exports.
Third World countries have long served as a market for Chinese agricultural and light industrial products. In 1986 developing countries purchased about 15 percent of Chinese exports and supplied about 8 percent of China's imports. China has increased trade and investment ties with many African countries such as Chad, the Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, partly to secure strategic natural resources such as oil and minerals.
Today, China's main export markets, in order of importance, are the European Union (20.4%), United States (17.7%), Hong Kong (13.4%), and Japan (8.1%). China's main import markets, in order of importance, are Japan (13.3%), European Union (11.7%), South Korea (10.9%), Taiwan (9.1%), and the United States (7.2%).”

Fact : The single reason that China increased its economic position and therefore the uplift to their society, was through the provision of cheap labour and manufacturing for a global market. Technology, innovation and IP were all provided by external sources.

Chinese facist government has no claim to successful economic management beyond that of allowing the West to enrich it . The Chinese then consolidated their gains through ignoring the international rules based order on trade by counterfeiting and stealing technology and through the extensive use of the protectionism that you find so offensive.

Reference: Blowipedia.

Hah! Took a while but you've caught on, seems like, Blind Boy.

Right up some's alley, no? Yeah?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/11/if-you-enter-a-camp-you-ne...

Yeh it's an authoritarian, conformist regime factotum. I don't have illusions about it, but they aren't going away, they're not going to change and they pose no threat to Australia. It is a very different culture with a very long history. From their perspective the last few hundred years have been an aberration when they slipped from being the greatest global power. They are looking at the long game, setting themselves up for millennia. From our perspective their behaviour is harsh and oppressive. From theirs, it is all for the greater good. Peace, prosperity, and a harmonious populace. Hence the intolerance of dissent and difference. I

Evidence that they pose no threat to Australia, please.

Does this mean we get back the trillions of litres of water inappropriately allocated to the Chinese owned cotton farms in Australia’s dry interior?

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jan/15/china-germinates-first-s...

Or are they just going to pipe the water from Cubbie straight to the moon ?

Check the ownership history of Cubbie, especially in regards to cotton.

Wrong 'Asians'?

But then again, they're all sama sama, huh?

In related 'yellow peril' news...

https://www.theguardian.com/news/shortcuts/2019/jan/14/drinking-your-own...

2,500 people use 1.14ML / day Town (Water)
250 people use 1.14 ML / day Nuclear Power (Water)
48 surfers use 1.14 ML / day Surf Ranch(Water)
1200 Cotton bales need 37.4 ML / day Cubbie(Water) (Jap' Textile/Chinese Tech)

Cubbie gulps down more than Kelly..'Bales probably beat Surf Lakes to the hose.

Chinese Ambassador to Australia is Cheng Jingye posted in 2016 (Biography)
http://au.chineseembassy.org/eng/sgxx_10/dsxx/002/

U.S. Ambassador to Austria? is Arthur B Culvahouse Jr Nov/2018 (Not posted yet?)
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-06/donald-trump-announces-new-ambass...

XPM Rudd: "The vacancy suggested that Trump views Australia as 2nd class Ally"
PM Scomo: "Where the Bloody Hell are You?"

Note:NZ/Samoa/Slovenia/Iceland/Malta were appointed ahead of Austria..Oz..Austr!
Final word to incoming U.S. Ambassador Artie: "Rock Solid as ever!" All Hail Trump!

Brexit a complete balls up. Looks like the UK is heading for an early election and a 2nd referendum. The right of politics is bankrupt and devoid of any meaningful narrative I given you exhibit one.

Does the right want Brexit or not ?

Would seem to me the differences tally less with left and right, and more with matters of class: political class = remain, middle class = remain, working class = exit.

Not exact of course.

But then it was the Tories that put the country through that most ridiculous of referendums.

aren't the upper class (a la boris) rabid leavers?

is this how WW1 was? watching a country march into what everyone knows is a disaster?

Do you think Brexit is a good idea or not ?

Who you torkin to?

You .

Anyone with an opinion.

I don't think they thought Brexit through. If they had they wouldn't be in the mess they're in.

My opinion is that the referendum was horribly misguided. Tories handballing their responsility to govern onto the populace who weren't informed on how the Brexit process would occur and what the consequences would be, the movement then hijacked by Farage who used it as a cynical exercise in populist democracy. Told the people what they'd get, didn't tell them what they'd lose.

Theoretically I agree with it, countries have the right to determine their destiny, but you can't shift between the two - leave or remain - on a whim. As a core EU member, the UK has longstanding structural policy that will take years to work through, and the changes will wreak havoc on the domestic markets as it shifts to higher import costs and changed trading conditions, with the biggest hit not being manufacture but London's standing as a financial hub.

So yeah, for it, but only when there's a plan in place.

But through it all I've been entertained by Brendan O'Neill's sustained but near-sighted flaggellation of 'democracy', not for once realsing he lives in a representative democracy, and it was even invented by his country!

Fly with Brendan:

If Australia was offered a chance to be part of a united Pacific/Asian bloc I’d vote No Fucking Chance.

It’s a common , but erroneous, parallel to draw between experts such as a pilot and “experts “ such as economists and politicians.

One has specific skills which are proven and qualifiably defined through trial and error , with sustained and predictable results. Whilst the other is a dog’s breakfast of cultish hypothesis generated with no adherence to predictive accuracy and outright corruption masked as civil authority.

Experts ain’t experts.

It’s like appointing someone as minister for agriculture when they’ve never spent a day in their professional lives outside of an inner urban environment. Sure they know what’s required.....

A lot of people were unhappy with the EU for a variety of reasons, free movement of people into the country, loss of sovereignty, another level of regulation etc etc. The big issue though, as Stu pointed out, is how do you undo all that when there is no agreement in the UK about how it should be done. So we have the current compete shambles with no certainty about what will happen and all the problems for busineesand individuals it causes.
That is bad enough but the situation with the Irish border could reignite violent conflict in Northern Ireland. The problem is that, since both countries are currently in the EU there is effectively no border between them. People live in one country, work in the other, and have family on both sides. The supply chains and customer bases of businesses alsooverlap the border.
The obvious thing would be to leave things as they are. Unfortunately this is unacceptable to the Ulster Democratic Party as it would weaken relations with the UK and strengthen them with the Republic. On the other hand putting a hard border with Customs etc there would cause massive economic and social problems. To propose leaving the EU as the Brexiteers did, with no solution to this issue was profoundly irresponsible.

whats so wrong with APEC, blowin?

You think it’s a set up to scuttle the whole Brexit idea ?

I don't think anyone should suggest the Minister is the expert. But they do have access to hordes of learned advisers and access to instittrions such as CSIRO. A good Minister for Agriculture speaks to those people, and hopefully draws good judgement, before donning his or her Akubra for the cameras.

Think what's a set up?

perhaps it's just Hegel's master/slave dialectic being played out at the national level, same with trump and the US.

it also has the classic elements of tragedy -- that one foresees the horror that awaits one, but nonetheless does it. both countries see they have become slaves to those forces they once mastered, but they have realised it too late, and their reaction -- brexit and trumpism -- is exactly what will bring both countries to their knees. ...well, that's enough from me today. off for a nap.

That's right, the Torys put it to a public vote to avoid an internal political struggle within the party (just like the SSM vote here). Add the conservative press (inc: Murdoch) and the lies told about the benefits. Farage and his lies. The fact voting was not compulsory and that a very large % of eligible young voters didn't turn up too lazy and thinking the NO side would get up. And on reflection those vast areas of the UK still suffering the economic scorched earth policies of Thatcher and ignored by successive incompetent governments were always going to vote to leave because a false hope is better than nothing (just like Trump's rust belters) .... so were they really voting to leave the EU or voting to be heard voting to say fuck you we are still here.

Guy there are very strong nationalistic feelings in the UK. If withdrawing was a straight-forward process I think there would be a clear majority willing to take the chance no matter how unwise it seems economically in the short term.

Do you think that all this parliamentary bullshit is a way for the political class to backpedal on Brexit . A referendum result they never dreamed would stand a chance of getting up ? I’m assuming that the two major pommy parties are as beholden to the same mass immigration future as the Oz majors .

I think the problems in the UK Parliament will lead the EU to allow a longer delay. Given that those who want to leave are disunited, it may be that those who want to stay can force another referendum to be held. In the circumstances, even though most might prefer an exit, it is hard to see a yes vote getting up. Disunity is political poison.

" ... even though most might prefer an exit, it is hard to see a yes vote getting up ..."

Huh? if everyone votes as before (perhaps unlikely) but all those young eligible young voters who didn't vote last time who are known to want to mostly stay the No vote would be overwhelming.

I think a 2nd referendum would be best because people are now informed what it actually means, let's see whether it happens or not.

Some great comments here re Brexit.
I never really delved into the pros and cons as they were presented before the vote. I just thought nah they wont leave, that just seems a divisive move.
Anyway its a funny old world we live in and the Brexit debacle continues.
It's easy to see aussue politics is a circus, but it appears the UK and US are headlining in the Big Top.

"it appears the UK and US are headlining in the Big Top"

Arguably only in the English-speaking world.

The now-Brazilian president got stabbed at a pre-election rally a few months ago, a Polish mayor got stabbed and died a few days ago, the Hungarian prime minister has "stolen democracy" and in South Africa the ANC is determined to see the country go down the toilet.

It's hard to know where to look first.

politics in the west is going through a major change driven by the power of social media to create populist movements with further fuel added by the increasing awareness that wealthy corporations and individuals are concentrating wealth while the rest of us, by comparison, get poorer.
People are answering with a resounding YES to Johnny Rotten's immortal quextion "Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?"

What do you think BB, if populism is the catalyst that precipitates major change, is it worth the risk of navigating the inevitable ugliness that rears its head if the end result promises something better for the masses?

Populism usually causes more problems than it solves Andy. The problem is how to create fairer systems when there are huge forces opposing those changes. The existing concentration of wealth is being deployed in every avenue to preserve the right of the wealthy corporations and individuals to go on pillaging the planet.
A lot of the populist agenda is being created as deliberate distraction by the manipulation of all types of media. The strategy is always to divide. Religion, race, class, whatever is available. This has been a huge factor in both Trump, Brexit and the rise of the right in Europe. By focusing discontent on others, they avoid having the focus on the mechanisms by which the rich get richer. Solutions? No idea!

I voted for Brexit and can confirm its a shambles. Out of interest, anyone else have a say in the referendum?
Its true that the media has had its role to play, the BBC for example is obviously biased towards remain. There were early efforts to keep presenters, dj's etc impartial in line with its code of conduct but its a free for all now.
I don't know anyone who voted Brexit who did so with immigration in mind, we're not part of the Schengen area as it is and the majority of immigration to the UK comes from outside the EU. Remain activists know this but portraying Brexiteers as knuckle dragging nationalists serves a purpose and there's always a flag waving fuckwit to be found somewhere for a soundbite.
I think most people who voted Brexit have a problem with the EU's philosophy of 'ever closer union' and the overbearing elitism which flows from Brussels.
A recent example of this is the ongoing tussle between the European Commission and Italy. The Five Star Movement/League coalition are seeing through their election pledges to cut taxes, increase basic income and pensions and introduce new social welfare policies. This will involve a 2.4% increase in its budget deficit which exceeds EU rules on spending limits. As a result Brussels is poised to impose its 'excessive debt procedure' which would see the EC fine Italy 0.5% of GDP, about £7.8 billion. Bear in mind that the coalition was democratically elected, Italian people voted for these policies after years of struggle following the Europe wide recession. No surprise that a recent poll showed that 60% of Italians thought the EU was bad for them.
As for what happens now with Brexit, who knows. The idea of another referendum seems unlikely to me, the first has been divisive and another could get ugly. Then there's the question of the question, in or out? A third option? Who decides? If it did go ahead and went the way of leave again would it be accepted this time? Best of three? I think it would go the way of leave again, there's talk about the youth being mobilised this time around but just as many people who didn't vote last time have been shocked by the attitude of the EU during the whole process. Brussels has made it clear that the UK should be poorer as a result of leaving the EU. Punishment, deterrent, whatever this attitude has contributed to the current situation and lets not forget, the EU claims to promote democracy and the UK is entitled to leave.
Clearly the UK hasn't helped its own cause, having a Remain voting PM in charge of the leaving process is crazy. In fact having a load of career civil servants who have never cut a deal or turned a profit in their lives in charge of negotiations is equally as crazy. We've basically rolled over in my opinion. The deal on the table isn't leaving. The 'no deal' scenario should've been tabled as an option from the start, all the pressure from Remain to rule out no deal has been a gift for EU negotiators. If ruled out we lose our biggest bargaining chip. And no deal just means WTO rules/tariffs, a position from which to then negotiate with the EU so at least we aren't backed into a corner.
There's certainly a whiff that parliament as a whole wants Brexit to fail. Parliament has a majority of remain MP's and it seems like they have steered the process to this impasse almost deliberately. Pretending to carry out the will of the people but doing their best to delay, prevaricate, stall. And of course the whole party structure of left and right serves little purpose in this instance as Brexit isn't a left or right question.
Brexit is fissile, it goes to peoples individual ideas of patriotism and it has shown that in the UK we're not very good at understanding other peoples patriotisms. Where it leaves parliament is anyone's guess. Both main parties may split which could be the change to the status quo many were looking for. Whatever happens it will rumble on for a generation.

Corbyn for PM? How do think that will go?

Apart from illustrating how stupid Abbott is this article also highlights the disaster Brexit is for the UK's sheep farmers, just a tiny part of the UK economy.

https://www.theage.com.au/world/europe/you-are-embarrassing-tony-abbott-...

Good read upnorth. Always interested in thoughts from the coal face. Lot's of questions there. Lot's of uncertainty.

RE: T bone Tone, wouldn't it be great to see him voted out next election.

So upnorth, what about the Irish border? To propose Brexit, or vote for it, without a clear idea of what should be done there seems irresponsible. I think you are right that a majority of the UK population would rather be outside the EU, it's getting there that is the problem. Where are Johnson and Farange now? They talked it up but have had zero to say in the practical issues.

A friend's English brother-in-law was recently over here and I asked him about Brexit. He also confirmed what Upnorth said about the Poms not wanting to be told what to do by Brussels although he couldn't specify examples where that might occur. He believes it had nothing to do with immigration because the migrates typically do the jobs the English refuse to do. He said he voted Out as did most in his area out from Manchester but added in a typically English understated way the trouble was/is no-one knew what on earth they were voting for, the politicians couldn't explain it and the papers he said were full of misinformation. He also confirm much of England hadn't recovered from Thatcher's time so those people had nothing to lose in voting Brexit. Finally, he said because of the current mess he sees the benefit of a 2nd referendum because it's clearly what is involved.