What's what?

Fentanyl?

hmmmm.... Fentanyl....... Never thought of that one...... Worth a go.

never give power to those that seek it.

I see Truffles Turnbull is now criticising the elites in the media and the ABC (gee where did he get that from?) and today came down to Vicco to surround himself with local Liberals to (re) announce existing road funding while not inviting local State Labor MPs or even the Vicco Premier to the announcement ....... we are talking about $3 billion AUD and our PM is playing petty politics ......... spare us!

blame trump!! more racism! more xenophobia! more nationalism!

must be trump

http://indonesiaexpat.biz/featured/rules-change-for-agents-visa-kitas/

there's gonna be some grumpy (lined up haha) bule's in bali

Floyd writes "I see Truffles Turnbull is now criticising the elites in the media and the ABC (gee where did he get that from?) and today came down to Vicco to surround himself with local Liberals to (re) announce existing road funding while not inviting local State Labor MPs or even the Vicco Premier to the announcement ....... we are talking about $3 billion AUD and our PM is playing petty politics ......... spare us!"

And Shorten is following the same populist tactic.... Both men disgust me.

The burning issue of our times (if I could only post bloody links!)

Chuck "Confecting a moral panic around 18C is easier than solving our real problems" into your search engine of choice.

@sheepy says .... "And Shorten is following the same populist tactic.... Both men disgust me"

Sheepy, you will need to illuminate me on what shorty has been up to, but you seem to miss my point which is our PM is playing petty politics with $3 billion of taxpayers money. I could go on about the need to get infrastructure spending right, free of politics and all about getting the best value for money but I think even you should be agreeing with that.

Kochie, ya need some Chomskybot, comrade. An example:

"Look On My Words, Ye Mighty, And Despair!

On the other hand, most of the methodological work in modern linguistics is, apparently, determined by a parasitic gap construction. From C1, it follows that the fundamental error of regarding functional notions as categorial can be defined in such a way as to impose an important distinction in language use. On our assumptions, the natural general principle that will subsume this case raises serious doubts about irrelevant intervening contexts in selectional rules. Comparing these examples with their parasitic gap counterparts in (96) and (97), we see that any associated supporting element is to be regarded as the levels of acceptability from fairly high (eg (99a)) to virtual gibberish (eg (98d)). To provide a constituent structure for T(Z,K), the theory of syntactic features developed earlier delimits the requirement that branching is not tolerated within the dominance scope of a complex symbol."

Noam Chomsky.

" Note that the fundamental error of regarding functional notions as categorial does not readily tolerate a stipulation to place the constructions into these various categories. Let us continue to suppose that the theory of syntactic features developed earlier is to be regarded as nondistinctness in the sense of distinctive feature theory. On our assumptions, the earlier discussion of deviance is not quite equivalent to the strong generative capacity of the theory. Suppose, for instance, that the appearance of parasitic gaps in domains relatively inaccessible to ordinary extraction delimits problems of phonemic and morphological analysis. Furthermore, a case of semigrammaticalness of a different sort does not affect the structure of the extended c-command discussed in connection with (34)."

Noam Chomsky.

"If you’re in favour of any policy – reform, revolution, stability, regression, whatever – if you’re at least minimally moral, it’s because you think it’s somehow good for people. And good for people means conforming to their fundamental nature."

David H Koch.

Floyd.... Bill Shorten on Sunday ; "Labor will heed the lessons from the mines and mills and factories of Detroit, of Ohio, of Pennsylvania”.......
Tell me..... WTF does Detriot have to do with Australia, Floyd? We have our own struggling towns.....

He then goes on a full Trumpism..... After years of pushing free trade and 457 visas, Shorten says , "“It is time to build Australian first, buy Australian first in our contracts and employ Australians first.”..... " now is not the time to simply rubber stamp free trade agreements” ....
Is this the same Bill Shorten who only 12 months ago signed off on Andrew Robbs Free trade deal with China?????? For real???? Even pauline is patting him on the back....... Hanson wrote on twitter "When you look at Bill Shorten’s recent rhetoric it seems Labor is now taking its cues from Pauline Hanson’s One Nation. Good to see"................
Then of course he ratchets up the fossil fuel people, JUST LIKE TRUMP.... Shorten said on Monday , "I am not a rampant ‘greenie’ who thinks there is no place for fossil fuel in our energy mix in the future"....

Bill Shorten is the worse Labor leader since Bill Hayden..... Even Crean was better..... And at least with Psycho Latham, you knew exactly where you stood..... This guy has gotta go...... For fucks sake.....

And if that isn't enough, here we have the Labor party in South Australia using the Trump factor to push for a nuclear dump, even though the people have said no.... Using twisted stats.... Labelling those that don't want the dump "elite"....... Fuckn disgrace.......

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-16/'silent-majority'-want-sa-nuclear-dump-koutsantonis-says/8030816

Thanks Sheepy, I see you really hate the guy.

But my point was about Turnbull's poor performance when it came to the vitally important matters of infrastructure and taxpayers money and ensuring both are politics free to ensure we get the best value for each dollar spent.

So Sheepy your against South Australia increasing its involvement in the nuclear fuel industry? That's your opinion and your entitled to it but there's plenty of born and bred S.A locals including me who can see the economic benefits of storing the end product of the cycle in the same place that it has been mined and manufactured.

South Australia has probably the most stable geography on earth and vast expanses of outback with non-existent population.

In its final report, the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission found South Australia could benefit from a projected revenue of $257 billion, and the potential accumulation of $445 billion in a State Wealth Fund.

To put that in perspective, the potential economic opportunity presented to South Australia is the equivalent of:
$260,000 for every individual South Australian;
211 new Royal Adelaide Hospitals; or
850 Adelaide Oval redevelopments.
Investment and development opportunities could potentially create more than 9,600 jobs by 2030.

South Australia is considered an economic basket case. Why shouldn't we explore the possibility of creating an industry that will transform our economy and secure our future?

@YS & Sheepy,

Heard last week on the Drum that if all this went ahead the waste would still be stored above ground for 200 years or so (reason not stated) thereby creating all the standard risks and that the preferred locations are close to other state boarders thereby creating the question should other states also have a say at any possible referendum. Finally, the point was also made if there was so much money to be made SA would face competition for the dump site from other countries thereby lowering the potential financial benefits to SA.

Donald Abbott. Tony Trump.

from a location perspective SD, and all other arguments aside, you have to admit that parts of outback SA are a pretty good location compared with elsewhere around the earth. flat, dry, stable, less flora/fauna, easy to get to.

is your main objection the potential risk associated with nuclear contamination, or that you just dont support global use of nuclear, or that you are worried about Aus progressing towards a nuclear future, or something else?

i suppose at the end of the day we have to face reality, the earth WILL embark on nuclear more, particularly india, china even if places like france move away from it.

we can either keep our heads in the sand, or pull em out and stick something else in it.

Happy , I don't support nuclear energy, full stop..... Dont care how many jobs are created...
Also apparently the stuff will be stored above ground for 100 years... That aint good...

And you have to transport the stuff from all over the world.... Which Australian port will it be coming in through?

Re India /China..... That's their choice..... We sell them beef..... We don't have to take their turds back..... So whilst I am against uranium, if we as a country continue to sell it to them, why should we have to take the waste? Their choice.

fair enough SD. when you think about though, its obviously ironic that we are happy to sell a product to help others polute their backyard but resist polution of our own.

its clearly a case of a country sitting out in the middle of the ocean with no neighbours and without a care of what is going on in the real world. ;)

what's the issue with storing waste above ground for 100 years sheepshit?

Happy writes "fair enough SD. when you think about though, its obviously ironic that we are happy to sell a product to help others polute their backyard but resist polution of our own."

Mate I wrote "whilst I am against uranium, if we as a country continue to sell it to them, why should we have to take the waste? Their choice."
I'm not the benevolent dictator, happy........ The reality is (whether I like it or not) we are selling uranium for countries to use as power..... That's those country's choice to do that.... It's our country's choice to supply, not mine... The debate at the mo' isn't whether we should stop mining uranium. The debate is whether we should act as recycle depot for countries that want to get the benefits of this poison, but don't dont to deal with the negatives... If countries want to go down the nuclear path, they should go down the path all the way... If they can turn on their tv's and fridges and traffic lights thanks to uranium, they can store the waste...

D'cock breath..... Don't you know how to google, ya skid mark.

So what your trying to say sheepshagger is that you have no idea why storing waste "ain't good" you're just parroting the greeny/commie fearmongering based on outdated science, your a bright spark aren't ya.

koch...tell me, who is that you trust to safely store such incredibly toxic substances for 100 years?

is it goverment? i don't have much faith in the present goverernment but you think that good goverment is guaraantted for the next hundred years? No corruption? no possibility of irresponsible or bad governements for the next century?

or is it private enterprise and markets that you trust to ensure the radioactive material is stored safely for 100 years? The market can't even lead miners to safely store their tailings and waste water. So why do you have faith the market will guaraantee 100 years of safe storage of radioactive material? It's cheaper not to store it safely, so the market dictates that it won't be stored safely.

eagerly awating your reply.

Incredibly toxic? Can you quantify that somehow?

yeah im not having a go at ya sheepdog. i accept your position totally and im not super invested in this issue. but I was just commenting on the bigger picture in a moral sense, pointing out the irony of how AUS is happy to contribute to a problem but then conveniently draws a line in the sand at that point. we have burnt coal historically but when developing countries are forced down the nuclear route through lack of economically viable choices then we say oh well, not our problem. and in truth, your right, it isnt our problem. why should we have to do anything at all. and we can make that choice because we are a very lucky country having both wealth and isolation from the rest of the world.

well that shut your dumb-assed mouth pretty quick didn't it, koch

Is that how toxic nuclear waste is?

Happy.. I know you aint havin a go, man..... This is the joy of writing, and not talking one on one.... people can put their own slant on a sentence.... Its a bit like playing romantic music behing the line "we'll be together forever"..... Now same line but with creepy horror music.....

BTW no "developing country" has been "forced" down the nuclear route.... sorry dude.... But thats crap.... In fact many "developing countries" are halted going down that path by the international community.

Now.... As far as Inland South Oz,NT/W.A etc goes..... Some of the biggest telscopes, pine gap etc are there for a reason....... It's arguably the driest place on earth, the clearest sky..... So, what does that mean? It means I have absolutely NO IDEA why we aren't building solar farms hooked into the grid.... I'm sure the local inhabitants would welcome the large scale employment in not only building but maintaining. I'm sure it would address our carbon emmissions (if that's ya cuppa tea).... Probably the best spot in the world for solar powers farms..... How many jobs would this dump produce? A fraction compared to solar.... Perhaps the gross profit margin on solar wont be as large for a select few who will benefit from a dump..... perhaps thats the problem for shit stains like Premier Weatherill.... But even at say 30% gross profit, the ruboff effect from employment, and the social pride would more than make up for it.

ill leave the nuclear discussion until another day.

gotta agree with ya on the solar farms in arid areas. its a complete no brainer. public private partnerships to encourage corporates to take the risk. new industries away from sydney and melbourne. its a future reality and so i dont see why not just start now. there is no technical impediment. its all lack of will, and lack of courage.

And of course there's another factor... Not everyone in the world knows geography... In fact, you could ask a crow eater to point out Charleville on a blank qld map and they'd struggle.... Same deal asking a qlder to point out Moonta. Even more so if you ask someone overseas where Keith is.......
But.... They all have a fair idea on where Qld, or South Australia is.... So, South Oz becomes the worlds dumping ground for high level nuclear waste.... That will be news, international news..... They just hear "south australia".......
So what happens to all the agricultural and fisheries produce labelled "South Australia"? Does the person in Cape Town who wants to try an Australian wine go for the Barossa or the Margaret river? The Robe S.A lobster or the Tassie lobster?
It will have an effect..
Weatherill is a douche.

You may some very good points there sheepster

There is a summary report from the recent royal commission held in SA on this. It should be stressed that governments do not manage the storage of nuclear waste. They would set up a body to do this. It is obvious this is independent of which government is in power. This is a relevant topic as nuclear is seen as the only viable solution for energy supply if global warming is to managed. Storage of waste in SA was estimated to provide over $5 billion per annum for the state.

TB, you have made many comments about this SA/Royal Commission/Nuclear issue.

I've heard someone on The Drum say if the dump were to go ahead the waste would need to be stored above ground for about 200 years, reason unstated. Is this true and if so why above ground?

Further, the same person said the likely sites are very close to other state boarders and he asks if South Australians are to get a vote on its go ahead why shouldn't other states. Your opinion?

Lastly, on the economic return the say guys says if there is so much cash to be made out of the dump SA would face competition perhaps within Australia but also overseas thereby dropping the economic benefits substantially, again do you have a view on this line of thought?

Not sure where to post this because this stuff has been discussed across the trump thread and this one, the gnarly impact of shaming on social media. all for social justice, along both ends of the political spectrum. An excellent interview with Richard Fidler,

"Jon Ronson: what it's like to be publicly shamed"
http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/conversations/conversations/8019706.

Tonybarber, now that you are back on the air today would you care to answer my questions to you from yesterday.

I'll have a crack at this one floyd. I think storing above ground has to do with allowing the heat and radioactivity to break down over a period before being stored long term. The material is often submerged in water for several years before being moved to dry storage.

I've actually built storage containers to hold radioactive pellets for use in mineral sampling machinery while working for a company called Thermo Electron Corporation back in the early 2000's.
These huge machines were used at Roxby Downs and also in mining operations worldwide. I worked under the instructions of a nuclear physicist. A beam of radioactive isotopes is directed through samples of the mined material to determine what percentage of various minerals is present.
One of the dickheads I worked with put his hand under the beam to see what it looked like. Of course it's invisible but he got a whole years dose of radiation in one hit and had to be moved to a different department.

There were three different proposed dump sites. One was in the eastern Flinders Ranges on land owned by former Liberal senator Grant Chapman that is reasonably close to the N.S.W border near Broken Hill. Marilinga near the W.A border is another site but there's not much out there. The third is in the Gawler Ranges region.

I wouldn't really put too much stock in some random panelist on The Drum to know what he is talking about anymore then some climate change skeptic's opinion over that of trained climate scientists. I'd say leave that sort of stuff to the experts?

thanks Yorksurfer, like all things its not clear cut.

On your economic return point floyd I read it will take 10 or more years to set up a nuclear waste dump so I think that would give a dump in the SA desert a decent head start before any competition emerges?

Also I think Australia would be a preferred country to store waste due to our stable political system.

Nuclear weapons can be manufactured with this waste material so foreign governments would need to be confident about the country they are storing it in?
We might even need our own nuclear weapons one day if Trump decides to throw us to the wolves along with Japan and South Korea so there's another advantage unless you want to learn to speak Mandarin?

Yes, all true Yorksurfer, that above ground storage will be the likely end of it.

Mandarin? mmmm, given sea transportation would want to be minimised the now privatised Port of Darwin would be possible an entry point in AU and then trained down to the dump site. Speaking about trains transporting nuclear waste ever see the 1985 BBC series Edge of Darkness. On topic and brilliant TV. Sound track by Eric Clapton. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_of_Darkness Recommended.

yorke, i believe the above ground storage you were familiar with was for highly radioactive isotopes that decay incredibly quick. there is no point burying this stuff as within a few days its gone.

not so for spent nuclear fuel. it takes ages to decay. basically forever.

Just discovered this quote. Thought here was as good a place as any to post it:

"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts - for support rather than for illumination." - Andrew Lang (Scotsman!)

I know keeping up with the LNP shit-show gets tiring with its daily fuck-ups...it gets beyond satire...not worthy of comment...BUT...

Friggin' Dutton's latest 'dead cat' cannot pass without comment. The stench of it is finally too much to bear.

Well may it be part of Turdstill's cunning plan to let this rancid potato go 'free range' and kill himself off...Lord Dickfist's full of erm, cunning plans...but the classic MO of Malcolm, as in the past, will end up destroying him. The racist stench is seeping into Malcolm himself and if he doesn't extricate himself, and his government, from Dutton now, it will be the end.

For a narcissist like Lord Dickfists, a fate worse than political death...or even real death...a 'personal legacy' forever stained with bog-standard racism of the lowest order.

It is unfortunate but true that there is still conflict or disagreement amongst various Lebanese groups.
There were about 3500 Lebanese Muslims in Australia in 1971. Just two decades later, the number had increased to more than 25,000. The number grew quickly, due primarily to Australia's then family reunion policy. Most Muslim Lebanese migrants settled in south-western Sydney. The Shia gathered around the Arncliffe mosque and the Sunnis at the Lakemba mosque. At the time some Maronite leaders warned the Fraser government, at the highest levels, that the decision to allow large numbers of poorly educated Lebanese Muslims into Australia would have unexpected and unwanted policy outcomes. They were dismissed with the "you-would-say-that-wouldn't-you?" refrain, meaning the Lebanese Christians opposed the Muslims simply on account of religion.

This was inaccurate and unfair. The Turks were the first large group of Muslims to settle here, arriving in the late 1960s when a Coalition government was headed by John Gorton and William McMahon. Despite the usual initial difficulties, the Turks settled well and soon found employment. The problem with Lebanese Muslims was that they were ill equipped to enter the workforce. Also, a number were fundamentalist Islamists. In time, some Shias became supporters of Hezbollah while some Sunnis became admirers of Osama bin Laden. The fundamentalists gave other Muslims a bad name, many of whom have had no connection with Lebanon or the Middle East or, indeed, Islamism.

As my good Lebanese mechanic mate told me, 'Don't buy a car from Bankstown or nearby suburbs'.

Where'd you get this cut n paste 'truth', BaaBaa? More importantly, why? That's a question only you can answer.

Its like 1 in 25 Catholic priests is a sexual predator of young children - so I take it Dutton and this colleagues will be recommending all Australians stay away from the Catholic Church.

From an article entitled "Steve Bannon Isn't a Racist. He's Worse" (Bannon is Trump's chief strategist for the new administration) :

"So even if we give Bannon the benefit of the doubt on racism, he’s still presided over a website [Breitbart] that deliberately indulges in race-baiting, presumably to build its audience. Is that better or worse? You decide.

I've written about this before, and I've already decided: It's worse. The David Duke [former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan] version of racism may be repugnant, but for that very reason it's fairly easy to fight. There are just too many people who are put off by it.

The Steve Bannon version is far more effective. Partly this is because, yes, critics will overreach and discredit themselves. Partly it's because his more subtle attacks on "political correctness" don't put off as many people. Partly it's because he assures people they can have racist attitudes without actually being racists. And partly it's because his sub rosa approach is just plain harder to expose.

If the only people we had to confront were the David Dukes of the world, racism would be a whole lot easier to deal with. There aren't that many of them; they're mostly not very bright; and to give them their due, they actually believe what they're saying. That limits their political flexibility. Guys like Bannon are far more odious. He probably doesn't believe most of the 'alt-right's' nonsense. But he's willing to sit in the background and cynically exploit it for personal and political benefit. That's about as vile as you can get."

Bannon = Bolt = Dutton etc etc etc

Scumbags, all.

It seems Nick Xenophon has rolled over to Turnbull on water for SA. True?

The insipid X man. His moment in the sun, and he melted.

Good to see Poorleeen sticking up for the working man too. By backing the ABCC/big construction!

And backing up her mate, Brandis?! Inquiry? Pfffft, nothin' to see there...

One Nation? They aren't even one party.

Rod...Rod...please explain...

FFS