Interesting stuff

VL, what's your view on immigration?

Pros and cons, economic benefits vs pressure on environment and infrastructure?

Again Frogg 100% agree exactly what my thoughts are but said much better than i can.

and this,

"I don't like where we are going but have seen enough to know that I can't say "why don't we just do xyz .....". I wish it was not so."

Yep, it's so easy to say something online and feel good thinking we have some easy answer, when in reality we don't and I'm yet to see any half decent alternative argument to growth.

I use to do the same, but now it's like, who am i kidding, let's dig deeper, the whole lets call it all a ponzi scheme blah blah blah is boring.

I have personally been passionate on the issue shared links on "sustainable population party" here years and years ago, shared links from Dick Smith on the issue.

Wish it was different but haven't come across a real alternatives.

I like your posts ID. And you hit the nail on the head, a reasonable alternative has not been forthcoming, hence why govts/corporations etc push the "Growth" bandwagon. Doesn't mean it is the right path, its is far from it. It suits the current generation, but in a couple of centuries/millennia there will be hell to pay. Modern societies are so complicated, that there probably wont be a solution that everyone will agree to, or like, or want to adapt too. Like a Ponzi Scheme, Growth is not sustainable on this planet, it has to stop at some time or mother earth will stop it for us. At some point in time the earth will not be able to sustain the amount of people, land for housing, land for farming, sufficient seafood, water, materials, pollution controls etc that will be demanded by huge populations. It may be boring, but it is correct, the new incomers feed the engine, that supports he outgoing crew …. and what happens when there is no possibility for new entrants into the system (home grown or otherwise is irrespective) … collapse. I don't have the answer, and it sounds like it wont come for a good while. I am sure some small island nations are very close to reaching their limit on "growth", it will be interesting to see how they handle a static population in the near future. As we have a very large land mass, we have some time to sort ourselves out, one way or another. Like the title "Interesting Stuff".

"a reasonable alternative has not been forthcoming, hence why govts/corporations etc push the "Growth" bandwagon."

Sorry but that's really naive and also very simplistic.

Be nice to continue talking about frivolous things like immigration and the welfare of future Australians but I think some serious talk is in order.

I've recently been rediscovering the joy of my fish twinny so I pulled out another fish I'd been riding lately, just to compare and contrast, check the differences in build and why they ride as they do. 

The other one is a quad edge fish by Phil Myers. Though they're both 5'6" and the planshapes are similar, the fin positions are, obviously, very different.

Nick Miles twinny at left, Phil Myers quad at right.

With the forward position on the quad I got to thinking about filling the front slots with the big twin fins, but use small fins at the back to try and replicate the twinny feeling albeit with a bit more range.

Few years ago I had a custom set of mini keels made so I dug them out and put them in.

Yesterday morning I had a great surf with that arrangement. As the keels are single tab I realised I could offset the positions - the forward plug on the heel side and back plug on the toe - to make an asymmetric fish. 

Late yesterday I got talking to a mate, told him what I'd been doing and he told me to come around to his house and grab a set of Webber's flexy fins. Greg sells them as a Thruster set, but my mate bought two of the rear keels to make a quad.

Took it for a run late yesterday and it felt like a whole new board. The front fins are tall but narrow with increasing flex towards the tip. The rears are single tab, the back two-thirds, where most of the fin area is, all flexes.

This morning the surf was a touch bigger and, again, the board just straight up went off. I'd ridden that board for more than six months and it was the best it'd gone. Need to ride it a few more times to understand what's happening back there.

I sense a rabbit hole approaching, but I'm not swerving away.

The mine field of playing with different fins........interesting and fun at times but frustrating and a mind fuk at other times especially when changing boards for certain conditions...anyhow i now only get thruster setups,less confusing.

Andy and Blowin where are these alternatives then?

Just a few links will be fine.

Growth is the most natural thing in the world, be it a seed that is planted and grows or an animal or human that grows and aims to reproduce, everything in life seeks growth, the whole purpose of life is growth, even this virus seeks growth.

But yeah 100% as we know and Jamyardy points out negatives also come with growth.

BTW. In relation to what other countries can do and what we can do and idea we can suddenly do things better to get some advantage that cant be challenged and made redundant .

Just look at what China did not long ago in building a hospital in 10 days, as a tradie it blow's my mind, i cant even comprehend how this is possible, even though it's mostly pre fab in Australia it would still take a year or years, no way we could ever do that in ten days.

Even to get approval would take months, it would be a miracle in Australia to even get approval in ten days..

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-03/china-completes-wuhan-makeshift-h...

"You probably don’t get it . This can be for several reasons..."

Nah.

With you, blow in, there's only the one.

You're a bigot.

Pardon the pun, but it colours your most every socio-political utterance on here.

Hundreds of 'em. 24/7. For fucking years.

Hahaha.

No use scurrying around now. The horse bolted years ago.

Who you really fooling?

Well, apart from yourself.

Gloria, I think they got your number.

Hahahahaha.

It's the blind leading the blind!

Stop it!

Bloody iriot.

100% Australia can make anything.

Problem is Asia is on our doorstep and can make everything much cheaper and we are not talking a little cheaper.

A full time min wage job in Australia is now about $30-35K a year, an average job in many countries in Asia is $3-3.5K a year, then on top of that every other operating cost is as cheap or up to 10 times cheaper.

There is just no way around this other than tariffs but even then the imported product can be much cheaper and then it gets messy and complicated.

I honestly have no idea why anyone would produce anything in Australia outside of a niche cottage type market.

In regard to selling off farms etc yeah that sucks i dont agree with that at all.

We basically priced ourselves out of manufacturing and every time our min wage rises it's like another nail in the coffin, but i just cant see how we can even the playing field, no one is going to take lower wages, devalue the dollar drastically?

In regard to a link...i just want a theory or idea on this alternative to growth to keep an economy afloat, because you guy are implying its possible, but ive never seen anything to suggest it is.

It's not just China as time goes on we could easily see other countries in Asia with low wages and overheads become much more productive in manufacturing exports, Indonesia,Thailand, Phillipines, Laos, Cambodia etc

It's like in the 80s i remember its wasn't so common to see made in china on things it was made in Japan, Hong kong, Korea..think also Vietnam

The big problem is we are a developed country with some of the highest wages and overheads in the world and Asia has some of the lowest wages in the world and lowest overheads and being a developing country have so much room to grow even wages and operating cost can grow at a decent rate and the gap between our's and theirs remain huge.

Yeah the twinny is probably a few years old, the unblemished visage a product of unabashed prejudice, but I'm trying hard to overcome that.

In other interesting developments, today I cleaned up an old tool box and turned it into an all-in-one surf hardware rig including fins, fin keys, grub screws, heaps of wax, wax scrapers, leggy strings, torch, head torch, box fin plate, screwdrivers. All tucked away in their own little compartments.

Put stickers on it too.

1. It's a niche specialty market it's not a mass produced thing.

2. They are paid for by the government who dont really give a shit how much they cost/spend.

3. Possibly security issues?

I thought we were making some in Australia?...which i always thought was crazy.

Stu gotta say though those webber fins look real nice ...you were using the c-drive quads?...no good ?

@ Indo - "where are these alternatives then?"

The adjustments are infinite, starting with an acknowledgement of physical limits to growth as dictated by natural ecosystems and resources.

Looking for "an alternative" seems like an odd question to ask.

The only superiority of neoliberalism lies in the power of the interests that sustain it.

Being more specific, I would suggest a social democracy that rejects neoliberalism and importantly, recognises that if we want any sort of quality of life aside from the material, we're going to have to accept less "growth".
If you discard neoliberalism, that IS the alternative Indo.

"What is a feasible alternative? The simple logical answer is: ‘discard neoliberalism’. The introduction of the alternative model would start from doing just that.
It would be sensible to start from seeking resolutions to problems that neoliberal governments have failed to tackle in practice” why/how has inequality grown for the last several decades? Why have good jobs disappeared? Why have median wages stagnated for more than four decades in the US and since the 1970s in the UK. Why is housing unaffordable in England now?

The alternative model to neoliberalism is designed to stop this negative money circulation—which creates inequality—and shift the direction of monetary flow—which now goes from the poorer (in low salaries and debt payment) to the rich (with great opportunities for wealth creation). The alternative, in this respect, denies laissez-faire, over-sized financialised capitalism and the debt regime. It values demand-side economics. Decent employment, corporate social responsibility and land availability are core concerns in the alternative model."

"Niche specialty market ?

Australia is paying $50 billion for those submarines."

Yes off course its a "Niche specialty market" the price doesn't change that, demand for submarines is low and id expect only from governments and then id expect certain countries spent going to just sell to anyone.

Sorry you lost me on the second part?

Yes coal is our second biggest export after iron ore, if you are implying because we have iron ore we suddenly become the best country to build anything out of steel, well it doesn't work like that.

I mean we even export our own fish to places like Thailand to be processed and then sent back to be sold here, because it's cheaper than doing it here.

Now that is crazy, is not just us though same practise happens between USA and Asia.

Ha ha ok Andy.

So basically you want to be a socialist country, a thing that has never worked anywhere for very long because as the old cliche goes you eventually run out of other peoples money.

I personally don't understand the negativity with Neoliberalism its basically the most natural system possible, the weird thing is those who always whinge about the government and government control are against it and seem to want a system like socialism where more power and control is given to governments and you basically become reliant on the government ????

I was on the dole for years, i was basically a socialist and didnt know it, i thought i deserved the money and deserved as much free lunches as possible and do fuck all for it, what did it do for me?...it made me reliant on the system, it demotivated me.

There is a reason why all developed countries system is based on neoliberalism and capitalism and thats because it works, while if you look at countries with a history of socialism and communism most are developing countries, yeah sure this is where people start pointing to Sweden , Norway etc but those countries only have aspects of socialism as do pretty much all countries and they also have free markets they are in reality more neoliberal/capitalist type countries than anything else.

I mean even China is communist but still a capitalist country, even they aren't that stupid.

This whole idea that capitalism or neoliberalism is bad, absolutely shits me to tears, it's basically just a tall poppy syndrome whinging about all the rich cunts, meanwhile half of you people own shares in their companies and most likely striving to grow business etc.

I have no idea who is a capitalist anyway, at what point does a business man become a capitalist?

A sole trader who wants to reduce tax?...a small business, a mid sized business?...a big business in Australia?...a big business that goes offshore? (all aim to pay as less tax as possible and make generally make as much money as possible)

IMHO we are all capitalist unless you are some lazy cunt like i was on the dole thinking everyone owns you something.

Had been riding C-Drives for a while. Great fins but flex simply isn't part of their equation as they're thick and further stiffened by the many outline curves.

The feeling with the Webber fins - and after a session this evening I'm certain it is flex I'm feeling - is of tension and release. As such, they respond really well to flow and rhythm, ample time between turns as opposed to sudden jamming.

Magical feeling.

Switching tracks.

There are social democracres right across Scandanavia, Indo. Long established governments, stable economies.

Australia could've been considered one too, before we caught the bug.

Indo, realise that a social democracy can still be capitalist, it's the neoliberal aspect, the rule by corporation that is the big problem.

The idea that anything with the word "social" in it is socialist or communist is a pretty fundamental misunderstanding.

"And the point about the exports is that a single order of submarines is worth more than our entire coal industry. Get it ?"

One years coal income, so what about the other years.

And if they were actually made in a country in asia how much cheaper would those Submarines been?

Shit loads

The Chinese hospital in 10 days looks impressive, fuck it, it IS impressive...

BUT, I’ve seen firsthand a few of the Chinese BRI infrastructure projects (roads, buildings, ports et al) in the region. Most of them are just terrible quality. Big freeway built by China in PNG in 2018 is already falling apart.

Cheap labour, cheap materials, little regard for workplace safety. You get what you pay for.

Go to sea in a submarine made with these principles? You’ve gotta be kidding.

"China’s “bat woman” was attending a conference with colleagues in Shanghai in late December when an urgent phone call came from her boss at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

People were falling sick from a mysterious new virus just a few miles from the institute. And Shi Zhengli, who had earned her nickname for her virus-hunting expeditions to bat caves, was summoned back to the central Chinese city to lead the laboratory’s investigations of samples taken from patients.

Momentum is now growing behind a theory that the laboratory itself — an internationally renowned centre of research — was the source of the coronavirus pandemic that has since claimed more than 150,000 lives and crippled the world economy.

That was what Shi reportedly feared, and US intelligence agencies are investigating while the Trump administration puts the screws on China. But what is the evidence? Is this another Chinese cover-up — or politicised “baloney” as one top US reseacher claims?

Shi is an acclaimed virologist who headed the team that traced the source of the lethal outbreak of Sars — another coronavirus — to horseshoe bats in southern China in 2002-03. She was a joint author of a research paper that warned last year that it was “highly likely” that future coronavirus outbreaks would originate from bats, and an “increased probability” that this would occur in China.

Within eight days of her return from Shanghai to Wuhan in December, her team concluded that the new disease sweeping the city was indeed almost certainly a new bat coronavirus. But Shi was surprised that the cases had emerged so far from the bats’ usual habitat in China’s subtropical south. In comments published by Scientific American magazine, she recalled a nagging fear: “Could they have come from our lab?”

Shi, who developed one of the world’s largest databases of bat-related viruses, frantically pored over the records at the institute. She was checking for any mishandling of experimental materials from bat virus research, especially during disposal, Scientific American reported in an article about her work last month. And she breathed a “sigh of relief” when the results showed that the sequencing of the new infections did not match those of the viruses her team had sampled. “That really took a load off my mind,” she said. “I had not slept a wink for days.”
Since those early days, though, speculation that the Wuhan institute, which houses China’s top biosafety laboratory, could have been the source of the outbreak has swirled online.

It was long dismissed as an internet conspiracy theory. But amid the US and Chinese blame game over the handling of the pandemic, the scenario was pushed to centre stage last week by hawks close to Donald Trump, with the fans flamed by the president.

The possibility of a laboratory leak has also been discussed at the highest levels of the British government. Earlier this month a senior government adviser described it as “credible” and said “it is not discounted”.

The leading theory among scientists remains that the virus spread to humans from bat-infected animals at Wuhan’s now-infamous wildlife market. But findings published in The Lancet medical journal gave some cause for doubt.

According to that study, 14 of the first 41 confirmed infected patients had no direct exposure to the market. For some experts, this suggested that even if the market had a significant role in transmission it may not have been the source.

Tom Cotton, a Republican senator, has been raising questions for months. “We don’t know where it originated and we have to get to the bottom of that,” he said. “We also know that just a few miles away from that food market is China’s only biosafety level-four super-laboratory that researches human infectious diseases.”
By now the theory that the virus may have leaked from the laboratory by human error, infecting a worker who would have been “patient zero”, has become common currency among China hawks.

It gained added credence last week when it was revealed that in 2018, US embassy officials in China sent warnings back to Washington about the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

In two diplomatic cables, US officials who visited the facility and met Shi expressed concerns about safety and management weaknesses at the laboratory, according to The Washington Post. One cable warned that the research into bat coronaviruses and their potential for human transmission could cause a new Sars-like epidemic.
Another piece of circumstantial evidence on the desks of Trump’s national security analysts is a paper published in February by two Chinese researchers, who said the virus “probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan”. The authors later withdrew it, saying they did not have evidence for the theories, but the claims entered the public domain.

Evidence of the Chinese Communist Party’s attempts to cover-up the outbreak at the early stages, even as Shi and her colleagues were investigating its origins, has further compounded suspicions.

In the latest revelation, internal party documents seen by the Associated Press disclosed that China’s leaders delayed warning the public for at least six days after secretly determining that the country was facing an epidemic.

On January 14, Ma Xiaowei, the top health official, laid out the grim assessment to provincial cadres, delivering unspecified instructions from President Xi Jinping. It was only on January 20 that Xi alerted the Chinese people to the dangers of the highly contagious disease. During the six-day public silence, more than 3,000 people had been infected and millions had travelled ahead of the lunar new year holiday.

Such secrecy explains why scepticism greeted an announcement by Beijing on Friday increasing Wuhan’s official Covid-19 death toll by a suspiciously precise 50% — from 2,579 to 3,869. Chinese officials insisted that the new figures reflected a more accurate count now that the epidemic had eased, not an earlier effort to conceal the severity of the crisis.

Many believe, however, that the figure is still way too low — and that cover-ups possibly included an accidental leak from Shi’s laboratory.
“We’re not suggesting that the Chinese had sinister intent, but that they might have screwed up,” said one Republican national security aide. “It’s perfectly possible the lab got sloppy and something got out. We know that the Chinese have been engaged in a more general cover-up over the pandemic, destroying evidence, cracking down on whistleblowers. Is it not reasonable then to ask about the origins of the virus, given there was a lab in Wuhan studying bat coronaviruses?”
In a press briefing, Trump was asked whether he thought the virus originated in a lab. He responded: “I don’t want to say that . . . but I will tell you more and more, we’re hearing the story. We are doing a very thorough examination of this horrible situation.”

Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, a US research organisation, who has worked with Shi and her institute for 15 years, is scathing about the lab accident theory. “The idea that this virus escaped from the laboratory is pure baloney,” he told the Democracy Now! TV network.

Daszak said he had collected bat samples with Chinese colleagues — “some of the best scientists in the world” — and that the Wuhan laboratory did not house the culture of bat viruses but rather their genetic sequencing. “It’s a politicisation of the origins of a pandemic and that’s really unfortunate,” he added.
Shi herself strongly rejects what she calls “tinfoil-hat” theories. “The novel 2019 coronavirus is nature punishing the human race for keeping uncivilised living habits,” she told the Caixin website. “I swear on my life that it has nothing to do with our laboratory.”

But other scientists are open to the idea that the virus might have originated in the lab, not a wildlife market. Richard Ebright, professor of chemical biology at Rutgers University, told The Washington Post that it was “at least as probable” the virus came from a laboratory accident as from outside the facility.
In an interview with state media Yuan Zhiming, director of the laboratory, said: “There’s no way this virus came from us.”
None of his staff had been infected, he told the English-language state broadcaster CGTN, and added some media outlets are “deliberately trying to mislead people”.
Luc Montagnier, a French scientist who shared a Nobel prize as the co-discoverer of the HIV virus, also weighed in. No stranger to scientific furores, he claimed in an interview that the new virus was released accidentally from the laboratory by scientists working on an Aids vaccine.

In an election year, Trump undoubtedly has a strong political incentive to pin the blame for America’s initially lacklustre response to the pandemic on external sources.
One is the World Health Organisation, the UN body whose funding he suspended last week. Another is China, with whom relations plummeted further last week after a new State Department report suggested that Beijing might have conducted secret nuclear tests.

Mike Pompeo, his secretary of state, ramped up the pressure on Friday, telling the radio show host Hugh Hewitt: “We are still asking the Chinese Communist Party to allow experts to get into that virology lab so that we can determine precisely where this virus began.
“We don’t know the answer to the question about the precise origination point,” Pompeo said. “But we do know this: We know that the first sightings of this occurred within miles of the Wuhan Institute of Virology . . . where there’s high-end virus research being conducted.”
He continued: “We know that the Chinese Communist Party, when it began to evaluate what to do inside of Wuhan, considered whether the [institute] was in fact the place where this came from. And most importantly, we know that they’ve not permitted the world’s scientists to go into that laboratory to evaluate what took place there, what’s happening there, what’s happening there even as we speak, Hugh, even as we’re on the show this morning. We still have not had western access to that facility so that we can properly evaluate what really has taken off all across the world and how that began.

“Those are facts, and those are important facts,” Pompeo added. “And the Chinese Communist Party and the World Health Organisation have a responsibility to the world to take those facts and take them to their logical conclusion and find out these answers, these important answers. These aren’t political. This is about science and health, and we need to get to the bottom of it.”
The claims about the lab might be hotly disputed, but they have resonance with many Americans. According to a Pew Research poll, only 43% think the virus came about naturally, while a sizeable 29% believe it was made in a laboratory.
Beijing has repeatedly argued that there is no proof that the coronavirus originated on Chinese soil, even promoting an outlandish theory that American soldiers might have brought Covid-19 to China during a military sports competition. But until irrefutable evidence of the source of the virus emerges, the rest of the world, not least Trump, will continue to ask questions."

The US scientist who believes the woman running the lab is a world class scientist thinks the idea that the virus escaped from the lab is “baloney”, but she had numerous sleepless nights worrying that the virus had indeed come from her lab. So the concept cannot be baloney otherwise she wouldn’t have had any reason to be worried..

Submarines are a poor example because of the security aspect.

Let's say there was no security aspect.

In that cases the common sense thing to do would put out a tender to any country to build them as long as they could prove they were capable of doing so.

Then would France get the contract?

Highly unlikely because instead of paying 50 billion for the submarines you could most likely get the same thing built for 25 million elsewhere.

Governments arent good examples to use though, because they are just like councils everyone rorts them, and they pay overs for everything.

If i was asked to do a quote or tender for the government or council at a minimum id double my normal price, everyone does.

Anyway the reality is Australia is not going to start manufacturing again on any type of decent scale, it's just not viable and never will be unless we put crazy high tariffs on things we wanted to produce or devalued our dollar to make it basically worthless.

Bit off topic but another problem is the French have fucked up in their quoting and time frame estimates with the Submarine build in question. Blown out to double the cost and time frame agreed on when the deal was struck. We wont be getting those submarines anytime soon (hopefully we dont need them in the meantime) , the old Collins class subs are going to have to keep on keeping on. Should have gone with the Japanese from the get go IMO, I,d rather drive a Toyota than a Peugeot anyday (and thats not having to go under the water in the thing).

Stu, as simba said
The mine field of playing with different fins........interesting and fun at times but frustrating and a mind fuk at other times especially when changing boards for certain conditions
MIND FUCK
I will add i stopped riding thrusters 10 years ago moved on to quads, then moved on to fish style boards then moved onto singles with option of twin.
Lots to unlock in the single and twin in one board.
Will not being going back to thrusters or quads
FYI
http://www.mckeesurf.com/?page_id=267

"STU ad been riding C-Drives for a while. Great fins but flex simply isn't part of their equation as they're thick and further stiffened by the many outline curves.

The feeling with the Webber fins - and after a session this evening I'm certain it is flex I'm feeling - is of tension and release. As such, they respond really well to flow and rhythm, ample time between turns as opposed to sudden jamming.Magical feeling."

Havin a traditional box opens more possibility, i reckon webber fins will break FCS plugs eventually

When you have a well made board Single or twin is all you need, ......Quads are good thrusters have had there day

Vision is easy. Here is one:

Australia should bring pharmaceutical manufacturing home - jobs, high end industry, high value products, lower risk in possible future health crisis etc. There the vision job is done. Not so hard.

The hard part is:
1. which ones to target
2. how to capture market share off well established competitors
3 how to work with or against exiting patents and big pharma around the world that has Congress in it pocket or the CCP on its side.
4. Developing a viable plan to attract investors.
5. developing a trained workforce from scratch.
6. Developing distribution channels around the country or world.
7. Setting up the tooling and manufacturing machinery which is vastly sophisticated these days and might not be able to be bought from potential competitors.
8. Dealing with predatory pricing in the early stages designed to destroy the fledgling industry.
9. Funding growth with impatient investors wanting wins now.
10. Having the leadership to drive the business through decades to come.
11. Facing the fact that we have limited options to make anything that is under patent and if out of patent, it is a low price fight against low wage countries.
12. Dealing with ruthless business practice - such as large o/s customers buying up big and never paying to screw the business over or just because they can.
13. managing cash flow and sales through GFC and perhaps another future virus crisis.
14. Innovating at a pace to keep ahead of some very smart operators with deep pockets or tapped into printed money loans from the CCP that might never need to be repaid.

Saying the above is hard is no more defeatist than saying that winning Wimbledon or even reaching the first round is hard. Ask the players who have battled the big four for a decade how it feels to be just a bit below the best. Perhaps they were just defeatist? In business being a bit more expensive or slower off the mark and you could lose (everything) in the first round.

A thousand politicians have put forth vision and leadership in the area of economic development. But how does that translate into solutions to the above real world practical problems? That question is always fudged or brushed over at all levels of discussion. Or else is it dressed up in broad strategic economic jargon spouted by every country and business guru. In practice, a grant here, a low cost loan there or even an "industry plan" might be offered up. That only scratches the surface of the problem. Politicians and economic development agencies largely cheer exports on from the sidelines and hope for the best. Their tools to help are often limited.

Without a competitive advantage, the right people in the right place at the right time, and a host of other factors all going well business success does not happen. Global competition is vastly tougher than it was for new start ups.

The more you read about countries such as Taiwan, Korea and Singapore or even a business success such as Amazon or Google or the success of Rome 2000 years ago, the more you realise how many different events led to their position over many years and how these can't just be replicated easily in another country, era or culture.

BTW. this idea that asian made product are shit and products made elsewhere are good is BS and often the complete opposite.

Asia makes really crap products but also very good products, same goes with other countries, when i was on the Goldie i worked delivering high end furniture to very well off people in pent house's etc and we often had to put together furniture etc.

Some of the stuff made in places like Italy was absolute crap, things just didn't match up or manufacturing mistakes, but they wanted it because it was regarded as good and from Italy or similar countries.

It's like looking at furniture made in Indonesia, there is stuff that is crap ikea style and then you have high quality solid timber furniture.

I mean just look at the craftsmanship on stone work and building design etc in Bali, its amazing and high quality, and then you have footpaths etc crumbling in the first few years.

@Frogg, my view is Australia and the world cannot go back to business as usual with China after Coronavirus. For too long the west/world has turned a blind eye to China's human rights abuses, illegal claims to the South China Sea, to its ambitions for Taiwan and its not so soft diplomacy throughout Asia and the Pacific. Ours and the worlds relationships with China need to redefined and it can start with getting China to honour its post SARs promise to close all wet markets and it associated wild animal trade. I also agree with Blowin's position on our unsustainable population growth fuelled by historically unprecedented numbers of temporary and permanent migrants; not Australia's role or responsibility to ease the problems caused by out of control population growth. We do have a role to play within our region with real and ongoing increases to foreign aid. If all of the above is to be achieved we need to reboot our manufacturing industries and tear up FTAs. Of course I'm also mindful enough to accept little or none of this will be done because we have weak leaders incapable of thinking beyond the next election cycle.

"Some of the stuff made in places like Italy was absolute crap" ......... The Pantheon rebuilt by the Emperor Hadrian in 118 AD and stands today intact. .

Well said GuySmiley

Weak leaders and a thoroughly corrupted and compromised system.

For example:

Gina Rinehart has at various stages had former federal Liberal MP Sophie Mirabella and former Liberal Chief Minister of the Northern Territory Adam Giles on her staff.

As another example, former federal environment minister Melissa Price is an ex-vice president of a mining company with a portfolio of Queensland coal mines.

The nepotism and bribes by way of high-paying jobs for the obedient is absolutely unbelievable.

Anna Bligh and the banks?

Andrew Robb and the port of Darwin?

I've digressed.

If any change happens, it wont be taken up by manufacturing here, it will be taken up by other Asian countries, they are the ones that have a lot to gain if us and others try to avoid importing from China.

That would also be good for us though, spreading our eggs out instead of having them all in the China basket.

@Guy
BTW. in regard to Italy, i wasn't implying everything made there was crap, just that these people were wanting this Italy furniture because the reputation is it is good when the stuff we had often had all types of manufacturing issues.