Toby’s Far View

A review of Melancholia

2011-12-19T01:24:00.002+08:00

You can read my review of Melancholia here.

2011-10-19T08:40:00.001+08:00

As I'm switching to Wordpress, you can find my latest update here.

How to spend a fortune and get nothing.

2011-09-16T22:46:00.000+08:00

Twitter is a wonderful beast. Almost real-time updates of any subject you care to think of. By chance I was able to read running commentaries on what Republicans were saying during a nomination debate. As an Australian, I don’t hold that much interest in the spectacle that is the lead up race for the White House, except this time the Republican side is led by a comedy troupe of Tea Party candidates.

One candidate in particular, Ron Paul, struck me as the freakiest of carny folk in Republican side show alley. Yet this isn’t about Paul. This is about where some of the claims about him has led me; the vaults of official statistics by the OECD.

You see, some people believe that government shouldn’t be in the business of looking after its citizens, specifically their health. One tweeter, in defending Ron Paul’s decision not to pay the $400,000 medical debt owed by one of his campaign managers - who had died - told me:

Rick Fisk might be on to something. The Texan Governor Rick Perry signed an executive order to fund a cervical cancer vaccine that targets HPV, a position he has now thinks is poor policy. Michele Bachmann adds the HPV vaccine caused mild retardation in a young girl and is therefore potentially dangerous. Paul simply says: “It's not good social policy and therefore I think this is very bad to do this.” So obviously any government involvement in health is bad. Obamacare must be bad.

Ever since Jesus played fullback for the Saints*, leading political figures have told us that the private sector is always more efficient that an equivalent government sector. It’s certainly a mantra of the Tea Party, that and the idea of universal healthcare is inherently toxic. The arguments can appear convincing, but once stripped of emotion, are they really? Hence delving into the OECD health statistics.

There are remarkable things to discover. For example; in 2008, the US spent $7220 per capita on healthcare (all figures in 2011 USD). This represents 17.4% of GDP. More than half of that is what Americans are paying privately. Every woman, man and child in the US forked out more than an average $3610 for private healthcare and almost the same again indirectly through tax.

Second place in the staggering statistics department goes to the Netherlands, who spent $4241 per capita, or 12% GDP. Unlike the US, the Netherlands has a universal health care system, and only about one-sixth of that is in the private sector.

In twenty-third place is Australia, possibly the best match for the US in health after Canada. After all, Australians eat roughly much the same amount of rubbish, watch a similar amount of terrible television and speak (mostly) the same language (but without the weird accents). Australia’s figures for 2008 are $3445 per capita or 8.7% of GDP, below the OECD average of 9.5% GDP.

Keeping in mind this total is the private and government sectors combined per capita, and yet it’s less than what the US pays privately per capita. Despite this, Australians on average live longer and have better health outcomes than Americans. The OECD data demonstrates Australia’s universal healthcare system is more efficient than the US private fend-for-yourself system and more effective. Surely that can’t be right? Believe me, the healthcare system in Australia isn’t exactly a shining beacon of efficiency, no matter how hard or magnificently those at the coal face work. How can such a sector, two-thirds funded by governments (i.e. Australian tax payers), be better than the equivalent private sector in the US, the land where the consumer rules?

One explanation is the private US medical system is fraudulent, syphoning off billions of dollars from governments, insurance premiums and individuals when they present themselves for care. Maybe that’s a little harsh. Perhaps the private healthcare sector is so grossly incompetent, inefficient and ineffective Americans would be better off without it? Best not to confuse a mistake for malice, but either way, small wonder President Obama wants reform.

What does it take to convince the fans of the Perrys, Bachmanns and Pauls that they are willing to continue spending a fortune to get very little in return? I mean people like Fisk who told me that if we pay tax for such things as healthcare, the government should also pay for our car loans (no, I’m not joking and I wish Fisk was). It’s a serious question I wish the American people would ask of those who aspire to be called, one day, President of the United States.

*Obviously Jesus didn’t play fullback for the Saints; Jesus is a fictional character.

Update: Rick Fisk informs me - which I haven’t verified - that Ron’s Paul’s campaign manager, Ken Snyder, couldn’t be insured because he had a pre-existing condition, and that Snyder died of pneumonia. Fisk assures me Paul had no moral obligation to help Snyder. Is Paul seriously wanting to be the Republican Party’s nominee?

Shut your goddam carbon-taxin’ mouth

2011-07-14T08:57:00.002+08:00

The following was originally blogged by Geoff Lemon here, and I’m reblogging it because a few people on Twitter have posted links, but for whatever reason the links point to a suspended account (I’m sure it’s nothing sinister; never blame malice for a mistake.)

(n.b. I haven’t asked Mr Lemon for permission to reblog; the usual rules apply.)

Shut your goddamn carbon-taxin’ mouth.

Three days on from Julia Gillard’s policy announcement, and the most striking characteristic of the carbon tax debate is just how closely it resembles a dozen retards trying to fuck a doorknob. The only apparent solution is a massive airdop of Xanax into our reservoirs, because really, everyone needs a few deep breaths and a spell in the quiet corner.

Sure, the weeks leading up have all been hysteria: Tony Abbott marching that bulldog grimace up and down the length of the country, like a Cassandra made of old leather and stunted dreams, cawing grim warnings of imminent ruin and destruction at the gates of Troy. But you might have expected, once the details had been released, there would arrive a little more perspective.

Nothing doing.

Far from being objective carriers of information, media outlets have been trying to manufacture furore. “Families earning more than $110k will feel the pain of the carbon tax,” warned the Herald-Sun, straightfaced. “Households face a $9.90 a week jump in the cost of living.”

$9.90.

Cry me the motherfucking Nile.

Households on less than that income would be even less affected. Those in the upper range would have their ten bucks a week at least partly compensated, while others would be fully or over-compensated.

The tax, after all, was not on people, but on 500 high-polluting companies. The compensation was to guard against costs those companies might pass on to their customers.

So, no big deal, I said to myself when the details were announced. Surely this’ll all blow over. And then, found myself more than a little surprised when a Herald-Sun commenter (one step above YouTube on the food-chain, I’ll admit) said “Somebody needs to assassinate Julia Gillard NOW before she totally destroys our way of life.”

Just… hold up a minute. Ten bucks a week? Our way of life? Aside from incitement to murder a head of government being ever so slightly illegal (and something the Hun mods should probably have picked up on), the response just doesn’t make any sense. Here is legislation that might make some things marginally more expensive. Probably not much. It isn’t going to drive industries offshore, because things like power generation and mining Australian resources kind of have to be done in Australia.

And yet the hysteria, even when not reaching Lee Harvey Oswald levels, has been constant throughout, led by the paper who defines ten bucks a week out of a hundred grand as “feeling the pain”.

“Social demographer David Chalke said the tax threatened values at the core of Australian society. ‘To an extent it will make people question, “is it really worth the bother?” They’ll smell in this something of a class war,’ Mr Chalke said.”

Ten bucks a week. Core values. Class war. Then, “Generous payments to those on low incomes and higher taxes for high income earners would anger hard-working Aussies.” Because, people on less than $110,000 don’t have to work hard. That’s why they get paid less! Scrubbing toilets is easy and only takes five minutes, while high-level boardroom execs spend 20-hour days chained to some kind of awful lunch machine being beaten with lobster foam.

I also enjoyed “On 3AW yesterday, Treasurer Wayne Swan was unable to say how the carbon tax would affect a Falcon. He also couldn’t say what the price change for a can of tomatoes would be.” The random grocery quiz had undone the Treasurer yet again. “Wait, wait, wait, got one…uh… large box of Libra Fleur? Nope. Uh, Sara Lee Chocolate Bavarian? Hah, you got nothin’, Swanny!”

Then there were the numerous headlines about airfares set to “soar” (geddit!). Well-meaning travellers were interviewed saying higher airfares would make it much harder to afford family holidays. Tres sad, especially when Qantas “said it would need to fully pass on the carbon price to customers, with the price of a single domestic flight ticket to increase on average by about $3.50.”

Three dollars. Fifty cents. They currently charge you more than that for a bottle of water. They charge $7.50 to buy a ticket online, $8 for a cup of noodles, $25 to use their check-in counter, and $6 to board the plane first. The best comment left after that article was, “So people won’t be able to buy a newspaper for the boarding lounge anymore? Good.”

So let’s never hear any talk of ABC bias ever again, because the Sun has well and truly picked its horse on this one. Any online article on the tax was headlined by a video of the lovely Andrew Bolt, telling us it was “the greatest act of national suicide we’ve ever seen.” Funny, I thought that was when they gave him a TV show. There was also a great line about “so-called solar energy” – because now solar energy is just a theory too. Like gravity, or Adelaide.

I am a sometime journalist. In that sense, the staff in the Herald and Weekly Times building are my colleagues. This makes me feel a bit like whorehouse linen. No doubt they all say they’re just doing their jobs, looking for opportunities. Nonetheless, they’re still actively promoting harm for the sake of attracting an audience. Concentration camp guards are just doing their jobs, too.

And with that level of reporting, the effort from their readers is no surprise. “Co2 is not a pollutant. It is vital for life on Earth. Without it, trees will die,” said John. Get that man on the climate panel.

“How much will Australia’s temperatures decline once the tax is implemented?” asked Marty. Well, Marty, the atmosphere takes notes about where its constituent particles come from, so we’ll get a full report from the Hole in the Ozone Layer each quarter. He wears a jaunty hat, and gives every boy and girl a delicious melanoma.

The dumbshititis was also evident in the audience of the Prime Ministerial Q and A on Monday, where the average question could be summarised as, “I’m a person, and I don’t like paying money. Can I not ever pay money for things?” My favourite line, from a surgical swab of a man towards the end of the show, was that because he earned too much to be eligible for low-income handouts, “I feel I’ll be taxed into poverty.”

This taps into a very prominent feature of our political landscape: the constant line from Tony Abbott that Australian families are hurting, that Aussies are doing it tough, that life is somehow getting harder, that the cost of living is on the rise.

Shenanigans, Tony. Let’s get one thing very clear. Australians, en masse, are enjoying a better standard of living than has ever been enjoyed in this country’s history.

And not just marginally, but by a huge degree. Really, along with a few other developed countries, we are enjoying a better standard of living than any group of people has in human existence. We have every kind of food and beverage from around the world deliverable to our doors. We have technological advances that make a decade ago look archaic. We have goods and luxuries of every conceivable kind; cheap and accessible. We have more and better options with transport, entertainment, comfort, place and style of residence. We have the most advanced medicine and best life expectancy of all time.

While there is still poverty in Australia, it does not even touch the kinds of poverty experienced in most countries on earth. Support systems and sufficient wealth exist to cover at least basic needs. The small proportion of genuinely homeless usually have other factors that keep them away from those systems. Being poor in Australia means living in a crappy house, in a crappy area. Maybe a commission flat. It means living on welfare, getting by week to week, not having any money for nice things. It might mean the kids have to go to their friend’s house to play X-Box, or that they don’t get sweet Christmas presents. It sucks, but it’s safe. It’s solid. It keeps you alive. It’s a level of stability and security that half the world would kill for, and even the basic amenities of a commission flat are amenities that half the world doesn’t have.

Poor people in Australia do not starve to death. They don’t die of cold. There is clean water running in any public bathroom. If they’re ill, they can walk into a hospital and be treated. If they’re broke, they can get welfare. They can get roofs over their heads, even if they’re temporary. They have options. If the utilities are shut off, they can find a tap, or a powerpoint. They can make it through the night.

And those poor aside, the rest of the country is doing very fucking nicely indeed, thanks very much. Reading these stories of parents bitching about working long hours to afford their private school fees just makes me want to give their little tow-headed spawn a spew bath. The lack of perspective is astonishing. Their kids are safe and fed and healthy and getting every opportunity to do whatever they want with their lives. They’re not getting sent out to suck tourist dick for enough US dollars to get their siblings through the week.

It should make us ashamed that there are people with good earnings ready to claim victim status on national television over a worst-case scenario of five hundred bucks a year. This is what is driving people into a panicky rage. Five hundred dollars, if you can afford it. Less if you can’t. If you run a red light camera in Victoria it’s $300. Do 40 ks over the limit, $510. If we get fines, we bitch about it, but inherently accept the rationale: the fine is levied as a penalty by someone endangering others in the society. It’s the basic structure of how a society works. We all agree to abide by certain rules as a form of insurance, to make sure that we’re not on the receiving end of the negative consequences of lawlessness. When people refuse to abide by those rules, they’re variously censured by or removed from that society.

If we obtain energy by burning irreplaceable fuel, and the consequences threaten the safety of our society, then surely we should pay a penalty for that (adding to a fund to guard against those consequences). The rule is basic: you make the mess, you clean it up. Ten bucks a week is a sweet deal.

But in being part of the luckiest couple of generations of people to yet walk the earth, most of us still like to imagine we’ve got it tough. It’s that same sense of entitlement that I was discussing regarding Raquel a couple of weeks ago. When you grow up with a certain standard of living, you come to regard it as the natural state of affairs. If someone threatens that state, they are depriving you of what is fundamentally yours. To your mind, you have a right to live like this, purely because you’re lucky enough to have lived like this.

Well, you don’t. So if you claim you can’t afford ten bucks a week, I call Shenanigans, with a healthy dash of You’re a Dick. One dinner at the Flower Drum would make up your year’s liability in one hit. Genuinely struggling people will get compo anyway. But even they could afford it if they had to. Buy one less deck of Holiday 50s a week. Buy two less beers. Leave off the Foxtel subscription. Wear a franger, save half a mil. What the fuck ever. Remember that you live in a country where drinkable water comes out of a tap inside your goddamn house, and where the power runs 24 hours a day. This in itself is a goddamn privilege, and if you are going to bitch and moan about having to pay for that privilege, you can fuck off and die in a ditch.

Because you do not have a right to this way of life. No-one does. We just have the extreme good fortune of enjoying it, and that won’t last forever. We should appreciate it while we can.

Perversely, part of me wants to see what would happen if the sea levels rise a couple of metres, the coastal cities get swamped, the rainfall dries up, the power goes out, the militias take to the streets. Part of me would love to see these squawking indignant right-to-luxury dickwipes learning how to live in the dust, scraping out dried plants from the earth and hoarding their remnants from the Beforetime. It’ll be a sight if it happens. Dirty red skies will rise up from the ground each morning like a curse. The only creatures that seem to thrive, the cockroaches and carrion birds, will swarm black against the sand and the sunset, rasping dry songs with their throats and with their legs. The water will be gone. The world will not remember ice floes. And for her sins, for ten dollars a week from each and every one of us, Julia Gillard will hang from the garret at the gates of Troy.

Religion is a very serious business.

2011-05-27T18:30:00.000+08:00

It’s not always easy being an atheist. Too often I get caught in religious debates. The same old stuff comes out; Pascal’s Wager¹, Darwin didn’t prove life came from nothing, so evolution isn’t true², our eyes are proof of intelligent design³, and so on it goes. As an atheist, I’m not one to jump down believers’ throats and shout at them to tell them they are deluded. It’s one of the fundamental human rights as laid down in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; people have the right to observe their religion.

I don’t believe religion is intrinsically a rort. However I do believe it’s protected by the Law more than secular belief such as humanism and is easily corrupted. Yes, believe in whichever deity you want and you should not be persecuted by the state for that belief. I say “the state” because it’s perfectly reasonable for any individual to question the integrity of such a believer; if such a believer is honest with nothing to hide, then the answers should flow freely, as any statement of faith should.

Yet this isn’t what really happens. The very well publicised Harold Camping said the rapture would occur on 21^st of May 2011. He was (not surprisingly) wrong, and not for the first time on this matter, either. Conservative Christians in the US, UK and here in Australia oppose gay marriage using 2 common arguments as a basis; 1) it would undermine heterosexual marriage by removing rights from heterosexual marriages, and 2) the law (at least in Australia) defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Both these arguments are, to be fair, weak.

Now I wouldn’t personally mind this kind of debate if it were on a fair playing field. Dare I suggest most religious conservatives believe it is, or if not it’s slanted in favour of the “homosexual agenda.” If only it were! Organised religion is exempt from discrimination laws; religious schools can expel students and sack teachers on the basis of being gay, pregnant and unwed, or even being nonbelievers of the school’s religion e.g. a Buddhist can be sacked in a Catholic school. That wouldn’t be such a problem if governments didn’t give such schools no strings attached subsidies!

This is nothing short of hypocrisy.

For all that, my biggest beef is that religions don’t pay tax. Religions hold the cards here, because in nearly all democratic nations, religions are exempt from paying tax. They are assumed to be not-for-profit organisations.

(Now to be fair, most religious organisations are not-for-profit, but how do we know if the books are kept in secret, and religion is exempt from Freedom of Information laws?)

These exemptions have their basis in medieval law, when the church and state were cosy bedfellows. The church even had powers to tax. That may have changed since the French and American revolutions and the resultant separation of powers, but religion remains untouchable when it comes to tax. It’s unreasonable, and unjust.

To make things a little more fair, organised religions should be taxed like non-religious charities, trusts and companies. If a registered religious group is truly not-for-profit, then nothing changes; they won’t pay tax. If they do make profits, or accumulate wealth through property, gifts, bequeathments, grants and so forth, then they should have to declare their income, assets, fringe benefits, etc., and thus pay tax. Like anyone else. The same rules should apply equally to all.

To demonstrate the hypocrisy, the Church of Scientology was taken to task by a few individuals who believe the organisation is quackery and fraudulent, claiming that Scientology is not a religion but a philosophy. This may be true, and as an atheist I have little doubt that the accusations are true. However the means of attack against Scientology was about their tax status, not values or ideology. The High Court of Australia ruled that Scientology is a religion and therefore exempt from being taxed. Anyone can form a religion as long as there is a belief in a supernatural something, and cannons of conduct exist and are accepted by the believers. That’s all.

I’m not going to try to figure out how much governments - and therefore citizens - miss out by religious organisations not paying any tax, but as a guestimate the figure would be in he order of $1 billion.

In the meanwhile, approximately $600 million is being spent by the Federal Gillard government to place chaplains in all schools; private religious and government secular alike. The Victorian Baillieu government is injecting a further $200 million. These chaplins aren’t allowed to teach or proselytise, so what is the point of them being there? I can only see them as bargain basement counsellors with no qualifications at all other than to have a working with children check like this or this. Seriously, no teaching, psychology or any tertiary qualifications are needed at all; equivalent experience is enough. Far from being representative of the non-secular make-up of Australia, these chaplains are all Christian⁴. It’d be interesting if an atheist was appointed as a school chaplain under the NSCP.

Is it not galling enough that that secular entities don’t pay tax and yet many are given government grants, or paid contracts to provide essential services? How is it fair that a church can “syphon” off funds from government to build a chapel instead of, say, a computer lab for students? How is it fair that an organisation like The Salvation Army can purchase a vehicle tax free to provide for a Salvation Officer or employee in lieu of income? (In any other context this is seen as Fringe Benefits and is thus taxed.) This is a double dip that no other business can get away with.

I specifically mention the Salvos because they have many government contracts to provide services to the community, such as employment and food, clothing and transport. It goes without saying the Salvation Army don’t do it for nothing, but we won’t find out how much profit they earn from these deals because they are exempt from FOI because they are a contracted service provider (and a religion).

Why can’t a secular charity or organisation provide these services? Well, some do, but without the tax breaks afforded to them that religious organisations automatically get, secular organisations aren’t competitive in a bidding process.

All this makes me uncomfortable. I’m not suggesting all nonsecular organisations are corrupt, but they are certainly open to corruption and have more mechanisms at their disposal to cover up any corruption. It’s difficult to prosecute when wrongdoing is exposed, too. Such as when a private religious school principal and his brother were taken to trial for fraud, but they were acquitted on appeal despite the obvious rort.

It’s time to stop giving religious organisations a helping hand at becoming asset rich whilst they cry poor. Praying should not be conceded to be a public service. Religious charities should not be allowed to discriminate when they are contracted to provide a government service to all members of the community. Most of all, it’s time for the books to be open and tax paid in the same way, under the same rules, that secular organisations have to.

1. Pascal’s Wager suggests it’s a good idea to “hedge one’s” bet and believe in God. If God doesn’t exist, then no harm done. This logic fails because there is more than one god. Also, any god who chooses humans because of their gambling habits over their value as humans is vain and capricious and therefore not worth aspiring to be with.

2. Darwin’s seminal work On the Origin of Species isn’t about first life, rather how new species evolve from common ancestors by natural selection. It’s not just an idea, but a testable theory with observable predictions, just like Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. Further, debating anything in science using the premise “but x isn’t true” does not negate a theory in it’s entirety; just because science doesn’t explain everything doesn’t mean it can’t explain anything.

3. Human eyes are terrible at many things. They aren’t like camera at all, and only a small part near the centre of the retina, near the blind spot, can detect colour. Even then it’s not very good. If the eye were designed, then the designer did less than a half-arsed job.

4. This blog here does an excellent job of dissecting chaplains in school, and why the commissioned report (which I linked here) for Access Ministries should be viewed as propaganda, or the very least, extremely subjective and biased. Not one acceptable metric was used.

What shall we do with the rioting refugee?

2011-04-26T18:38:00.001+08:00

Much debate is raging in Australia at the moment over refugees. It makes me angry and sad that we are still arguing over details in the foreground rather than it being a background topic, as if asylum seekers are a sign of end times. For those in mandatory detention, it must be beyond anger and sadness, as the rioting demonstrates.

Now the government has had enough. Enough of the rioting. Enough of asylum seekers burning down perfectly good squalor for attention. So Chris Bowen, the Minister responsible, has angrily come out, fists flailing, saying that any refugee charged with a criminal offence in a detention centre run will fail the character test and therefore be deported. Further, the government will be reintroducing the much reviled Temporary Protection Visas.

The real reason this is such a crisis isn’t mandatory detention, it isn’t offshore processing, it isn’t a failure to “stop the boats.” It’s a simple problem with a secretive mission: ASIO. No asylum seeker is granted refugee status within Australia until ASIO has done a background check. These background checks have, over the past 2 years, blown out to more than 60 days per detainee and growing.

What is the solution? More ASIO staff to do background checks? Maybe, but not really practical. Bigger detention centres? The prison management company Sirco can barely staff what exists now. Naru? Naru still hasn’t signed the Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, despite promising to do so, which effectively means any asylum seeker (or indeed refugee) has no rights when in Naru.

A the risk at being unpopular, this is what the government could do: use detention centres only for medical checks and quarantine, then release the asylum seekers into the general Australian community with a visa within 30 days. Once released, the asylum seeker would have to report to Immigration once a fortnight, inform the department of their whereabouts at all times where practical, is barred from work and would not have access to Centrelink or Medicare services. In other words, they would be for all intents the same as a tourist on a tourist visa (except for the reporting requirements).

Some may say this is inhumane and doesn’t give the asylum seeker certainty. This is true. Australia’s obligation is to protect asylum seekers and process their claim, and we should do this better. What better place than for some poor wretch to be housed with family or friends or people of the same culture or refugee advocacy agencies who can provide until refugee status is granted (or declined)?

It’s time to stop treating asylum seekers as the problem in need of easy but tough solutions for political games, or as potential terrorists or criminals. Sure, not all asylum seekers are genuine, but the vast majority are. Those who are are no more a criminal risk to the broader community of citizens and permanent residents. I’d even risk a frown or two to suggest saying they are less of a criminal risk.

You’ve got to… accentuate the positives.

2011-01-26T11:29:00.001+08:00

It’s somewhat remiss of me having successfully ignored my blog. The trouble is about my lack of confidence and esteem; I don’t have anything worthwhile to say, I’m not interesting and so on. The point isn’t about whether I am dull and uninspiring, it’s whether I believe I’m insipid and tedious. Which, unfortunately, I do, and since today is Australia Day (or Invasion Day if you prefer), now is the time to write something that will be buried in the bloggosphere amongst all the other national day blogs.

2010 was a tempestuous year for me. End of a long term relationship, death of a pet, homelessness, multiple hospitalisations. Oh, for a quiet, boring life.

Yet even as it’s easy to look at the negatives, many positive things happened too, and the year ended on a surge of positive self-discovery and that’s pretty much due to my American mate. He views the world with child-like wonder. His philosophy is simple; it is what it is. His ability to extract joy from the simplest pleasures is astounding. And this is what triggered my urge to look at myself anew. Who am I really? What do I like? What makes me happy? Sad? Indifferent? So here is a short list of what I’ve found so far:

• I’m not a leader, I’m a follower. Yes, I’m fine with that now. Not everyone can be a leader, which is just as well as I’ve often found myself frustrated in situations when there are too many chief and not enough indians.

• I like rules, except when they are stupid. Yes, it sounds like a stupid thing to say, a bit like “I obey the laws I believe to be just and disobey the laws I believe to be unjust,” but really it means that I don’t control the rules of the game, and ought to stop thinking that I should. A simple example is a game. Sometimes a rule makes no sense or doesn’t reflect the real world; this frustrates me, but it’s about time I stopped worrying about it, getting bogged down in its syntax and semantics, and embraced the game as a whole, the broader picture.

• I ought to stop trying to justify myself when I don’t like something. Not everything ought to be liked, it’s fine to have tastes and be discretionary and discriminating at a personal level. I don’t like Tom Hanks films, for example. Full stop.

• Now is the time to thank people instead of thinking “I don’t deserve any praise, well wishes or compliments.” If someone says something lovely to me, it’s probably because they’re sincere and the proper thing for me to do is to humbly accept.

• I have friends, mates, for a reason. If I were truly repulsive physically and emotionally then I wouldn’t have such terrific, loving people around me.

• Ask. So what if someone thinks I’m an idiot for asking. If I don’t ask, I can’t get or, worse, won’t be told.

• Rejection is as normal as acceptance. It’s time to stop taking things personally; if I ask and someone says “No”, it probably isn’t because of me and in any case they don’t have to justify it. After all, if I’m going to attempt articulate what I like and don’t like, want and don’t want without justification, then I shouldn’t expect anyone else too.

It’s a start.

So much to do, so little time.

2010-10-27T13:06:00.001+08:00

There are so many things to do and I have no clues how to do it all. That’s life in the big city. There are hermetically sealed crates after hermetically sealed crates to get through (not my idea). Clothes I’ll never wear ever again, books I can’t throw away, hats for display and hats for wearing, a TV from the dark ages and a monitor from the Cretaceous period.

I’d be happy to take them to a Good Sammy’s bin, but as I’m without private transport, that task is simply beyond me. Some are easily solved: bin it. Others not so simple, such as how do I move a 30kg TV when I can’t lift more than 10kg without my back simply collapsing under the strain.

However, I haven’t been idle. I’ve been preparing for the arrival of my newly found American friend. It’s meant drawing up an itinerary of activity, booking hotels, hire car, and so on. I was hoping to book a room at Karri Valley Resort, but the last room was snapped up less than 1 day before I tried to book it, nearly 3 months out! But that turned out to be a good thing: I found something cheaper in Margaret River, and we will travel through Pemberton to see the Karri forrests - Gloucester Tree & Diamond Tree included - on our way to Walpole’s Treetop Walk, Albany and Esperance. Besides, Karri Valley will be full of, shudder, children being, well, annoying little children.

Christmas with the folks should be interesting: my American has never had a summer Chrissie, let alone all the delights of cold meats followed by a arvo nap then possibly a swim in the shark infested waters of the Southern Coast of Western Australia. Not just any old sharks. White pointers: The Great White shark. Think Jaws. But my mind is at ease knowing I’m more likely to die in the hire car during the trip there than be killed by a shark.

I’m quite looking forward to the journey as well as the destinations. Plus I’m sure my guest will have the experience of a lifetime. Something that so many of my fellow Westralians take for granted.

I have the best friends and family bar none.

2010-10-18T23:25:00.001+08:00

Where to begin? If you’ve read anything it has a happy ending. Promise.

I have so many fantastic people to call friends and family and they have been very supportive during a difficult time. However, it doesn’t end there. So many people have helped in big and small ways to move me into my new flat, despite the worst efforts of myself and more so a certain government department who is supposed to assist people like me be independent, not co-dependent.

There are so many people to thank. So many in fact it would be unfair to anyone to list them. You know who you are.

So in no particular order a big thank you to Russ, Roz, Libby, Mum & Dad, Cath, Geoff, Caryn, Bruce, Ian and many, many more besides.

Thank you.

Normal service shall return shortly.

Does diagnosis help?

2010-10-11T23:52:00.005+08:00

Sometimes I wonder about labels for the abstract and the concrete. This may seem a surreptitious way to give the appearance of being busy. I know better than that. What better way to look at Mental Health week than to pry into the world of labels.
Since my early teens I struggled yet coped in some shape or form to deal with anxiety, depression and the disassociation I all simutaneously felt often without cause. Exams made me more anxious than usual, as did the Christmas period for understandable reasons. There was the apperition of a pattern when really none existed. How I survived I really can't say. It certainly wasn't mind over matter or will power: survival was by mere chance, and eventually the odds stacked against me.
1st label: acute major depression.
A box of pills and she'll be right, mate. See you later (ie not at all).
Later that life… I was back.
2nd label Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
And on we go. 3rd & 4th labels were Chronic Major Depression with Psychotic Features.
Right. So now you think "Uh-oh, that's all we need: a bloody psycho." Psychosis is an unfairly loaded word. Another will appear shortly, but for now let's deal with the 'p' word. Psychosis merely means hallucinations and so forth are real. That's it. As much as I love Hitchcock films, real 'psychos' don't randomly murder people. If really bad, a psychotic person is much, much more likely to hurt themselves rather than other people.
So this time I thought - when my thoughts were ordered - "No biggie, just another episode of depression and the auditory hallucinations (hearing voices) had the upper hand." Yes, that was true, however the team stated from scratch. From both my reporting and my history, some new things were discovered, resulting in a slightly different twist of diagnosis: Schizoaffective Disorder.
Okay, I'm now waving goodbye to all those who now believe I'm a whack job. Who doesn't stigmatise schizophrenia? You don't? I don't believe you: to my shame I still have a negative attitude to schizophrenics, and I bet I've met far more in my life than you'll ever knowingly meet.
That aside, I'm not a schizophrenic, I know all the jokes and it's an awful illness. Look up schizoaffective disorder by google, bing or wiki. The point is in my case I've never had mania or hypermania, just "normal" and depressed. I have auditory hallucinations. I'm not generally paranoid. During depression I tend to be very suicidal and require hospitalisation. Does this new diagnosis change anything? Not really. The only change is instead of taking a prescibed anti-psychotic when feeling overwhelmed, I take it twice daily with room to take a little more when I know I'm struggling to be coherrent or my brain is too noisy. That's all.
The prognosis isn't too good. For example I'm more likely to kill myself than die of natural causes, but - excuse the black humour - I can live with that. If the current anti-psychotic loses efficacy, the alternative drugs aren't a barrel of laughs and I'm not sure I could live with that. But let's not cross bridges before the chickens have hatched or get splinters from fitting on the cents.
Diagnosis, like a label, does help. Without them we don't know how to handle the contents let alone know what the contents are. However context is just as important.

Noisy Brain Syndrome

2010-10-02T06:14:00.000+08:00

If, by industry, man can do good
Then he should do so
Not to prove that he can
But that he could.

There isn't a lot now that I can add to my log of "voluntary" incarceration. Except perhaps to add what Grand Poo-Bar, Mr Hodges, had to offer today. It may not be immediately apparent how I am currently. That's mainly due to 25 plus years of lying, good acting and a hefty dose of denial.

What was different about Thurday or Friday? VWell, my brand new iPhone 4 was stolen. Not having a phone was inconvenient: what was unbearable was not having Stravinsky, Shostakovich, Gershwin. Beethoven (Symphony 7.2 is sublime) or Tchaikovsky was doing my head in. Depression is bad enough, auditory hallucinations - the three personalities inside my head but outside - are hard to handle during an episode.

Mr Hodge held my tome of mental health history and noted an antipsychotic drug wasn't as effective as it should be & that despite of many symptoms being controlled, the depth & the depression have been increasing as well the severity of hallucinations/psychosis.

Instead of calling it schizophrenia, we decided on "Noisey Brain Syndrome". As an example of how intrusive this is for this depressive episode, it's taken 5 hours to get this far plus a fair whack of Stravinsky and Shostakovich.

I'll find out Monday all the treatment option. Some from the outset I won't entertain, like Electro-Convulsive therapy (ECT) or Lithium. Better Living Through Chemistry.

The biggest shock was how friends, old and new, rallied together to help me: an old iPhone 3G for basic telephony and net access, and an iPod Shuffle for music. I can't thank them enough.

I'm not sure how ordered this entry is. Sometime in the future when I'm better, I'll read it and know.

No platitudes, thanks.

2010-09-29T05:19:00.001+08:00

4am. What better time to blog? Well, it’s just another symptom. The lack of sleep is due mostly to an overactive brain curiously at odds with its depression.
Let's get some definitions out of the way early;
1) Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD): a state in which one is overly anxious all the time, and often - but not necessarily - suffering frequent Panic Attacks,
2) Chronic Clinical Depression: a condition in which the patient suffers low mood, interest and drive. and
3) Suicidal Tendencies (ST): a particular state in which the patient can only see one solution to end their psychological pain, that being suicide, and active plans or fantasises suicide. Ok so these may not be DMIV/V definitions, but they will do.
A person, such as myself, can suffer all 3 conditions at the same time but more usually just 1 or 2 combinations at a y one time. Treatment is brutal, to say the least. I've been here too many times before.
Knowing there is "the other side", i.e. wellness doesn't make surviving any more pleasant. In a way it makes it harder. When will the next episode be? GAD leads to depression with ST. In my case Depression is a dominant feature. Over the 20+ I've learned to be a damn good liar, actor & identity theif in order to function. Most chronic sufferers recognise this and detest themselves because of it. Soon the GAD surfaces, then depression with ST.
Make of that what you want, but certainly not a life I willing choose, want, seek or wish upon others. At this point I thank family, friends, empathises, medicos and fellow sufferers for doing what they can to help me to "the other side", back to wellness. It is amazing how many suffer quietly, too afraid to ask for help knowing that doing so will expose the lies they have led.
And me? Well, the anxiety that led to writing this is rapidly evaporating. Depression has an awful habit of griping one's goolies tightly with no intention of letting go.

Hospitals are hilarious

2010-09-27T18:40:00.000+08:00

So, after whining like a whinging bitch, I received my wish. I'm now a psychiatric patient. Things don't get much lower. It's a low as shark shit. Any lower would be six feet under.
That's it for today. Whoopee.

The Twitterati and Scruff - I mean Stuff

2010-09-09T18:13:00.001+08:00

Funny how life never turns out as planned, and sometimes I'm happy it doesn't.

Firstly a big shout out to the Twitterati. Without Twitter, I'm not sure where I'd be right now. The story is simple enough; for reasons beyond my control I had less than a week to move on from the temporary stay I had. So a plea of help resulted in a wave of retreating. The generosity of strangers to help - not only with accommodation - but also to move my meagre belongings (one bag and a backpack) had me staggering.

So for the time being I'm in a position of not having to worry. Well, I worry, but at least I can concentrate on the main matter of rehabilitation at Shenton Park. There are so many more things I can do now that I couldn't do a few months ago, and I'm really enjoying gym now. Well… mostly. I'll never have the body of an elite athlete so it's fortunate that I don't want one. But I am stronger, and the added benefit is less back pain. Most of the time.

That other niggling thing, the rheumatoid arthritis, hasn't been as kind (nor has the osteoarthritis for that matter), but it's good that the body isn't falling apart. A new lot of medications seem to be more effective and the evidence is that my hands, wrists and back aren't as painful or stiff. A handy side effect is that my posture is better and my other bits are, how should I say this… happier? Yes, happier is a good start. Happier in the mornings. Happier in the evenings. Happier at supper time…

Good news for some: the Caretaker government is over. After seemingly a billion weeks the Gillard Labor government persuaded enough independents to have a majority of seats in the House of Representatives. No, the sky didn’t fall in, and it didn’t fall in when it looked like a deadlock of 74 seats to Labor, 74 to the Liberal/National/Country Liberal/Liberal National conglomerate commonly known as the ~~Bastards~~ Coalition, with 76 seats needed to form a majority. (It’d like to point out to the Liberal Party leader, Tony Abbott, that the Liberals didn’t win 72 seats as he oft claims; the Coalition won 71 with 1 WA National who will sit on the cross benches.) So now we join the fate of other nations enjoying the benefits of a minority government. No big deal; Western Australia has had a minority government for over 2 years now, and even though it’s a Liberal/National/Independent coalition, the sky hasn’t fallen in. Surprisingly it seems voters don’t hate Premier Colin Barnett as much as they did when he was Opposition Leader.

Of course, the other big gig going on at the moment is my Fremantle Docker's progression through the finals. With a big injury toll this season, like Barlow's broken leg (cop that, round-ball football fans with your diving and fake injuries), making it to 5th was a big deal. But the bookies had us as an outside chance to beat 2008 Premiers, Hawthorn. Stuff that. We buried them from the start. Three hours later, tough questions were being asked of the Hawks. How could they be thrashed by such a lowly regarded sided of teenagers?

The answer's easy. The Hawthorn Hawks aren't as good as they think they are.

Next assignment: Geelong, Friday night at the MCG. A lot of the Freo mob flew, bused, drove and trained across the continent. Hopefully we'll get a full house and beat the Geelong Cats again. (We beat the reigning Premiers in round 3 this year, much to the shock of sporting journos).

The other news is a new iPhone app (what? Another one?) Yes, this app is for a select clientele. Like me. It's amazing to think that there are so many like minded people all over the world. Chatted to a few, but thought "just another way to be let down." How wrong I've been. In fact, there is some weird thing going on.

For starters, intelligent conversation isn’t dead. A little further down the track I find someone that I know I just click with. We’d click better if he wasn’t in the US, and 12 hours behind. But as Dr Carl Sagan once said “Life finds a way,” and I’m curious to find out more!

A drug induced lucid dream and other dramas

2010-08-07T16:39:00.002+08:00

This isn’t going to be easy, and it’s not worth pretending otherwise. It’s more stream of consciousness than a thought exercise or well thought out opinion piece on one subject.

Inception.

Finally I decided to overcome my fear of a DiCaprio film. Each character, bar Romeo in Romeo+Juliet, I saw DiCaprio and wilfully wished his character would die, and thankfully most of them did. Christopher Nolan’s Inception would be the test, even though he probably thought the main character, Cobb, would have been filled by Heath Ledger at a guess. I don’t know how long Nolan has been working on this film.

To my surprise, It was easier to let go of DiCaprio and see him as Cobb, a former “architect” and extractor driven by the desire to see his children.

A mysterious Japanese industrialist Saito (Ken Wantanabe) allows Cobb to assemble a team to do one last job, promising that should Cobb succeed, he’d make the charge that Cobb killed his wife Mallory (Marion Cotillard) vanish, so that Cobb can reunite with his children in the USA. In Return Saito wants Cobb to perform an inception on his rival Fischer (Cillian Murphy), the son of the dying Maurice Fischer (Pete Postlethwaite). Fischer is haunted by his father’s disappointment in him. Keeping the massive business going is Fischer’s driving force to prove his father wrong.

Inception is planting a seed, a thought, in the subject’s mind without them knowing it. By a process of drug induced sleep in which the extractor and his team share the dream with the subject, the extractor can find the information the subject has locked away in a metaphorical safe in their subconscious. The subject creates their world, however each member of the team contributes to the dream to make it more plausible than reality, and by this process the subject unwittingly opens the safe or exposes it to the extractor.

The team consists of the architect Ariadne (Ellen Page), a graduate student of Cobb’s father-in-law and mentor (Michael Caine) whose responsibility is to create a world for Fischer, the forger (Tom Hardy) who researches Fischer’s associates - mainly his godfather and Fischer’s fellow executive Peter Browning (Tom Berenger) - to keep the inception going by adding another layer of reality to the shared dream. Yusif, the chemist (Dileep Rao), is needed to make the right combination of sedatives to keep the team dreaming. Finally Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is Cobb’s associate and lookout, searching for possible ambushes and other threats inside the dream.

But there are complications in this one last job. Cobb’s deceased wife “Mal” frequently appears due to Cobb’s unwillingness to let her go from his subconscious. She feels betrayed by Cobb after they shared a dream together, in which she believes Cobb abandoned her in Limbo, breaking their promise they would grow old together. As a result, she’ll do almost anything to make Cobb suffer in his inceptions, even trying to sabotage them.

The only way to wake from the dream is either by being killed in the dream, or by “the kick”; the sudden unexpected sensation of falling. It’s Yusif’s job to make the sedatives strong enough to induce sleep, but enable any member of the team to feel the kick when needed.

Additionally each team member must have a token with unique properties that only they know about; in the real world they work as expected, such as Cobb’s small spinning top which eventually slows down and stops. In a dream, the top continues spinning forever.

The timing of the dreams must be precise, as during a dream as much as a few hours can pass in 5 minutes of real time. This precision is required as Cobb usually uses the technique of a dream within a dream for his extraction, planting a second inception in the second dream to delve even further into the subject’s subconscious by layering the deception but further dilating time. Arthur as the lookout uses Edith Piaf’s Non, Je Ne Regrette Rien as an auditory cue to so he can induce a kick within a dream to the others.

Fischer is constantly travelling between Sydney and Los Angeles, a 10 hour flight across the Pacific, and this provides the necessary time window needed for Cobb and his team, including Saito - insisting on being a tourist on the job - to ambush Fischer into being an unwilling subject so that Cobb can conduct industrial espionage for Saito. But things go awry very quickly, and every member has to think fast to find a way of avoiding the very real hazard of ending up in limbo forever, unable to wake up.

Inception is reminiscent of The Matrix or Memento. What appears to be real frequently isn’t and vice versa. It’s definitely not a fluffy film one would watch casually as it requires attention to detail and an attention span greater than a few minutes. I enjoyed Nolan’s attention to detail; for example Fischer’s private jet in Sydney is registered in Australia (its tail registration begins with VH-.) Also the detail of Paris and other cities is first rate. The suspension of disbelief is easy (even if for me Cobb does become DiCaprio a little too often).

The story of Cobb’s wife, Mal, as the antagonist, and defenders - the parts of a subject’s mind which try to kill the the team and thus the inception in much the same way as a bodies’ immune cells detect and kill foreign invaders - ensures there is never a dull moment.

Well, there is one dull and extraordinary boring world; Cobb and Mal’s dream when they achieve limbo and survive. The architecture is amazingly boring, uninspiring and copy-paste repetitive. It looks like a grey never-ending Gold Coast without a single plant of any description. (In the real world the Gold Coast is remarkably unimaginative and dull with plants.) As an architect in the dream world, the impossible isn’t, such as the Penrose Stairs (the most famous example being by M.C. Escher) which Arthur demonstrates to Ariadne as an example of how dreams aren’t constrained by logic or physics.

Fortunately Inception isn’t as boring or as predictable as Cobb’s architecture. Right down to the the last millisecond. It’s not flawless and it won’t win DiCaprio an Oscar (thank god), but it’s possibly worth seeing more than once since it takes a minute to understand the difference between dream and reality; possibly most of the whole film for some. I’ll probably watch it again even though I know I won’t get the same experience of surprise and satisfaction of knowing which depth of dream the film is in. I found the plot remarkably easy to follow yet is it solid and interesting in its own right. Also there are some scenes due to the CGI or fast-paced action that would be worth looking at again. Unfortunately for me, the cinema had the sound levels all over the place, with the score often much louder than the dialogue, which was very annoying, often distracting. I doubt there will be much debate over a coffee about what actually happened after the movie.

4 stars (just) from me.

Who is the real Meryl Dorey?

It came as no surprise to me that the self proclaimed leader of the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN), Meryl Dorey, has disappeared from view after the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission upheld a complaint that the AVN “…the AVN provides information that is inaccurate and misleading.” Instead of providing information to parents about vaccines - the benefits and the risks - Dorey and the AVN chose to be anti-vaccination crusaders, which is fine, but one can’t be an anti-vaccination advocate while spread mistruths, lies and the distortion of facts and claim to be giving a balanced view on vaccinations to parents.

It gets worse for Dorey. The AVN is registered as a charity with the NSW Office of Liquor and Gaming, which audited the AVN books after complaints that the AVN wasn’t acting as a charity, or properly declaring income and expenses, as well as improperly fundraising. The AVN has just under 3 weeks to show cause as to why it should be allowed to continue to hold its charity licence.

Is that enough? Not for me. The AVN and Dorey have been referred to the NSW Department of Justice for possible offences. It will be up to the NSW Director of Public Prosecutions to decide if there is a case for Dorey and the AVN to answer. I would imagine this would include fraud, deception and possibly stealing as a servant. Also the AVN operate all over Australia and are not confined to NSW. This is a matter the Commonwealth Agencies such as the ACCC and the AFP should be investigating in cooperation with NSW.

If not for the continued pressure by victims of the AVN, Australian sceptics, balanced investigative journalism by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s Four Corners (using the BBC’s Horizon program the 7:30 Report and Lateline, and other media organisations, and a properly conducted campaign by various people, including Twitter users with the hashtag #stopAVN, the issue would never have come to light. (Without wanting to pump up my own tires, I’ve blogged a little about the AVN before in oblique references.)

The legal and moral issues are not solely on the AVN’s shoulders. Since way back many, many scientists and the organisations they have worked for have breached the public trust. It’s now at a point where distrust of science is very high. This is somewhat unfair in that it has been sham or ill-motivated scientists and pseudoscience that have brought disrepute, not science itself. Nonetheless, the public have turned more to woo, such as homeopathy or naturopathy. However any prosecution of the AVN is welcome in a sceptic, scientific light, as well as a legal one, such as Alastair Hope’s Coronial Inquest into the death of Penny Dingle involving homeopathy.

It’s not the role of science to tell people how to live their lives, or in the case of medical science which course of action must be taken by the patient. Rather, it’s there as advice for an adult audience to take on board, so that the pros and cons can be properly considered.

The difference between science and woo is simple; woo makes claims that can’t be verified and only have positive testimonies to back it up - negative testimonies are simply discarded - while science is a sceptical, logical approach, testing using the randomised double blind methodology whenever applicable and peer reviewed before being accepted for publishing by reputable journals (e.g. Nature). Journals such as Nature or Lancet often insist on further investigations and trials before publishing, as they don’t want their reputation tarnished in any way.

So, back to Dorey. Now that the regulators are clearly not happy with her or the AVN, why has she refused to refute the claims against her and the AVN? Why has she stopped giving media interviews? (Self promotion has been her strength.) Hardly the actions of someone who believes what she is doing is right and proper, I would allege. Or perhaps her legal counsel has told her to wait to see if charges are laid against her, using her right to silence.

Despite my anti-AVN stance, I’m hoping she has been simply stupid, foolish, incompetent or a combination thereof, rather than being malicious and deliberately irresponsible.

Mad dogs and Englishmen.

It’s fair to say that when all else fails, hug your teddy. I wrote about mental health issues, specifically depression, in my last blog, so I won’t repeat all of that here. Instead I want to chronicle as best I can what’s been happening to me.

The short answer is it’s getting worse, despite doing everything right. I’m exercising more; walking, gym, hydrotherapy all courtesy of Royal Perth Hospital’s LEAP at Shenton Park Campus for my ongoing rehabilitation of my spinal injuries. I’m hoping that a fitter, leaner more active me, plus all the surrounding issues about chronic pain management, will mean more control and less medication. In theory that should mean I should be happier. Indeed the staff and other patients in the programme are very supportive.

Yet despite this, my mood is deteriorating rapidly. I’m finding it harder to engage. I’m not enjoying most things I’m doing. Gym has become a little refuge as I can do that on my own with the physiotherapists simply looking on and only giving advice when necessary. Using the rowing machine I can block out the world to some extent, and focus on the rhythm which can be hypnotic.

Today has been the first time in nearly a week I’ve turned on my MacBook Pro. I’ve had so many brilliant (I hope) ideas for writing and I fear that if I begin it will consume me, as there seems to be a strong link between low mood and a desire to write a lot of material. Perhaps it’s catharsis; writing somehow purges the darkest realms of my mind, or releases months of pent up frustrations or is simply a relief valve for my passive-aggressive habitat. Whatever the reason, the end result is a counter intuitive burst of productivity to the detriment of my health. There comes a time when the burst bursts, the fingers no longer type or the mind no longer creates.

If by some circumstance I become famous due to my authorship, the last thing I want is to be seen as a tortured soul or some tragic figure, brooding and dark. Which is a problem since that becomes a voice that persuades me to submit less work than I should, or worse, not finish the umpteenth draft when I should. The obsession with words is intoxicating. The way they look written down, how they sound, the juxtaposition against other words. The interaction of rules and knowing exactly how to break them and when. Knowing what’s clever and what’s pure compositionally wank.

That aside, the more tangible elements of my world are visible to anyone; the strangely teary eyes for no apparent reason, the pessimism, the seeking of comfort or solace in meaningless events, the total disregard to diet by either becoming unable to eat or gorging on fast food, unabashed anger over the insignificant contrasting with an impotence with the crucial, being unable to sleep for days on end despite a combination of exhaustion, sedatives and hypnotics, and dark thoughts that are both a comfort and alarming. When the alarm stops the real danger begins.

Why write this publicly? That I don’t know. I’m not asking to be rescued, pitied, or derided for that matter. There is some disconnect here; when I think of how I look and compare that image to what I think I see in a mirror or photo, the contrast could not be more stark, akin to believing oneself to being a thoroughbred race horse at the pinnacle of it’s career but seeing a dying elephant and knowing the dying elephant is closer to the reality. A deep imbedded loathing of everything said, done and thought of myself. A hatred of everything ugly and beautiful and not able to tell the difference.

Somewhere a long time ago the train derailed. So long ago the reasons are obscured or forgotten and it matters not which. The question becomes how to continue wading on in this waist deep rancid treacle that is my life. A distant but powerful beacon tells me it will get better, it will, yet it is difficult to believe and harder see each time I see a glimpse of it. These are the times I want to sleep forever.

Everything is robotic now. I do because an alarm tells me when to get out of bed. A timetable tells me when to catch a train. A schedule tells me what I am to do for whichever day it is, and all the bloody days may as well be the bloody same because none have any joy about them. Why celebrate a Friday when Monday is only a blink away, and the process begins all over again?

Depression is different for everyone. The depth, the length, the breadth, the obstacles, the cycle and the outcomes of each episode. Some may only experience it once (thankfully), for others they find a therapy that stabilises their life. The possibilities don’t bear thinking about for the moment, at least they don’t for me.

Now I don’t want anyone thinking of this as a document of despair, or a hopeless confession or a cry for help. In times past I couldn’t think straight enough to bother writing a suicide note, which was a pointless exercise anyway since my track record of suicide is woeful. It must be since I’m writing this. In any case I’m lucid for now, and acutely aware of the assistance available to me.

The unexpected positive is that I could not care less about any physical pain I have, as if it simply isn’t there.

Independence Day of the Mind

2010-07-04T14:41:00.004+08:00

An honour that is given out every year is Australian of the Year. In the past sporting heros have been given the gong more often than any other group. But the current holder, Professor Patrick McGorry, OA, is a champion for the betterment of mental health services. Management is one matter, but McGorry is at the coal-face; intervention where it first affects most suffers of mental health issues at the beginning - the youth.

McGorry deserved without doubt his AotY 2010, and extra weight was given to his work by being awarded the Officer of the Order of Australia - second only the Companion to the Order of Australia - in June this year (roughly equivalent to the US Presidential Medal, a British OBE, or French Officier Ordre national de la Légion d’honneur).

Yet McGorry is constantly expressing his disappointment and frustrations at the lack of government resources to combat a stigmatised health issue.

I’m not a psychologist or a psychiatrist, but I do have enough knowledge of how lacking the system is; I’ve been on all sides of the fence as a patient of “normal” health services, mental health services and a critic of how government still continue to separate mental health from other heath budgets and programs.

Despite it’s stigma, I have no issue in declaring that I have mental health issues. On more than a few occasions I’ve been hospitalised because of my depression (once involuntary).

Now, let’s get one thing quite clear, depression isn’t a prolonged sadness. Being sad is normal. It happens because of events that occur in life that are unavoidable. Death of a family member or companion, even a pet, the loss of work, for example. Eventually sadness goes away on it’s own accord. Depression is more insidious that that. Sometimes it comes without any notable trigger. Sometimes the trigger can be what would be seen by others as a happy event. An example case of this is crying at advertisements that portray happy events to sell a product. But whatever the cause, it’s almost impossible to pinpoint and even if it can be pinpointed it’s of little value to the sufferer in understanding why their mood is so low.

Exacerbating low mood and low self esteem are glib remarks - intentional and unintentional - by family, friends, co-workers, acquaintances and even doctors. “Get over it,” “build a bridge,” “put it behind you,” “think positive,” “sort yourself out” are just a few insensitive remarks I’ve heard when I least needed to hear them.

A situation can also affect a depressive episode.

Possibly the least understood aspect of depressive/anxiety disorders - yes, they are part of the same problem for many sufferers - by the public, government policy makers and health professionals is when a sufferer is suffering. That might sound silly, how can a health professional not know? Those that suffer from more than one episode learn to become excellent actors and liars. It’s not at easy as it sounds, and is one of a set of skills sufferers learn in order to survive, ironically when they “plan” a suicide.

This is part of the reason, if not the biggest reason, depression is stigmatised. Suicide is seen by many for various reasons such as religious or political doctrine as a sinful, gutless or illegal choice rather than a tragedy that could have been avoided if those with faux concern had acted with compassion rather than pontificate.

Getting patients in real need hospital treatment is difficult as there are too few beds, while beds in other departments remain unfilled as part of the required spare capacity. Hospitalised patients are usually released too early because of the pressure caused by the lack of beds, often with only a bag of medication to last a fortnight without any ongoing support. It is little wonder those most at risk of suicide are those discharged from hospital by an inexperienced intern. The sufferers have no support outside the hospital system; many have no family or friends willing or able to give support during recovery. It’s akin to a patient who has undergone major surgery after a near death car accident, and released after the surgeon has closed the wounds and the anaesthetist has left the theatre. Such a policy in “mainstream” medicine would be unthinkable, but this is exactly what happens in the same hospitals that have a mental health facility.

To make matters worse, most interns, residents, even the family doctor, aren’t particularly clued up with medications and their side effects. And this is where I enter the story. I didn’t know I was depressed. Nor did I think detailed thoughts of suicide was abnormal. My only lasting memory of events is that I wanted the pain to end and that being end would mean relief to all that knew me. It was my General Practitioner that hospitalised me, apparently after a very heated debate with the on-duty psychiatrist and added input from a friend who happens to be a nurse.

The only bed available was in the locked ward. It’s a ward that lives up to it’s name. Patients can’t get out, usually because they are a danger to themselves or others, or because of a court ordered psychiatric assessment required before the judge hands down the sentence. It’s bad enough being forcibly imprisoned with every shred of dignity removed, and it can’t be worse than being surrounded by staff panic buttons and psychotic - often violent - criminals; a Victorian age asylum but with clean floors and super-sedation rather than irons. Welcome to the road to recovery.

A week later, I was given a plastic bag full of an anti-depressant and told “Good luck.” Good luck? I now imagine the over-worked nurses - who chain smoke to cope with the stress - having a ledger of wagers on how long it will be before the police return with a former patient.

Unfortunately the anti-depressant in vogue at the time actually caused my anxiety and depression to worsen. Fortunately, or rather due to excellent training, my GP noticed I was getting worse, not better (I found out later that the drug had been implicated in murder-suicides in the UK and US, although I hasten to add these events are statistically insignificant compared to the amount of patients that are prescribed the drug, and therefore I won’t name it’s marketed name nor it’s pharmacological name.) Another period of hospitalisation was required, and to be honest I don’t remember very much about that month.

Since then family, friends and my GP have been superb monitors of my depression, and I’ve learned to look out for the little things that let me know where I stand on the razor line of health; the tipping point for me, like many sufferers, is often a hair trigger and mostly beyond my direct control. It’s not as simple as taking more medication since the half-life is between 10 and 16 days, and dependant on many factors. However I have learned to live around some limitations, even accept that I may not be in the best position to judge.

Despite what some people may think or say, I’m not insane and nor do I feel stigmatised. Anymore. I say that because for many years I felt ashamed about my episodes, would even deny they exist. But no more. Here I am, running naked down the streets shouting “Eureka!” because there are so many people suffering needlessly, afraid of social stigmas - rightly or wrongly - and if I remain silent on the matter for much longer, I would be just as guilty as the faux concerned pontificators for doing precisely nothing remotely positive.

There is an upside to to all this. When I’m suffering from an episode I’m strangely more productive with my creative writing. Not only more productive, but it’s of a better quality. I’m not an orphan nor a pioneer here. It simply just is. Which is how I’d like everyone to rethink depression and anxiety disorders, as well as mental health in general; don’t think of the why - or who - but rather as it just is, and that there can be a truly wonderful upside to it. Think about it the next time you read a novel, or watch a movie, or visit a gallery of art.

Addendum 11/07/2010: The Government of Western Australia has a published a discussion paper WA Mental Health Towards 2020: Consultation Paper and I urge all residents of Western Australia or Australia to read it and make a submission.

Health reform: a good place to start is to remove homeopathy

2010-07-02T14:14:00.000+08:00

Australia has one of the finest health care models in the world, yet it is under constant reforms and tweaks that aren’t always in the patients’ best interests.

Every citizen and resident is entitled to the very best in health care at any public hospital; a universal health care. Complimenting the public system are the private hospitals, which cater for those who don’t need emergency surgery or care, or want a “better” standard of care, or wish to avoid being on a waiting list for non-essential or minor surgery, or even prefer to use their health insurance than use the tax-payer funded public system.

The use of the private hospital system is made more affordable by “reforms” introduced by the Howard Liberal-National government by giving a tax deduction of 30% for private health insurance. It was one piece of many of the Howard government’s middle class welfare program. When the Rudd Labor party swept into power (even unseating Howard, something that is almost unheard of) the middle class welfare didn’t end. The 30% tax deduction for private health cover remained to anyone who had it. In fact, the extra Medicare Levy imposed on the highest income earners would also be reduced to the same percentage Medicare Levy as the lowest income earners as a reward for having private health insurance.

The health insurance industry is also a strange beast. Providers are almost exclusively Not-For-Profit Mutual Funds. Further, their rates are capped and each year negotiate with the Federal Health Minister through the department on any increase in rates for services. The arguments by the Funds are the same; without an increase the Funds won’t be able to provide the services resulting in a loss of membership and thus more pressure on the public health system. The government’s position is almost always the same, claiming that most Funds are gouging their members for services they don’t need or won’t use.

This raises an interesting point. Should these Funds be free to offer a range of products for a discerning public can pick and choose from, or should they be restricted to services that are only covered by Medicare? (Currently dental is not covered by Medicare, but each State has a system for dental subsidy for those least able to afford dental care. A plan exists to bring Dentistry into Medicare.)

Before the Coroner of Western Australia, Alistair Hope, is a case that raises very serious issues for the Health Fund industry. The death of Penelope Dingle highlights the damage homeopaths can do in a self-regulated industry. Yet it is almost impossible to be a member of a Fund without having the option of at least one “alternative medicine” in the bundle.

While Mr Hope has yet to hand down a finding, it is time for the Federal Health Department to refuse Health Funds any increase in fees until they remove any unproven medicine from their packages; naturopathy, homeopathy, in short, woo.

This isn’t the first time a Coroner has had to deal with the effects of homeopathy, but hopefully it will be the last. As long as Health Funds package “alternative medicines” with basic cover, or even Ancillary cover, it legitimises the woo. If any citizen or resident wants to have homeopathy or any other unproven medicine included in their insurance, then why should it be subsidised 30%? If such treatments did work, we wouldn’t have a regular stream of Coroner’s Reports condemning the practice and practitioners, nor would we have families begging for justice.

This is a challenge for the new Gillard Government and for Health Minister Nicola Roxon in particular; stop the Health Funds from bundling woo into their packages. The next time the Funds cry “we need to increase our premiums” the government should stand firm and suggest the Funds could save money if woo wasn’t automatically bundled with services that are legitimate, and remove the 30% refund for any service that cannot prove its efficacy.

That should save Medicare enough money to finally include dental services.

Good news, bad news.

2010-06-28T22:56:00.001+08:00

Today was the day I meet with my neurosurgeon. Not the one that operated on my back originally, but nonetheless a consultant and therefore good enough for me.

Knowing that the fraternity has rules I asked “Should I call you Mr?” He smiled as the MRI and CT images loaded on his computer monitors and replied “Dave was good enough for my mother, so it’s good enough for you.”

Dave it is.

We chatted about things in general, then about the things that mattered. He showed me the MRI, scrolling back and forth to satisfy himself the titanium had fully bonded. The plates, the screws, the 2 delicate cages that held a donor wedge of bone in place where a disc once was. Fusion was total and couldn’t be undone. But he wasn’t happy. The work Emir, my original neurosurgeon, did was first class. The problem was not of the surgery but of my body continuing to break down. The arthritic spine was evident, almost glowing white hot on where vertebrae rubbed on vertebrae. However we all knew that and it wasn’t a surprise.

The surprise is that the canal which the spinal cord passes through is too narrow, and becoming even more narrow. There is no room for spinal fluid to surround the vital bundle of nerves. It’s like having a delicate bundle of fibre optic cables being crushed in a vice from all sides. Without intervention the sheath that protects the bundle will rupture and the core of nerves will become damaged without prospect of repair.

Fortunately the structure is stable for the moment. It will become less stable over time, but Dave is a conservative and won’t operate unless the vertebra above my fused vertebrae become unstable. I like his thinking; the more of the spine that is fused, the greater the pressure on the spine overall as the forces cannot be dissipated. That’s what discs are for, to act as shock absorbers and dissipate much of the forces on the spinal column.

In one particular type of arthritis, which mainly affects young men, the vertebrae slowly fuse together until there is no movement of the spine. Ironically this fusion makes the spine weaker, not stronger, because forces on it cannot be distributed properly. Also the arthritis makes the bone more brittle, so fractures are far more likely to happen. It’s been known by many names, bamboo back being one of the most common because the spinal column looks like bamboo. These days ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is its common name. A progressive degenerative disease related to rheumatoid arthritis (RA) - the main type of arthritis I have - and like RA, AS is a auto-immune disease. That is, the person’s own immune system doesn’t recognise the body’s own tissue and attacks it. In AS, the immune system attacks the fluid in the degenerating discs and the facets of the vertebra. In RA, the immune system also attacks the bone in the synovial fluid in, for example, the fingers. The fluid acts as lubricant and prevents bone rubbing on bone. In my case, the poly arthritic nature of my RA affects my fingers, wrists, and my spine. Probably my ankles too, but I don’t worry so much about them, particularly my right ankle as I can’t feel it, and my lower right leg and foot are supported by a high tech device that stops my foot from drooping and the ankle from twisting. On flat, solid, grippy surfaces I can walk without the aid of my walking stick. It’s an amazing feeling to be able to do that, I can’t begin to describe how much better I feel within myself to walk without aid or fear.

So, where to now? Pain management still goes on, as does hydrotherapy and physiotherapy and, of course, consultations and prescriptions. More importantly, Dave has referred me on to a neurologist. The point being? There are other issues besides walking strangely or pain. Somewhere higher up, near or in the thoracic vertebrae, is causing a few problems. It’s not painful, unlike my lumbar, but it needs to be looked at. If surgery can be avoided, I don’t mind. If not, then I know I can trust Dave to make the right decisions after another consultation. Of course it’s great not being in a position where a decision must be made now, that my spinal column is so unstable that intervention must happen now. I’ve been through that before, the emergency, the temporary stabilisation, the operation, and the ongoing rehabilitation. It’s not something I would wish on anyone.

For now I’m not sure how to feel about the idea of my spine slowly crushing my spinal cord. It’s not a surprise to me in a strange sort of way. I’ve already started on my “bucket list.” Today I opened a special savings account with the goal of saving enough money to travel to Beijing then travel to catch one of the Trans-Siberian trains through Novosibirsk, onto Moscow, stay a few days, then catch the Red Arrow to St Petersburg. Why? To do it before I can’t.

I’m not saying that being a paraplegic would stop me from doing what I want to do, but I want to be able to do it while my legs have some function left. In some ways when my back broke, it may have been better to have lost my legs (which I did until the operation) and not have the debilitating chronic pain that I have now - a case of being able to fool most people much of the time and a few people none of the time. Those who have met me probably think I’m a pain in the arse, or perhaps a little too jolly. Those who know me understand that if I stopped and thought even a little about how much it hurts physically and emotionally, I would seize up like Tin Man in the rain.

There is another driving force. Every day I’m at Royal Perth Hospital, Shenton Park Campus where rehabilitation is the focus, I see young and old who have lost limbs, who are para/quadriplegic and are rebuilding their lives. Some are at the beginning of their journey, some are nearing the point in their lives where they are truly independent for the first time in their life.

If the prospect of death focuses the mind, then the prospect of losing independence toughens the resolve. My resolve has never been tougher. This is a war I cannot win, but I can, and will, win many battles along the way.

The Dashing of Babies' Heads

2010-06-27T09:53:00.003+08:00

This is a response to http://twitter.com/heidiraff/

@Epigrammist Ezekiel 9 Explanation - Question posed by atheists on Twitter: How can the order by god in... http://tumblr.com/xt1c64w9u

Which in turn was her response to @DanVerg’s question; How can Ezekiel 9 be justified? I embellished the question - in order to get a response as @heidiraff was constantly stalling - with a passage form Psalms. Psalm 137:9 to be precise. You may remember the song as sung by Boney M; By The Rivers of Babylon:

By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion. 2 We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof. 3 For there they that carried us away captive required of us a song; and they that wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion. 4 How shall we sing the Lord’s song in a strange land? 5 If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. 6 If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy.7 Remember, O Lord, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof. 8 O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. 9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

Ok, so Boney M didn’t sing happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones, but it would have made for an interesting song. Back to Psalm 137 later.

Ezekiel 9 says (in the King James Version):

1 He cried also in mine ears with a loud voice, saying, Cause them that have charge over the city to draw near, even every man with his destroying weapon in his hand. 2 And, behold, six men came from the way of the higher gate, which lieth toward the north, and every man a slaughter weapon in his hand; and one man among them was clothed with linen, with a writer’s inkhorn by his side: and they went in, and stood beside the brasen altar. 3 And the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house. And he called to the man clothed with linen, which had the writer’s inkhorn by his side; 4 And the Lord said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof. 5 And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity: 6 Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house. 7 And he said unto them, Defile the house, and fill the courts with the slain: go ye forth. And they went forth, and slew in the city. 8 And it came to pass, while they were slaying them, and I was left, that I fell upon my face, and cried, and said, Ah Lord GOD! wilt thou destroy all the residue of Israel in thy pouring out of thy fury upon Jerusalem? 9 Then said he unto me, The iniquity of the house of Israel and Judah is exceeding great, and the land is full of blood, and the city full of perverseness: for they say, The Lord hath forsaken the earth, and the Lord seeth not. 10 And as for me also, mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity, but I will recompense their way upon their head. 11 And, behold, the man clothed with linen, which had the inkhorn by his side, reported the matter, saying, I have done as thou hast commanded me.

I suggest for those who aren’t familiar with bibles or concordances (those wonderful little bits of theological academia that justify anything, link any verse to any other verse, and generally attempt to confuse anyone trying to understand the bible for themselves) to grab one and have a look at the contexts in which Psalm 137 and Ezekiel are written.

@Heidiraff’s answer breaks down into 2 parts;

1. (biblical) Israel was corrupt, and

2. was in need of cleansing. Yes, even new-borns who had no concept of “right” and “wrong”.

Ezekiel was an old school prophet; the “oh woe is Israel, oh woe is Jerusalem!” kind of guy. This “prophecy” is no different (but I wonder if they only remembered and wrote down the prophecies that were right and those that were wrong were erased from history; certainly many prophets were denounced as false prophets).

In essence, what Ezekiel wrote (by tradition) was “God yelled at me, saying get all those that run the city, particularly priests, into the sanctuary with all their families so he can send his messengers down to destroy them. Ok? Thanks! Oh, by the way, there is this angel next to me recording this event in a very efficient, bureaucratic way with pen and paper.”

@Hiediraff claims this is the same deal as Noah’s ark. The obvious question here is that if Noah’s ark was supposed to rid the world of corruption and evil, since Noah was a righteous man, then why would it have to be done all over again? If the story of Noah is to be believed, then we are all a result of incestuous sex from Noah’s family, which means the “flood” really wasn’t a great idea after all, even if there was archeological and geological evidence for it. Which there isn’t.

Did god fail? Because it’s starting to look like the god of the Israelites, Christians and Islamists is very good at getting prophets to write down a plan for humanity to marvel at before cocking up its execution.

More worryingly is that Ezekiel 9 is held up to be an example of how god looks after his chosen people by commentators like Wesley. If we don’t turn to god and beg and plead and do everything god says without question, our innocent babies will be slaughtered by god’s henchmen, yay!

No matter who comments, or how Ezekiel 9 is interpreted, it all boils down to sin and corruption. Ezekiel was tasked to tell all who would listen “If you don’t get your shit in one sock, then there is going to be lots of stick and no carrot.” That’s pretty much the message of every Old Testament prophet, only they are imprecise and verbose. Possibly due to the tea they made from that green stuff on the side of the road.

Back to Psalm 137: It’s a psalm that was, and is, used by exiled Jews (and now Christians) to remind them that although in exile, they will take back Jerusalem. It’s also used to reassure Jews that Jerusalem is theirs for ever, no matter where they are. Huzzah!

That, and that they’ll have a lot of fun smashing non-Jewish kids heads in with rocks.

What wonderful examples Ezekiel 9 and Psalm 137 set. Wander slightly and your family will be slaughtered, follow the path of god and you have permission to kill newborns of your enemies.

This isn’t discipline, as @heidiraff claims. It’s barbarianism. For those who wonder why the extremes of Islam are brutal, this is it. The same god, and the same reverence for the Old Testament (Torah) as Jews and Christians. Next I’ll be told how only Christians have a moral authority because only they are the “chosen ones”.

I’m sorry; any answer that ends with the likes of @Heidiraff’s “In this case, God used other nations to discipline His children and bring them back to Himself. This was the push-me-pull-you relationship that existed until Jesus came and brought mankind back to God through His death on the cross.” is akin to saying “I don’t really know why, and it doesn’t make a lot of sense, but to me it doesn’t matter because of my personal relationship with God.” I’d much rather the latter, honest answer than the former Jesus-makes-everything-taste-better answer drawn from the jar labeled “Stock Answers for when you don’t know the answer.”

Why Universal Health Care is Vital to Any Civilised, Compassionate Society, and how it Benefits Everyone

2010-06-04T18:48:00.005+08:00

There's no big secret about me having rheumatoid arthritis, or a broken back. I tweet about it, share my experiences and get some good advice from others who know about auto-immune diseases, as well as having a plethora of specialists, including a consultant rheumatologist, taking care of me.

Due to the damage in my spine, which is currently held together with titanium pins, rods, screws, a cage and will power, I also suffer chronic, intense back pain which needs it's own management plan. Lately the symptoms of the partial paraplegia, from the significant nerve damage, have been getting worse. More pain, less mobility and some potentially embarrassing moments in public. (Other than my risqué conversations!)

Working out what's going on isn't that straight forward. Physiotherapy have noticed the deterioration. A muscular-skeletal exam confirmed what my physiotherapist suspected, an expensive custom made orthotic was made to assist me to walk further than a few metres without tripping over. Meanwhile a pathologist investigates my blood and reports back to my rheumatologist and General Practitioner (GP, just a regular doctor). My gastroenterologist orders Doppler ultrasound, and interprets the digital video remotely from the Imaging Services Department at the hospital. My neurosurgeon is frequently updated with digital CT scans to look for change.

That's where the “problem” lays. The titanium that is fused into my lower spine scatters x-rays, so high resolution images near the suspect site are not possible, but there is enough change for it to be noticed. So an MRI scan is ordered.

I don’t know if anyone knows what having an MRI is like. I’ve become used to them, but still they aren’t pleasant for me. The MRI scan process for me is fairly straight forward; change into “something more comfortable”, double check for any metal I might be wearing, get wedged onto a plank, then loaded like a shell into a cannon. For the next thirty or so minutes the sounds of thumping, banging, buzzing, and harmonics of all these all but drown out any music I’m listening to through plastic tubing. While all this is happening the electro magnets (which resonate causing the disturbing banging sounds) are so powerful, any loose metal within a few metres of the machine would be flicked through at a velocity enough to break bones or, worse, the machine. They are so powerful that it makes me vibrate. Indeed, I can tell when they are focusing on my lumbar region as the titanium moves with the vertebrae to cause pinching of some nerves which results in a combinations of unpleasant discomfort and sensations of having hot pokers rammed through my feet and into my spine. Then I’m unloaded briefly, but not allowed to move, as a contrast agent is injected into my wrist. Normally they try and find the less painful area, but it’s not always possible. The contrast agent makes my tongue feel like someone’s put a dirty teaspoon on it. Then it’s reload and do it all over again.

Yesterday’s little outing in the tubular coffin took no less than 90 minutes.

Now I’m not saying this is, or should be, a typical experience for anyone. It’s simply my own experience due to my unique circumstances. Most people that have an MRI have nothing more than a little discomfort from being in a confined space for about 15 minutes. MRI scanning is routine in an emergency hospital, such as Royal Perth Hospital, and all across Australia’s major public hospitals.

Now, here’s the fun part. How much do you think all this testing costs? How much did it cost me? The MRI scan alone costs are about AU$10,000. Cost to me? AU$0. That’s right. Nothing. Same for physiotherapy, pathology, rheumatology. Even when I had the neurosurgery to remove the spiny growths of bone, the ruptured discs, and to reconstruct and repair fractured vertebrae using expensive titanium didn’t cost me a cent. The room with a view that I had to myself for 2 weeks during recovery cost me nothing. The rehab, zilch. The fitting, construction and refitting of my high-tech orthotic? Absolutely nothing.

Every Resident and Citizen of Australia has access to free, that’s right, free medical care at a public hospital. There are private hospitals, but the only difference between the two is that private hospitals have more expensive art in the foyer and don’t have emergency facilities. In fact, most consultants from all disciplines, including my wonderful rheumatologist, work in both private and public hospitals.

So how can it be free, and why? The answer is simple. Taxation pays for it. It even subsidises General Practitioners so that going to a doctor is cheap, and in some cases, free. Yes, that’s right, for some people it costs nothing to see a doctor. Going further, most prescriptions are also subsidised, to the point that once a certain number of prescriptions have been used by an individual or family, for the rest of the calendar year all listed medications are free. Yes, free.

Every Australian is aware of this to some point. Most wouldn’t even think about it.

Surely this is madness! Isn’t this socialist nonsense and surely it will bankrupt the country? Like Greece for example?

Well, no. It’s a vital service, Universal Health Care. For those in the Tea Party movement in the US (referred, unflattering as “teabaggers”!) who are fighting to stop the Obama administration to trend towards Universal Health Care, countries like Canada, Australia, Great Britain, France and so on are to be pilloried for having such a blatantly evil “socialist” policy.

But if they really thought about it, why don’t they complain that the police or firefighters are part of a socialist agenda? Or government schools? Why should doctors become wealthy at the expense of patients when the police also have arguably difficult jobs, or firefighters or teachers? Why is it that prisoners get better health care than they could ever hope to get outside of jail? Or members of the US armed forces and veterans? Or indigenous Americans? Isn’t that also an evil socialist engineering program?

The fundamental arguments against Universal Health Care start to look pretty weak in light of the evidence. Especially since those who make the most money out of the health industry in the US are the insurance companies are the same collection of people that make the decisions on what treatment, if any, a US citizen is entitled to, or what medication they can have. It doesn’t take much brain power to understand that these people are making decisions based on a bottom line, not in terms of health outcomes for policy holders.

At the same time, medical services and medications costs in the US are practically extortionate. This in turn means the insurers have to charge higher premiums, which mean less people, despite the Obama Administration’s changes to stop the practice of denying policies to people with pre-existing conditions, can afford any quality medical care. Essentially, the US is a duality; those with money and influence get the best medical care money can buy at the expense of those who work just as hard, if not harder, for far less reward.

A civilised nation would treat all citizens as equal before the law, and enable access to all services on an equal footing, be it electricity, a police force, justice through the courts if accused of a crime, or health care. A compassionate society would treat those who, for a variety of reasons, aren’t able to fully take care of themselves or make decisions for themselves about their welfare; this is no different to how parents look after their young children or children look after their aged parents.

Using taxes to pay for these things is money well spent. Instead of someone who becomes horribly ill and unable to work never contributing to society ever again, they are more likely to be rehabilitated where they can contribute once again. That in itself is a powerful incentive for the patient to become well again because no one likes to be dependent on others.

I would have thought most of this is self evident or self explanatory. Anyone with a grain of sense would know Universal Health Care isn’t about a slippery slope to some form of evil Stalinism. At least I believe anyone with a grain of sense would know that.

Of course, if critics wish to point out how I’m some form of bleeding heart lefty socialist, then fine. Maybe I am. I was born in, raised in, and live in a liberal socialist democracy. That doesn’t mean a Laissez-faire, Marxist democracy, It means a free thinking, progressive, open to new ideas, let’s give everyone a fair go democracy. Usually it means that governments are more centralist or left of centre than governments of the USA, but nonetheless a liberal socialist democracy is a long way right of Stalinist North Korea.

Critics are welcome, if they wish to ask me any questions they like. I can begin by stating that currently I am on a Disability Support Pension. It’s not a lot of money, but it’s enough for most things; rent, power, and as you can see, the internet. And independence. Would I rather be working? Of course, but it’s not practical nor beneficial for myself or - more importantly - an employer at this point in my life.

Would I be just as happy if I was the one paying the tax and somebody else was on a pension due to illness or injury? Absolutely. Been there, done that, didn’t complain.

I leave with one final question: if you’re a US citizen and a “teabagger”, how would you like to be treated if you unexpectedly became ill for a protracted period? Would you like to worry each day about how long the insurance is going to pay and what treatment they will pay for instead of focusing on getting better? Or would you resign yourself to becoming homeless, even imprisoned for being homeless, when every one around you pities you but says you ought to have known this is what was going to happen and paid some faceless company more money.

It’s a conspiracy.

2010-04-08T13:34:00.001+08:00

You know what? Climate science is a conspiracy. A conspiracy by scientists who have everything to gain by getting the truth out there before we are neck deep in acidic sea water.

On the other hand, far right-wing conservatives such as Lord Christopher Monckton have nothing to gain by asking people for a considerable sum of money to see a short power-point presentation showing lovely pictures of Greenland, all photoshopped to show vineyards and happy Vikings herding cows on lush grassy pastures. Or the Houses of Parliament underwater with the caption “So what?” How could Lord Monckton be gaining anything by showing a power-point presentation that cost bugger all to make and asking people to buy his books not allowing any questioning of his authority at all? Besides, he’s preaching to the converted. Oh, but he’s already rich, being landed gentry and peer of the realm, so any money he makes doesn’t mean anything. It’s all for paying the cause.

Also he doesn’t debate those silly scientists who insist climate change and oceanic acidification is real because the idiots only confuse and upset his audience. Bless him. He’s all above board that chap.

I need to work on my sarcasm; I don’t think I’ve been subtle enough.

People like Lord Monckton are dangerous. These people decide on a position before there is any substantive evidence one way or another. But that’s why they are policy makers, or rather policy drivers; in this case Lord Monckton was an adviser to the very conservative British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

Now it’s important to stress that some fundamental elements of true science is scepticism and debate. Science cannot exist without debating with colleagues about the theory, the experiment, and the results. Similarly the scientist must be sceptical but intrigued about the subject. Often results are at first counter intuitive, so without some sceptical reasoning, the risk is that the easier option of a false conclusion based on a false assumption is taken.

But Lord Monckton isn’t a scientist; he was a journalist, becoming one at a time when a university degree wasn’t required. Yet because he did some university, it apparently gives him enough credentials to be authoritative on the subject of Climate Science.

Recently there has been a bit of a kerfuffle about leaked emails from the “custodians” of climate science research, the University of East Anglia. The leak occurred because of unauthorised access. Hacking, theft, stealing, call it what you want. A few emails came to light because of this illegal activity. These two emails from a few scientists who specialise in Climate Science, seemed to disagree with what the UEA Climate Science Unit has being saying, and the International Panel on Climate Change (the IPCC) as well. But that is the nature of science; the method of collecting data should be debated. Results should be argued. The statistical analysis should be scrutinised and debated.

This is called Peer-Review. If I have a theory, and then design an experiment to test the theory, then whatever the result may be (proving or disproving my theory), an independent experimenter should be able to replicate the results using the same method I did and come to the same conclusion. And there should be debate on my experiment; is it an experiment that guaranteed to produce the results I predict? If so then somebody should put me in my place and say the experiment is flawed, and perhaps put up an alternative method for others to try. Whatever I, or anyone else publishes, on the experiment it’s there to be critiqued at every step of the way. It’s not a personal attack on me, or anyone else. It’s simply being rigorous and thorough.

In the case of science when short time period experiments aren't practical (such as climate science), then there are other ways to collect data, formulate a model, and make predictions. Yet the same methods of science hold true; the method of which data is collected, what it means, and how well the model stands up to scrutiny is all up for criticism and debate.

And this is the case with the UEA Climate Science Unit; 2 emails of dissent/criticism does not mean the science is wrong; it may be, but fact that other researchers have collected similar data and concluded with similar results does not mean there is a conspiracy, rather it means that the science is sound. Not perfect, but sound, and there is healthy debate occurring with peers.

Again, take the IPCC. They make predictions based on modelling, that is using statistical analysis based on data already collected. The IPCC has been wrong with some forecasts. Sometimes overly pessimistic, sometimes overly optimistic. But why the outcry over being wrong over one prediction amongst literally hundreds that have been correct?

Every night news stations gather forecasts from private or government meteorological agencies. We want to know what the weather is going to be tomorrow. Currently we have expectations that the forecast be accurate for the next seven days. Agencies like Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology provide forecasts for capital cities for 7 days and most major centres for 5 days. Even places that city dwelling Australians have never heard of or can’t pronounce can have forecasts for 3 days. There is nothing magical going on; the BoM is simply using modelling to arrive at a forecast. Forecasters know the science and the limitations of the various models (yes, there is more than one model) and statistical analysis to write up or even amend a forecast.

The IPCC is no different apart from being a much larger, better funded international organisation. So when hundreds of journalists, including Lord Monckton, quote the head of the IPCC, Professor Sir John Houghton, with “Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen” it must be true, right? Surely that ads weight to the argument that whether it be the UEA or the IPCC or even the politically independent Australian taxpayer funded CSIRO, climate change is all a scam; it’s all about shonky scientists trying to make a name for themselves or Big Business conspiring to make money playing the Carbon Trading Exchanges, or governments conspiring to create a new tax without calling it a tax. Surely. Absolutely positively this must be the case even if it means conflicting hypotheses and illogical assumptions.

As it turns out, Prof. Sir John Houghton never made such a statement. The journalists with London’s The Independent and the researchers with the ABC’s Media Watch found the truth; a grubby hack and professional oxygen thief by the name of Piers Ackerman, who writes a column in Sydney’s Daily Telegraph, made up the oft quoted Sir John without any evidence that Sir John had ever said such a thing.

But it doesn’t matter to those that peddle the “we humans didn’t do it” or “it’s a conspiracy” message of their imaginary climate non-change. Those who distrust science or are ignorant of the facts gladly line up to pay between AUD$50 and AUD$150 to listen to a message they want to hear; it’s alright, it’s not your fault and anyway they’re wrong and here’s the “evidence”. It’s a new form of snake oil. Make no mistake. Not one speaker on the Climate Denial, or the Pro Status Quo as I prefer to call them, are true sceptics or real climate scientists. Everyone from a geologist who believes the earth is less than 5,000 years old, Lord Monckton, a former employee of petroleum company, a pastor and a geologist who specialises in finding coal amongst others. Not one climate scientist amongst them, and few versed in meteorology! One former meteorologist who advises Lord Monckton has written a book opposing climate change, but refuses any portion of it to be peer reviewed. All of them cherry pick data to suit themselves, use strawman arguments or simply misunderstand the raw data and make it fit what they already believe, i.e. relax people, it’s not us if there is any such thing as climate change.

There are dissenters, some of whom are on the IPCC panel and contribute to the reports. I don’t have a problem with that because they are doing science, and aren’t being paid to do a power-point talk circuit in front of a paying group of people who want affirmations of “there is no human element to climate change, even if it does exist”, with the only motivations being money and anything, anything to prove the consensus of scientists on climate change wrong.

It’s an emotive issue, but it shouldn’t be. The über greenies have been crying wolf for perhaps too long a time, so it can’t be about them. So all that’s left is those who need the status quo, who need cheap coal, gas and oil. But surely they don’t have a real voice; after all they don’t write letters to the editor every day…

Indeed they don’t. They don’t have to. After all, their PR companies can make the phone call or email the press release and the journalists will, by and large, write up the stories that are sympathetic to the big polluters. They provide us with jobs, with electricity, with plastics, with everything we need and want from concrete to the latest gadget. Don’t you see? The government already over taxes them and now with governments fixated on this climate change thing your way of life is jeopardised. Gosh and golly. To cap it off, newspapers and magazines need paper, and they doesn’t come out of thin air… So naturally the conservative media is biased against any climate change reporting; report only “bad” news sparingly, report the “good” - for the media and polluters - news repeatedly, and if you can’t find “good” news, make it up scary news that is unbelievable so that readers/watchers/listeners will later think “those scientists are on crack!” Or do a Piers Ackerman and lie, telling the world that these climate scientists want to tell us really horrible things just so they are heard, and they don’t care about the truth. Or even better - for the media and polluters - present one non-consensus view, qualified or not, against ten or more consensus views as balanced, objective journalism.

No wonder the public is confused, the non-consensus opinions are expressed in the media as fact, and any non-consensus science report is significantly distorted so that it appears that there is some kind of classroom brawl going on in the climate change field, that no-one agrees on anything.

Well, it has come to the point where the public isn’t so easily fooled or misled over these matters anymore. They may not completely trust the scientists, but they trust them more than the media, fossil fuel companies and the dozens of Lord Monckton wannabes that are trying to make their fortunes by cashing in on the debate rather than contribute to it in an enlightened, positive way.

The Truth About Dogs

2010-02-18T01:20:00.002+08:00

I’ve received the news I didn’t want to hear only hours ago. The emotion is raw and painful but holding it all in is impossible and stupid.

Peanut was a rescued dog, at the end of his puppy-hood. He was scheduled to be euthanised literally the day after he came into my life. He needed so much love and attention and affection, being emotionally damaged from abuse and neglect. My first concern was how long would it take for him to become a normal dog? He was scared of people, of toys, of contact. It took months of intense emotional investment to get him to enjoy chasing a ball, being confident with other dogs despite his toy Jack Russell size: his head as an adult was no bigger than my outstretched hand. He weighed about 5 kilograms.

Three weeks ago, something wasn’t right. He lost his appetite, and even when he did eat would vomit within hours. And continue on vomiting. I wasn’t unduly concerned as long as he was drinking water. He then stopped even that and I forced him to drink. I stayed with him for two nights fitfully sleeping either on the floor or on the couch, acutely aware on the second night that he could die at any moment.

The next day a vet checked him and concluded that it was nothing serious. Perhaps a canine influenza or minor stomach complaint.

Slowly, over the week he was getting better. Much better. Eating properly again. I felt relieved that the worst of whatever he had was over, even if he preferred to lie in his basket or on my lap. Even so, his belly was slowly becoming distended, and his favourite toy, an old orange ball, would only be chased down once, without much enthusiasm.

Last Saturday (13/02/2010), while he lay on my lap, I noticed how laboured his breathing had become. Prior I had arranged to meet up with acquaintances at a Northbridge bar, and so took him for his much loved “walkies”. His ears pricked up, his eyes lit up, but his body wasn’t so keen until his lead was on.

It was a slower than normal, even tentative, walk, but he was more than happy to be out and and about. At the bar, in the courtyard, he was a chick magnet, which was hilarious ironic! And despite not being totally comfortable, he wasn’t in pain, and was more than happy to lay at my feet off the lead or on my lap as I sat and chat and drank.

The next day – Sunday – we spent a few hours in a shady, grassy park. He trotted around, sniffed here and there, an would lie down in some cool shade to catch his breath, before chasing down his favourite orange ball, then resting again. I knew then what ever it was, it was serious, despite Peanut being his happy little self.

Later that day, my ex, who was Peanut’s other “parent”, came to collect him for his “turn at custody”. I was always Peanut’s “daddy”: I was the one who taught him all the basic obedience that all dogs should have, I was the one who took him for walks, I was the one who played with him to give him his confidence back with strangers and other dogs, I was the one that imposed the discipline of regimented meal times. It all sounds “me, me, me” but honestly I was the leader of our pack, my ex just didn’t have the experience, patience or discipline that I had. So whenever there was a game of “who does Peanut love most”, I would always win. Of course I didn’t have a monopoly on loving him, nor did he only bond with me. But the inevitable conclusion is I was, and still am, the one with the greater emotional burden despite this not being a contest.

I gave my ex a list of verbal instructions about Peanut’s care. Importantly that if he was still without appetite and his distended belly grew even by a small amount then he would need to see a vet again. I was hoping it was only a case of constipation due to an obstruction, but also knew that a tumour was highly likely.

On Monday it was decided that Peanut should see a vet again. An ultrasound was taken and a mass was pressing up against his diaphragm. Again, I was hopeful that it would be a benign tumour or a cyst, but it would have to be surgically removed. As soon as I heard the news, I dropped everything to be with Peanut on what would turn out to be his last night. My ex and I had discussed at length what we both wanted to do and what was best for Peanut. We agreed on all points. If the tumour was malignant, or couldn’t be safely removed, then euthanasia was the only humane option. The issue was never about money, rather making sure that Peanut didn’t needlessly suffer.

That Tuesday night., he wanted to lay in my lap, and later he wanted to sleep on me as I went to bed on a make do mattress on the floor. He only wanted to be with what sounded and smelt familiar. It’s a dog thing and for him it did mean being less stressed than had I not been there.

Wednesday morning, the vet surgeon removed the mass, and was hopeful of a recovery, despite the mass being nearly 1 kg, or 20% of his weight. After fifteen minutes, things looked good enough to continue. 45 minutes later the story was different, with the mass being attached to his gall bladder. But it was worth continuing.

After an hour, a drain was inserted, an IV put in, and he was closed up, wrapped up and put in a warm crib for recovery with the words “hopeful” the best prognosis. Everything is a risk: anaesthetic is a risk – it depresses the central nervous system so that the cardiopulmonary systems fails, i.e. heart failure and or breathing stops – surgery itself is a risk, even recovery is a risk just as it is in humans. The alternative was not palatable as the tumour would slowly suffocate him as well as compress his stomach to the point he couldn’t eat or drink, like having a gastric band fitted by the dodgiest of quacks that shut off the stomach completely.

Peanut was looking the worse for wear, as one would expect and had a low core temperature but recovery meant being externally warmed, and a transfusion and constantly being checked by staff.

Sadly, at 9:15pm Wednesday night, Peanut had enough.

Writing about this event is cathartic. Yes, I feel better for writing the time-line as I remember it, and for writing about Peanut’s circumstances that lead to his death. And yes, I feel terrible about it for many reasons, not least publicly expressing what could be seen as as emotionless nonsense to justify my actions or inactions. There are many truths that are not yet written. Foremost is that ever since I left the surgery I’ve felt both numb and void and yet without a moment’s relief of thinking about him without tears welling up in my eyes.

The simplest truths I can share is that I have lost a big part of my happiness. Yet there was nothing that could have been done differently that would have arrived to a different outcome. Although only six or seven years old, Peanut has had at least five years more than he would otherwise have had, and not just a half decade of quantity, but of quality. From being a terrified pup rescued from a horrible start in life to being earmarked for euthanasia because a suitable home couldn’t be found to having a very good life of being constantly loved, cared for and rehabilitated. There is nothing I would have done any differently.

But that truth isn’t a one-way street. It certainly was never a case of me giving of myself in some sort of selfless act. He contributed to my life much more than I to his. Peanut selflessly gave this partial paraplegia and chronic pain disabled man many things; a reason to get up in the morning, the ability to take the focus of my needs, and joy I needed when I needed it most.

Now is the time to grieve. To acknowledge his death appropriately. To feel sorry for him. To feel sorry for myself. Ultimately to never forget Peanut. It’s difficult at the moment not to think about about how good it felt every time I pet him, or the look of bliss on his face when I scratched between his ears or under his chin. How he would gently put out his front right paw and gently touch me when he wanted a little attention, how his tail would furiously whip side to side when he saw his favourite orange ball in my hand. When he knew I was in awful pain how he would very, very gently lie on me, resting his head in the crook of an arm that made me feel better.

I shall miss Peanut, the little bugger, the funny little Jack Russell who died at the midpoint of what Jack Russells would normally live. Same as I miss Sam, the wonderful faithful companion Blue Healer I had for many years, and before him, Defa, the “bitsa” that just loved nothing more than going bush with me.

There are a few litres of tears to flow when thinking of Peanut yet. Death isn’t something we ‘just get over’, it’s something we come to terms with. Later today when I collect his collar, I’m sure I’ll hear the tinkling of his tags as he trots (he only had two speeds: trot and flat out running).

The worst is yet to come, and it’s a selfish thing. The worst is the void created. That I’ll forget he’s gone and call for him, or I’ll see a toy of his and his absence makes his life that more real and the loss that much greater.

The truth about cats and dogs isn’t that they die. It’s that given a chance they enrich our lives in ways people can’t.

Australia Day? Invasion Day? What a Load of Jingoistic Crap

2010-01-22T11:38:00.000+08:00

A son of a German shoves a Union Jack on the shores of Botany Bay, proclaiming that a terra nullus is now the property of a King George III, whom is completely mad from the hereditary disease porphyria and is not English but German, during a time of malcontent by those the New World (American) colonies. How is this a day for Australia, let alone representative of England’s expanding empire?

It reminds me of an Episode of Blackadder Goes Forth (General Hospital), where Capt. Blackadder is tasked to root out a German spy in a WWI field hospital: having tied Capt. Darling to a chair Blackadder interrogates, and Darling finally cracks under the pressure “I’m as British as Queen Victoria!” to which Blackadder attacks with “You mean your father's German, you're half German and you married a German?!”

I’m not anti-German or anti-British or even anti-Calathumpian. The point is how ridiculous that Australia Day is about the establishment of the Botany Bay Colony (NSW), which has nothing to do with South Australia, Tasmania or Western Australia, and Australians in general. Particularly immigrants (aren’t we all?) and indigenous peoples. That doesn't leave very many Australian Citizens left.

Surely this artificial date, linked to firing a few muskets to the strains of God Save The King, is not appropriate for now let alone pre-Federation.

Perhaps a better date is when the Premiers of each colony first sat together and, with the “mother country” (English or German?) agreed on the referendum that would put our nation on the path of a successful Federation, remembering that both Western Australia and South Australia both had universal suffrage - for non-indigenous peoples - for those aged 21 and over? A second date could be set aside to celebrate the successful referendum in which indigenous peoples won the right to be recognised as people with the same rights as citizens and thus given the vote.

Perhaps the real “Australia Day”, then, should be 2nd March to reflect the first day of the meeting of all Colonies to push for Federalism.

In the same way, 26th August should mark “Vincent Lingiari Day”: the walk off by Aboriginal stockmen from Wave Hill, which precipitated the overwhelmingly successful 1967 referendum which removed the power of the Commonwealth government as to how indigenous people could be treated. (Contrary to popular belief, in some states indigenous peoples did have citizenship and were allowed to vote in state elections.)

As for the current “Australia Day”, it’s time to let go. Unless you are a New South Welsh man or woman, and even then it would be better to rename it as "Foundation Day, NSW".

Daylight Saving? Yawn

2010-01-21T20:13:00.005+08:00

Don’t like missing out on Daylight Saving? Disappointed WA voted for the 4th time “No”? Then referendums are obviously not the way to go. May I suggest you go to New South Wales or Victoria or Tasmania or — the eternal purgatory – South Australia.

You see, I don’t really care if Perth has DLS or not; and let’s face it Perth/Mandurah/Bunbury is the socio-political critical mass of Western Australia. Does DLS cause more car accidents? Probably not. Do more people sun themselves at the beach after getting home from a stressful day at the office with DLS? I doubt it, except for the above average wage earners in the beach-side suburbs. Do kids not sleep properly at night because the sun sets later? Maybe not.

Whatever arguments that are put up, there are counter arguments.

But I’ll let you into a secret. I voted no. And I’ll tell you why.

If you’ve ever lived in the North of the state (and I don’t mean the suburbs of Joondalup and Wanneroo) then you’ll know you get roughly 12 hours of sunlight each day all year round. It doesn’t vary as much as does in Tasmania. Or even the Southern Coastal towns like, for example, Hopetoun.

I chose Hopetoun for a particular reason. Hopetoun is less than 10km East of the 120°E Easting, which is where WA officially measures its time zone. And Hopetoun is roughly on the same Northing as Sydney. So if anywhere would need that extra bit of daylight at the end of the day it would be Hopetoun. After all, with sunrise as early as 5am, they could do with the extra light at the end of the day rather than the beginning.

Well, it’s not that simple. During the height of summer, the sun rises and sets in the ocean. But in winter, is rises and sets over land. In Hopetoun’s case having a bloody big hill the size of a mountain to the West reduces winter daylight by as much as an hour.

What’s this go to do with Perth? We don’t have any mountains. The sun always sets in the Indian Ocean for shore dwellers. Being 5° West of the 120°E mark means Perth has less morning and more afternoon all year round. A kind of built in DSL. 5° may not sound very much, but it means Perth can get over 20 minutes of DLS. Plus not having the sun set over mountains, unlike Sydney, means more twilight.

But that’s not the real reason for voting no. The Office of Energy did an audit of power consumption during the 3 year Day Light Savings Trial, and was supposed to release the data to the public before the last referendum. I guess the idea being that because we were all at the beach being sand-blasted by the Fremantle Doctor, we weren’t using our electricity guzzling reverse cycle air-conditioners. And so, the theory goes, we weren’t burning as much gas and coal in our power stations.

How could we be so naïve! The Independent Market Regulator washed its hands of the issue, and no documents have been allowed under the Freedom of Information Act (WA) to say whether more or less power was consumed. However, since the former Carpenter government thought it necessary to re-commission a coal fired power-plant, one becomes suspicious.

Yes, we know that Apache’s Varanus Island gas plant exploded, but Apache are still fighting NOPSA in the courts over the inspection, and anyway, even when the Carpenter government enacted a reserve of 25% of all gas produced to be for WA domestic and industrial use, no plans have been made to decommission the re-commissioned power station. Even with the current Barnett government, even with more gas available and a plan to keep storing energy so that we urbanites won’t have to go without power again.

Conclusion: they are hiding something from us, and it isn’t the Office of Energy’s good news.

Yes, we may dream that we’ll go down to the beach after work. With the kids. Get some sunlight — but not too much because we don’t want any more skin cancers than we already have — and all the fun stuff that the warmer weather brings. But let’s not kid ourselves. At most we’ll only spend more time down at the pub or at a mate’s barbie. Or as earlier this week proved, 3 consecutive days over 41.1°C (106°F) and 5 consecutive days over 37.8°C (100°F), it was no surprise as the grid again failed. We had been warned about this before, and we are being warned it will happen in the future.

No matter if you prefer DLS, don’t grumble to me about how awful it is doing business with those over east. Let’s face it, it’s awful doing business anyway and the money comes into this state from those in our timezone, eg Beijing, not outside it (Sydney, Melbourne).

Google and China

2010-01-13T08:53:00.000+08:00

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-approach-to-china.html

Discuss.

Shame Is The Only Weapon That Hurts Them

2010-01-12T21:53:00.000+08:00

Humans are flawed. We are prone to err. We make observational errors. We unwittingly make assumptions that have no foundations. Sometimes we deliberately deceive ourselves as a protective (or coping) mechanism so that we don’t have to face facts: the lie is comforting and protective.

Perhaps the most interesting psychological and social phenomenon that demonstrates one of our psychological flaws is the Fundamental Attribution Error. We all have it to a greater or lesser degree.

What is it? Well, it would be easy to insert a few links to Wikipedia or a paper or text on Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, or even the person credited with the term Lee Ross. Instead, I will explain it in hypothetical examples of a cognitive error.

Let’s say someone has severe depression. One of the behavioural problems this person exhibits is severe social isolationism and an irrational blame system. The sufferer may attribute all “good luck” to simple good but undeserved fortune, and any “bad luck” to deserved punishment, be it by “God”, or any other source, even themselves.

The use of “good”, “bad” and “God” is deliberate: they are loaded words, with a value that is different for each individual.

The same phenomenon happens in perfectly functioning individuals too. For example, “bad” things that happen are entirely due to things beyond the person’s control, and “good” things happen because the person is a “good” person or because they pray to “God”.

It should now be obvious what is really happening: the individual is attributing in error what is happening to them. As individuals we all do it from time to time. As a society we gravitate towards those with similar belief systems and reinforce any errors. To claim otherwise is in itself a fundamental attribution error.

So why talk about a psychological theory, especially one that is still debated amongst psychiatrists and psychologists? There is a battle going on, and an ugly one at that. It’s religious fundamentalism verses human rights. Normally sanity prevails and on accommodates the other, but this “war” is becoming ugly as issues become polarised.

On the religious fundamentalism side, a claim has been staked for theological absolutism over morality. The principle being only religion can own morality, since what is “good” and what is “evil” is defined by “God”, be it Yahweh, God, Allah, or any defined deity, and any human morality is corrupted. The flaw in absolutism is exposed when absolutists can’t agree on moral “laws”, or even be consistent on interpretation.

This isn’t the crux of the problem, as conflict amongst religious absolutists has ever been thus. What the current vortex has done is draw in an ever growing number of seemingly normal people capable of making their own decisions based on evidence and experience and turning them into bigots. Nowhere is this more evident than in the US. There is a growing fear, often unfounded, of Islam because a few radical “Muslims” deviate from orthodoxy and have an irrational belief that Christians and Jews are deserving targets in a violent jihad. Similarly a growing number of centralist, nominal Christians in the US, as well as here in Australia, believe that homosexuality is equivalent to a moral cancer. To recruit the otherwise “I don’t give a hoot” to the cause, they actively, deliberately, use fundamental attribution error to scare those on the outside into believing that gay marriage is a danger to children.

There are two very important issues that those against gay marriage, or homosexuality in general, that those behind these bigoted attacks don’t want you to know;

a) many western governments already accept same-sex couples for the purpose of taxation, estates and family laws,

b) the organisers of bigoted attacks deliberately confuse being homosexual with having homosexual sex,

c) the organisers of bigoted attacks deliberately obfuscate any logical debate, and,

d) the organisers of bigoted attacks pander to fear by linking homosexuality, particularly male homosexuality, with paedophilia, when in fact evidence is to the contrary. When any such activity is demonstrably shown to be from within a church then the cracks are papered over. Nothing to see here, move on.

As a society we can arm ourselves the best we can with facts, and question every “fact” given to us. As individual we can not give in to the moral absolutists. Today is the rights of individuals to enter a civil arrangement and be equal before the spirit and the letter of the law and equals within society. Tomorrow it may be your right to judge for yourself what is acceptable, how to raise your children, who you are allowed to associate with or something more sinister.

As an example how deep this self-belief (or delusion) goes, I’ve engaged with tweeters with different views to my own. It’s important in my view not to devalue someone’s personal belief system for my own amusement. However one tweeter came to my attention because the nature of the argument cementing into a “because”. You know the type of argument. Master or Miss Four comes to you and asks a question, to which you answer. But they are never satisfied, and eventually you give up and reply with a “because it just is” or “because I said so.” That’s fine, since as the adult you set the rules and the boundaries. However when it’s a debate with someone who is supposedly an adult, and the debate still reduces down to “because”, then you can bet that person is an absolutist, or worse a fundamentalist absolutist. It may be tempting to dismiss such individuals as radical right-wing fundamentalists and not representative of others of their faith, but it’s a dangerous assumption.

I wish it could end with just religious belief, yet recent events both here in Australia (mainly in Melbourne and Sydney) and in India have brought up another societal ugliness: racism.

The murder of Nitin Garg, an Indian National, has brought out bloggers such as “Wendy” (I won’t give a link, as I don’t wish to promote her views. If you wish, Google “culturedviews.com racism laugh” and take it from there). The point is there is a growing resentment towards immigrants and asylum seekers in nearly all nations. Racist classics like “we’re full” and “they take our jobs” abound. Throw into the mix “no one’s forcing them to come here” and “they should count themselves lucky to be here”. Yes, it’s very easy to be a racist without thinking about it.

I don’t know if the recent attacks on Indians living in Australia is racially motivated, however I have noted a increasing resentment towards Sub-Continent Asians by various people. “They’ve fucked up the taxis single handedly” is one such comment I’ve heard. Before this it was the Serbs or the Croatians who were to blame. Before them it was the Vietnamese. You get the picture.

What I have noticed is India’s growing self assuredness as a nation. The Indian media has certainly taken a more aggressive stance on the matter. It doesn’t help when inadvertent comments made to the media further sour relations, forcing what should be a murder investigation into a diplomatic row.

Now let’s be utterly clear and frank. We are all capable of expressing racism. Racism isn’t solely the domain of “white” people. And no-one is best served when generalisations are made about a person’s country or culture. Finally, it does no harm to apologise for our failings of the past and current. Not just “white culture” but all cultures. Surely in this specific case, the interests of the victims it’s best to take a deep breath, both Australia and India, find, investigate and prosecute the offenders.

In the meantime, we should do our best to out the religious and racists bigots: shame is the only weapon that hurts them.

Raunchy for the RSPCA

2010-01-12T20:20:00.001+08:00

Raunchy for the RSPCA? Well, fellow #PTUBer Tim Pokorny aka @soporificfrog and all-round good-guy is raising money for the RSPCA (WA). Specifically a minimum of AUD$520. When that target is reached, he will nude up for a tasteful self-portrait, which will then be posted to Flickr. Why? Read Tim’s blog. It’s a worthwhile cause, in my humble opinion. I have not only given a denotation, but have offered an other $10 donation for Tim to keep his clothes on.

Go on. Donate. Do it now. Tim is dying to nude up in front of his own lens.

Welcome to Eternal Digital Purgatory

2010-01-05T16:56:00.003+08:00

It’s an unwritten law about politicians: it’s expected that they be hypocrites and be able to disguise (so they think) by using gobbledegook or nonsensical technocrat jargon.

Senator The Honourable Stephen Conroy, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy is today’s subject. Well, not so much a subject as a lesson. In not how to be a minister.

What Conroy is trying to achieve is nothing short of total censorship of the internet within Australia. Many commentators have already spoken about this, commentators far more qualified than I am. However I will add something that no commentator to my knowledge have spoken about.

I wrote to the Senator about his plans for a compulsory internet filter for all Australian ISPs. He finally replied with an nonsense letter (in PDF form), republished here;

(I apologise for the poor quality of the images. One could say it represents the quality of the answers Conroy gave.)

There are some answers that amuse me. For example Enex TestLab tested the filter, but no IT group, journalist or editor accept the findings, particularly at ADSL2+ speeds. Mainly because the Minister reneged on his promise to publish the full results. Instead we have to take the Minister’s word and Enex’s report as gospel. No surprise, then, that Enex “found that a defined list of URLs can be delivered with 100 per cent accuracy.” Of course it can, because that’s like saying parsing a text file for the word “the” will succeed 100% of the time if “the” is in the defined list. What Senator Conroy or Enex don’t say is what the defined list is. In other words it’s easy to pass with 100% any test when you know what the answers are beforehand. If it were a statistical study or basic science at year 11/12 level, then quite rightly the examiners would fail the student.

Of course, this “one hundred per cent accuracy” is spin. At least three websites were erroneously added to the the banned list, if this news article is to be believed. And even though I don’t trust News Ltd or the Courier Mail 100%, I trust that report 100% more than Conroy’s statements. Especially since Conroy threatened to have the Federal Police, which was never followed up, investigate the leaking of the list held by AMCA.

There are, at best, deliberately misleading errors, or at worst, lies, by Conroy. The claim that Germany has already legislated ISP filtering only relates to child abuse. Italy’s Ministerial Decree only relates to child abuse and illegal gambling sites. Neither are close to the scope Conroy and the Government want to implement. Misinformation, spin or lies. You decided.

Much more amusing is the quote “Some opponents of the policy are trying to misrepresent the figures in the Enex Testlabs report by suggesting that a figure if of less than ten per cent is substantial. To put that into context of real time, Australia’s largest ISP, Telstra, undertook its own testing that showed the impact on internet performance would be less than one seventeenth of the blink of an eye!” Now, I don’t know about you, but I’m pretty certain a “blink of an eye!” isn’t a standard measurement of time, let alone one seventeenth of a blink of an eye. It’s a claim made more absurd when neither the government nor Telstra will release how they tested the filter to arrive at this ‘figure’.

Who are these opponents? One is a influential body, Save the Children, an NGO that pushes for some radical rights for children. But even they are against Conroy. Why? Adviser Holly Doel-Mackaway when interviewed by the Sydney Morning Herald said:

The filter scheme [is] “fundamentally flawed” because it failed to tackle the problem at the source and would inadvertently block legitimate resources. Furthermore there was no evidence to suggest that children were stumbling across child pornography when browsing the web. Doel-Mackaway believes the millions of dollars earmarked to implement the filters would be far better spent on teaching children how to use the internet safely and on law enforcement. “Children are exposed to the abusive behaviours of adults often and we need to be preventing the causes of violence against children in the community, rather than blocking it from people’s view.”

Even Google Australia’s Head of Policy, Iarla Flynn, wrote in an official Google Blog:

At Google we are concerned by the Government's plans to introduce a mandatory filtering regime for Internet Service Providers (ISP) in Australia, the first of its kind amongst western democracies.* Our primary concern is that the scope of content to be filtered is too wide.

We have a bias in favour of people's right to free expression. While we recognise that protecting the free exchange of ideas and information cannot be without some limits, we believe that more information generally means more choice, more freedom and ultimately more power for the individual.

Some limits, like child pornography, are obvious. No Australian wants that to be available – and we agree. Google, like many other Internet companies, has a global, all-product ban against child sexual abuse material and we filter out this content from our search results. But moving to a mandatory ISP filtering regime with a scope that goes well beyond such material is heavy handed and can raise genuine questions about restrictions on access to information.”…

This is not enough for Conroy and his cronies. In justifying the filter, Conroy concedes that “it is possible that filtering may be circumvented by a technically competent user”. That is a lie, Conroy. A user need not be technically competent to circumvent the filter. A user only needs to see what other users are doing to circumvent the the filter, and apply it to their own situation. A user doesn’t need to know the hows and whys of various methods to work around the filter. The user merely only needs access to the information. Such as a WikiPedia page or a forum with the instructions. A user doesn’t need to know how an OS like Windows 7 or Mac OS X work, so sure as eggs break when thrown at brick walls, the “technically competent” will be able to show even the most casual user how to circumvent the filter.

The filter doesn’t address peer-to-peer connections or proxy servers or VPNs. In short AUD$126 million and counting is being wasted to catch the 11 or 12 kiddy porn downloaders out of the 22 million Australians. Wow that’s outstanding value, Conroy. Pity it won’t catch the thousands using peer-to-peer networks or those grooming on chat channels and the like. Police agencies will still have to work as hard as ever to catch these offenders, and the “smartest” of these offenders will escape being caught.

It’s as stupid an idea to waste money to target the drug mules carrying illicit drugs in their hand luggage instead trying to nail the source. Or ignoring illegal drug labs and targeting the one or two drug-fucked that sell a few grams of low-quality marijuana to undercover police officers.

So why is Conroy equally obsessed with a mandatory filter and refusing to answer questions by the public or the media about it, except on his terms to spruik it?

This will help answer that question.

Conroy, despite being a Senator for the Australian Labor Party, is a conservative right-of-centre politician. Since leaving university he has been working for, or understudy to some of the ALP’s biggest king-makers and head-kickers. He has been implicated in the plot to removed former ALP leaders Mark Latham and Kim Beasley to stall current hypocrite, PM and master of double-speak Kevin Rudd.

Conroy’s also religiously a conservative, fundamentalist Catholic, having voted against the “morning after pill” RU486 (the bill passed, and RU486 is legally available in Australia), and voted to overturn the Northern Territory’s euthanasia laws. Not so ironically, abortion and euthanasia will be banned subjects once the filter is imposed in full. We’re not talking about pro-abortion or pro-euthanasia, the filter will block any site that discusses these issues. Potentially sites that carry information about safer drug use, or safer sexual practices, will also fall foul of the filter. It’s conceivable that people will die because information Conroy perceives as dangerous will be filtered, or if a domain within Australia, be given a “take down notice” by ACMA without AMCA having to explain why such an order is issued.

Separation of church and state, anyone?

Despite his conservative, fundamentalist Catholic views, and right wing conservative political views, he and his wife arranged to have a surrogate mother by egg donation, with the procedure performed in New South Wales. Such surrogacy arrangements were illegal in his home state, and the state of his Senate Seat, Victoria. Not to mention that such a procedure anywhere goes against the Papal decrees of John-Paul II and Benedict XVI.

This man wants censorship based on an ill-informed won’t-someone-think-of-the-children mentality, justifying it on the thinest of premises. The very same man who has, despite the deep conservative fundamentalist Catholic beliefs, evaded one set of laws by having the procedure done in another state and yet use his vote to overturn the wishes of the Northern Territory because euthanasia is a “dirty” word in fundamentalist Catholicism.

For now, Conroy wants to protect children from seeing images that have been refused classification, and yet there is no transparency as who decides this or exactly how it is to be done. Even the “list” of URLs which have been deemed to contain material which is Refused Classification is to be kept secret. Despite what Conroy wants, the horrible truth is that children will continue to be abused - with the Catholic Church still being the biggest institution offending, and protecting offenders). Internet content that is currently available with a classification will inadvertently be reclassified as RC mostly due to some fundamentalist viewpoint objecting for no other reason than their belief that it should be offensive, or because a site has been hacked and redirects to a site that sells sex toys or R18+ DVDs.

How long is it before ideology or political or social commentary is deemed to be “Refused Classification”, with the author or authors none the wiser as to who complained and under which grounds the complainants believe the material is RC? This has already been done. The parody site StephenConroy.com.au has been removed by auDA and has the strong stench of political interference.

We can only hope that the bill, and Conroy’s and the Government’s plans are scuttled. And then hope Conroy doen’t introduce it as policy as a back-door method to get around the law.

There is something you can do. Write to your local MHR (you can find your member here), and cc Senator Conroy either by senator.conroy@aph.gov.au or minister@dbcde.gov.au

Don’t restrict your questions to the filter. Ask about the NBN, AustraliaPost, the ABC and SBS. Anything and everything that is in his portfolio. That way you won’t get an automatic, computerised letter that says nothing. When you do get a response, question the answers, and ask again. This is where asking your MHR is important. You MHR is obliged to ask questions of the Minister on your behalf and the Minister is obliged to answer.

As it currently stands, on-line petitions are being ignored. Conroy doesn’t have to respond, and given the outrage and lack of intestinal fortitude, he won’t.

It’s time Conroy had a decent kick in the balls, or his head kicked in instead of being the head-kicker.

The Non-Secular Infection and A Spectacular Implosion

2009-12-01T23:44:00.007+08:00

I’m very, very cranky as I write this.

It’s great to live in a secular liberal socialist democracy. One gets to vote, the media is freely available, health care is provided by the state and if one wishes one can supplement it with health insurance by not-for-profit insurers that have policies that are simple to understand. Yes life is grand: almost a state of utopia.

Did I say utopia? I meant semi-dysfunctional like all democracies.

Yes, I do enjoy all the benefits of a secular liberal socialist democracy, but there is so much crap to put up with. For example, the secular bit: I have no problems with people wanting to believe in supernatural beings or forces that has not one iota of evidence to back it up. But I do get peeved when politicians have a sudden bout of conscience or morality and convert to a religion. Why? Because suddenly they want to impose their “truth” and values as a universal truth on everyone else. For example, my Prime Minister is a “moral Christian” and has instructed his Attorney General to investigate whether the Australian Capital Territories laws on recognition of marriage of same-sex couples conflicts with his idea of marriage, i.e., no gays allowed. It's not that he hates queers, good gracious no, the Honourable Kevin Rudd MP doesn't like the idea of queers being legally married. Which is amusing because he has no objection to having same sex couples declared as de facto married couples for the purpose of taxation and social security, knowing full well that when it comes to these decisions gay couples are proportionally taxed at a higher rate when working, and receive proportionally less benefits when not.

It's a win-win situation for governments. Rudd and the Australian Labor Party might as well say “Well, fuck you. You chose your life, whereas straight couple didn't have a choice and they have children to raise so they need the middle class welfare.” This ignores the fact gay couples can have children if they wish. In Western Australia, men who are recognised as a gay couple are equally entitled to adopt children as straight couples, for example. And of course there are many gay parents who bring their children from a former heterosexual marriage into their gay union.

It gets worse: religions are tax exempt for no other reason than tradition. The Church of Scientology was mentioned in the Senate as being a non-religion that should be investigated, or lose it’s tax free status. Fine. The Senate can do that. But why stop at The Church of Scientology? Why should any religion be tax exempt based purely on an outmoded ideology? Fine, if a religion provides a service to the community and the net gain is $0.00, no tax should be paid, just like any other charity or not-for-profit organisation. However charities and not-for-profits have to prove they didn't make a profit to the Australian Tax Office, whereas religions don't. That doesn't seem fair. It costs money to comply with ATO rulings on even the simplest things with charities and not-for-profits, so that when Australians donate tens of millions of dollars to special appeals like the Boxing Day Tsunami Appeal of 2004, they don't understand that for every dollar they give, approximately 30 cents disappears into the black hole of wages and tax compliance, even though no tax is paid, and the donors can claim their donations above $2 against their income. Religions don't have this "black hole” problem and as a result any money they claim as costs is in fact profit going towards building their religion. Is that really fair?

Even if, as the Catholic Church claims, they provide services to the community that governments can't or won't, there still is a problem. Take for example age care. Your mum's getting a bit dotty and it’s time for a home. So you pay a church a considerable sum of money so she can live in a villa, ahem, flat and receive the basics. The problem we don't see is that you sell your mum's house to buy a lease on that tiny “villa”. When she dies, the age care home resells the lease. They may argue that this will provide care for their patients. What they are less willing to admit is that they receive government funding for each patient to provide that care. So what happens to the money they make on selling a lease? We may never know as religions aren't required to open their books to anyone. For all I know, the profits could be diverted to upgrading a cathedral. Religions, particularly the Catholic Church, have a habit of complaining about being asset rich but cash poor.

Then there is education. Education is a tax free environment. Almost. Books, for example aren't always tax exempt. But what perplexes me is how much money the Commonwealth Government subsides even the richest private schools that are run by religions. Subsidies that state government schools would love to have. You see, government schools are supposed to provide free education, but they can’t: there are fees for all sorts of items from extra curricular actives to buying essential items for all students. At a private school parents expect to pay fees, after all, it's a private school. Some prestigious schools have long waiting lists and parents pay a non-refundable deposit almost as soon as the sex of the unborn is known, in the hope that they can have their child the best possible chance in life. After all, why would one accept a “second-rate” education for their child when a “first class” education is available. Again, why should private schools, which are run by religions, be tax exempt simply because they are religious in nature? And worse, why should money be diverted away from government schools to private schools to make these exclusive schools more affordable?

These religious schools don't have to follow a state, let alone a national, curricula, which means any fundamentalist religion can require that students learn religious education before numeracy and literacy! As an example, an Islamist College in Perth for girls was investigated for embezzlement. Fine, but the court ruled that both the Western Australian and Australian Governments’ own rules didn’t prohibit money both governments gave in subsidy, as well as the fees of the students, from being diverted to a third party in another country. It's a similar situation with Christian Colleges: part of the fees and government subsidies leave the educational environment and are handed over to their respective churches. An internal tax, or profiteering? You decide.

In related news: today the Liberal Party (which is actually a conservative party — yes, it is confusing when people immigrate here and have to vote) imploded. There is so much commentary on this, an unbelievable amount. For a time #spill was the leading hashtag on Twitter. We Aussies were riveted to the core with how the Libs could manage to simultaneously shoot themselves in the foot as well as shove said foot firmly into their collective mouth. Entertainment plus, much hilarity.

But on a more serious note, even though the Libs are not in government, it does have big repercussions. As it stands, the Senate is in impasse. The bill commonly called the ETS, the Labour government's Emission Trading Scheme with which to go to Copenhagen, looks certain to be defeated twice by the Senate. This means the government shall have the right to send a writ to the Governor General for a double dissolution. That is an early election of both the House of Representatives and all of the Senate. The normal election cycle is for elections for the House of Representatives and an election of Half-Senate.

The idea of a double dissolution is to break the dead-lock. At present, with the worst of all possible candidates becoming the Liberal Leader and hence the Leader of the Opposition, things are looking bad for the Libs.

The real problem is that an ineffective opposition cannot properly hold government to account. A party, any party, that has both government and the majority in the Senate can use it for it’s own cynical purposes and ram bills, bad bills, through in very quick time and list them for gazettal before the next election cycle. I'll point out here that I'm neither a Liberal or Labor voter, but am a realist and know that the Liberals (in coalition with the Nationals) or Labor are the only viable government alternatives for the foreseeable future.

And this is the related bit. All the major players are fundamentalist Christians. Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister, is Protestant, Tony Abbott, leader of the Opposition, is a Capital C Catholic and major player in the cross benches of the Senate, Senator Stephen Fielding, is a “happy clappy” conservative Pentecostalist and Climate-Change Denialist.

Our highest parliament, the most important and powerful of our parliaments, is now infected with fundamentalist Christians. And all have adopted an anti-GLBT stance. None want to allow same-sex marriage. None wish to see gays, lesbians, bisexuals or transgender people have equal rights under law as “straight” people, or the same human rights as “straight” people. I say “straight” people because no one is truly heterosexual. (Read Kinsey's work, and peer reviewed academic papers on sexuality: discuss.)

It's not just me that will be affected. All minority groups will suffer. The real irony is that Australians have a long held common majority view that politics and religion do not mix. If you go into a pub, don't talk politics or religion if you wish to walk out again with ego and/or body intact.

And yet we get these fuckwits thinking they have “moral authority” to impose their wishes on all of us.

Yes, I am very, very, very cranky as I write this.

Update: 2 December 2009. The ETS Bill was blocked by the Senate for a second time. The gun is loaded, will the government pull the double dissolution trigger? The situation is too fluid to blog here.

A shameless plug for Dr. Karl

2009-11-20T10:31:00.004+08:00

This really is a passion of mine: If Dr. Karl didn't have a loving wife and kids, I'd ask him to marry me. It, however, isn't going to happen.

The next best thing, as a lover of all things science, and as an atheist, is to shamelessly plug the good Doctor's latest endeavours: another book and a first for Karl, a real punk song mixing science and his vocals.

Visit his website http://drkarl.com/

In the meantime, enjoy this:

(I must confess I enjoy the line about the so-called Shroud of Turin.)

Speaking of science…

I’m one of many hundreds of thousands of people that suffer from poly rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis, so I don’t ask for pity. Just a little understanding will do.

Recently my liver has been more of a bitch than normal. It’s has bee some years since I “passed” a LFT (liver function test), but it has become much worse. Meaning from time to time I’m crooker than a mongrel dog, despite doing all the right things, like eating well, exercising and not drinking alcohol (a lapse of a glass of red or a beer twice a year isn’t going to be a problem, yet.)

So If I’m moody, or not up to my usual levels of levity, I blame my liver and my arthritis and what the disease and treatment is doing to my liver. Thus, if I give you shit on Twitter, or you don’t receive any sympathy from me because your back hurts, forgive me in advance: it’s not that I don’t care, it’s that I don’t care at that particular moment as my back is more probably by far more insufferable than your slight twinge because you happened to be out partying hard the night before.

Nothing more shall be said of the subject. Normal transmission shall resume.

The New Gutenberg Press

2009-11-18T01:03:00.003+08:00

There is no other way to say this, so I’ll just go right ahead and indulge myself.

We are well into the age of the New Gutenberg Press. I was around when there was an internet, at university in fact, at a time when the internet was only text. Unix was the OS and C was the language. Computer Science was still a “fringe” subject at the Sandstone University I was enrolled at: or at least those who did Computer Science were the nerdiest of the nerds and the geekiest of the geeks. Real students studied maths, physics, chemistry, arts, law. Which is amusing because that’s exactly what computer science encompasses now, more than two decades later.

While I was there, I witnessed the birth of the World Wide Web. No longer were we restricted to text, or packets of data that couldn’t be viewed in situ. And being the nerdiest geeks we could not imagine the political ramifications this subtle change with the use of the web would allow.

A tad over 20 years later, and we are now seeing governments trying, and failing, to control both the web and the net on which it resides. Governments don’t like this: they are used to being in control. They like us to have “free speech” but on their terms. The Criminal Code Act Compilation Act 1913 (Western Australia) still has sedition as a crime, that is in broad terms to criticise the Sovereign (Chapter VII section 44) (The Commonwealth of Australia has a similar offence listed.) I particularly find offence in Chap VII s44(e) “To promote feelings of ill-will between different classes of Her Majesty’s subjects… is a seditious intention…” To begin with I don’t believe in her god, that her god exists, and therefore she has some divine right to enslave me as a “subject”. Secondly this law is more about protecting the position of the Government. Further, what is this “different classes” notion? I want the society to which I belong to be classless, even though I understand that in practice this hasn’t happened: to whit the plight of indigenous Australians, and the incredible stupidity of the WA Police to charge an Aboriginal child with receiving stolen goods. A chocolate worth AUD$0.70. No non-Aboriginal child would have ever been charged with such a serious offence for a trivial item. Even the owners of the 70 cents of chocolate didn’t want to press charges. Finally after the outrage of sensible citizens and journalists overwhelmed the “bring back the stockade and flog them” shock jocks’ points-of-view so that the Police Commissioner Karl O’Callaghan withdrew the charges.

Now let’s make this point perfectly clear. This child has never been convicted of any crime during his 12 year life. More than that, various legislation means that imprisonment either before a trial, during or after a hearing is a matter of last resort, and in particularly with children imprisonment is the very last resort and then only after a conviction due to a serious crime. Yet this child was locked in a prison cell for a few hours while the charges were being typed up.

Some may think “that will teach him a lesson”, but a lesson in what? That being Aboriginal mean he has less rights before the law than anyone else?

So what this seemingly minor incident have to with the web? Everything. It is true connectivity and immediacy and intimacy. That someone like myself can tell part of the story, that someone can google it or subscribe, that they can find out more because no matter how much any government tries, they cannot control the content I aggregate and publish, nor the thoughts I write down, nor who reads it. I am part of a mass of millions of digital Martin Lutherers, nailing my list of aggrievences to the Church’s door, and by mysterious mechanism it becomes available to be viewed over and over again, cheaply, and in a way that is impossible to control. I know how this much idea irritates Rupert Murdoch and News Corp. and I don’t care.

Well, perhaps not. If governments so wished, they could burn every single New Gutenberg Press they find. Except now governments themselves have a problem: how to cheaply and reliably disseminate public information. Perhaps governments could licence every New Gutenberg Press: an army of inspectors would check every piece of information that it publishes. Don’t discount this: governments have a habit of creating absurd laws to deal with absurd situations they themselves have created.

I was lucky to be there at the birth of this silent revolution, and thus in a fairly élite group of people that have seen the rise of the digital culture and of social media. By no means am I an expert, however by knowing how life really was before, during and after this new social order, I know I can survive if somehow the plug is pulled. Which is more comforting than you may think.

Well I’ll be buggered!

2009-10-26T03:50:00.000+08:00

It’s been a bit of a drought for me lately. Maybe that’s a tad of an understatement. Then…

Let’s not call it a flood. But the drought has broken. And I have my iPhone and a particular app that Jimbo doesn’t appreciate- yet. Or at least in company.

And fair enough too. It’s rude to be checking out who might be interested (usually not) a few miles away (alas, it measures distances by miles and feet), and with a few stats. Like age, height, weight in lbs (whatever that is) and a nice pic. Usually of the torso and occasionally various states of arousal of their equipment. If one is really lucky, a picture will be of a head. Nearly all are reversed as the user holds up their iPhone to a mirror. Almost a kind of narcissism; tanned, super-buff torsos are the most common pic.

Anyway, the point is that Jimbo is right; if your with your mates, put your bloody thing away and furtively glance at the hotties that happen to be within eyesight, and practice your conversational skills. Of course, as any tweeter knows, there are the right times and places for the box’o’magic to be whipped out so one can add to the feed. It’s the new social etiquette. Just make sure you know that everyone there knows it’s a tweet and you aren’t ignoring them. Common sense, people!

Now that being said, and with this last weekend being an example of what hell would be like if it existed, I divided my time appropriately with my hosts — of whom it must be said were very, very kind — and with myself. Since I didn’t think I had a snowball’s chance in a Pilbara Iron Ore mine, of either leaving, bumping into some fantabulous guy completely by random and being asked back for “some refreshment”, I thought I could occupy some time by fantasising about — let’s be honest — many of the guys on Jimbo’s least fav app.

However, the best plans of mice and men… A “hi” here and a “g’day” there suddenly became promising. Usually at the best of times I’m ignored. But not this time, just to make life even more difficult as I had to be honest about the fact that I don’t have a place to accommodate any guest, let alone one that has a similar objective to me.

Fate, if she exists — and she would be a she — was mocking me. One chat became two. Two became three. Bloody hell, suddenly I AM DESIRABLE! To make matters worse, it became time to return to my “normal” temporary home and still the offers came flooding in. A case of it never rains but it pours.

Now, just to add further problems to my sudden desirability — and no I didn’t doctor my pic or lie about my height and so on, it’s all real except I don’t give out my name in the app — I don’t have a car; I prefer public transport despite a car being really convenient. There was no way I was going to ask my house mate to borrow his as the situation is tense enough as it is.

So there I am — chatting to four guys. All of them wanting the best bits of me. Somehow I managed to tick P box off the list, late last night in fact. So only three to go. And I can’t wait. O is next on the list, and seems to be a very understanding, wonderful guy. S is from interstate on a holiday and is awesome; I really don’t understand what he sees in me. Finally is C. Not as easy as it appears as C, although the most enthusiastic of all, is just starting out; experimenting I suppose at a later stage than most.

My “mantra” these days mainly is to make sure I don’t set myself up for a fall. If it all falls flat on its arse that’s fine. These things happen and all that. Yet I must talk a bit about P.

P wasn’t sure, even though quite close by. That’s understandable as chatting via text doesn’t give all the picture of a person. And I didn’t mind if nothing happened; I was annoyed by the excuses though. Not the “my mum’s coming home any minute now” kind of rubbish. It was more the lack of pride or self esteem “I’m not good enough for you. You won’t like me if you see me” kind of excuses. They are forgivable and human. However I wasn’t going to let that bother me; P wasn’t going to be a conquest or there for pity sex. Not at all. My mindset is firm; I won’t do anything the other party doesn’t want. No means no.

So I am glad that P gave me the green light. It was wonderful. He was wonderful. My drought has been broken and P has given me so much self confidence; I may be broken but for real people that doesn’t matter. Those that put down a little bio that they are this, that and the other, 6 foot 9 and 115 pounds with gym fit and very muscular body wanting same be warned: that is so transparent that it would be little wonder if others ignored you because being the Adonises you all are, you are unobtainable, or because you’re full of shit. Alternatively someone may engage with you, chatting along and feeding you lies, leading you on. That would be fun; I don’t seem to have the time. At least P is a real person and wasn’t like 2 minute noodles.

Wish me luck with O, S and C!

I love a good parade.

2009-10-23T19:50:00.006+08:00

I've been wooting it up lately. By wooting it up I mean going into Northbridge and watching people having a good time. Or joining up with some of the Perth Twitter élite; eating, drinking and being a-tweeting. Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow you may diet and all that stuff. #TapasPTUB at Harry’s Bar was a success, as was #ItsAllAboutThePieTUB (thanks @MrsMacs, @dragonflyspark & @freocookster for the #TexMex pies - scrumptious!) It’s fun having a lemon, lime & bitters while watching people get drunk. Honestly.

Coming attractions - non-Twitter related - is the Pride “Homecoming” Parade; Perth’s biggest social event. No, really. More people watch the parade than the Christmas Pageant (take that, you breeders!) Bigger than any equivalent Festival in the world, bar the Sydney Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras. So if you’re near Perth (a relative term), come and see the real thing come and see. Saturday 31 October 2009. 20 years of solidarity for one night of freedom and one helluva party afterwards. Good luck getting tickets to the Party, Ladies and Gents and Inbetweeners. But for everyone else, make sure you get in early along the route (that’s pronounced “root” here in Australia, for my American and Canadian friends) along William Street and James Street in Northbridge.

I myself will be attending a pre-march drinks party (Champers and GnT, or rather LLBs for me) before wandering across to watch the wonder that is the Dykes on Bikes and the Perth Marching Boys doing their stuff.

In other news: spring has sprung. We had a corker of a few days maxing out near 40°C (104°F for those that are Metric challenged). The natives are in full bloom and there is a danger that manufacturers of tissue paper will make huge profits as they drive the price of their prissy boxes up to cater for the sudden load of hay fever and the subsequent flying snot. Not being a hay fever person, it amuses me to see such a preponderance of proboscises snorting and sneezing their way through the day, it makes me glad of three things. That I don’t have hay fever, I’m immunised against Influenza A Pandemic H1N1, and it won’t be long before the long, hot days and insanely hot nights are here. Well, hopefully none of the latter as the Freo Doctor should sort that out. And with that means by day the beach, and by night the beer garden of some pub - with a tasty lemon, lime and bitters - watching my mates turn into a drunken mess. Oh the fun times of being a tee-totaler.

Speaking of fun times, I thoroughly recommend couch-surfing. Honestly. It means I get to pay for not being homeless for the time being. But don’t worry, as soon as I find a suitable home, I’ll be grabbing it with both hands and making it mine. That could be some time as the Western Australian economy is popping champagne corks again and speculators run amok in the stock exchange buying up anything that can be dug up, pumped, sucked, compressed or distilled and sent in ships bigger than an intact “Exxon Valdez” to China. It’s good in a way; the Aussie Dollar is at record highs, almost at parity with the US dollar, and making every Aussie’s dream of a cheap flight to Bali a reality. The bad news is that anything that is exported, due the the crap value of the US Dollar, doesn’t make the books look that amazing. What arse-head decided that contracts for exports should be decided in US Dollars? Why should we negotiate in a nation’s currency when that nation has become a byword for sub-prime? Maybe we should do what the Chinese government has been doing for ages - devalue the currency, but in our favour! What a fiendishly fabulous plan. We would have to put off the next plan to fly to Bali to buy cheap, pirated DVDs. However in these uncertain economic times we need to tighten our belts *cough-bullshit*. Sorry, hay fever.

The good news is my footy membership renewal pack arrived yesterday. The really, really good news is that I have a chance to win a holiday in Mauritius before it disappears under the globally warmed Indian Ocean. Global warming caused mainly from all that stuff that’s been dug up, pumped, sucked, compressed or distilled being converted into trillions of tonnes of carbon dioxide gas. Still it’s good to know that I have a chance to visit the place, speak some creole of French and English, and leave with a few good memories and photos so that I can tell the children of the “whatever” generation I have proof the place existed. On second thoughts, that’s just wrong. The “whatever” generation have become so lazy “whatever” is now simply a “meh”, if one is lucky to get anything at all.

As the sun sets on the Empire, the Empire wants to strike back.

2009-10-20T03:38:00.005+08:00

After yesterday, (Monday, Australian time), the Battle-lines were drawn up between Murdoch (NewsLtd/NewsCorp, News.com.au) and Taxpayer funded independent Public Broadcasters (the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and the British Broadcasting Corporation).

(Watch/read “End of the Free Ride.”)

MediaWatch recently celebrated its 20th birthday - the report that reporters dread for it is without fear or favour, and never afraid to bite the hand that feeds it (the ABC). Always controversial, insightful and with humour when required, reporting on the industry of (Australian) journalism.

One highlight of the 20 years of MediaWatch was a political episode of what became known as the “Cash for Comments” scandal; radio jocks being paid by big corporations to comment favourably about them or their industries, without telling their listeners about any comment being an advertorial. Strident critics had become fervent admirers.

The political and industrial fallout was nuclear: without MediaWatch, I doubt anyone would know the murky, grimy, greasy-palmed world in which journalism operates, and why nations like the United Kingdom and Australia need a publicly funded independent news source that is globally respected for its impartiality.

Murdoch may want the BBC and ABC to stick to radio and television, but in this brave new world of free news content, it’s important that the BBC and ABC at least match what NewsLtd/NewsCorp can do online, and provide it for free. After all, in Australia the ABC’s tagline has been for 2 decades “It’s YOUR ABC.”

I am serious, and don’t call me Shirley!

2009-10-14T02:04:00.001+08:00

Surely you can't be serious…

The Australian Labor Party in Western Australia is becoming both a joke and on the nose. It lost the unlosable election; a young, charismatic Premier at the height of his powers in the middle of a mining and industrial boom, with hand-picked high profile local celebrities verses a tired old conservative deposed leader with a team of conservative players that really didn't like their “captain” much.

Worse, the conservatives had a proven formula of losing elections; Colin Barnett had demonstrated this before.

But Carpenter, or “Carps” as the local rag like to call him, made two horrendous mistakes. Firstly he allowed his “team” to talk to disgraced former Premier and criminal Brian Burke, and then after fixing that blunder called an early election.

If there is one thing people hate more than compulsory voting, it’s having to endure an election campaign before the government’s term is due. And Labor lost, after a coalition of independents, Nationals and the Liberals formed.

But one could be forgiven if Labor learned any lessons. For example, prior to the election, Labor wanted to reform shopping hours. Instead of businesses being forced to close their doors at 5pm in most cases, Labor was committed to deregulation of shopping hours.

That was in the good ol’ days before the glitch in credit costs to banks.

Now in opposition, Labor have made themselves as popular as roast pork in a synagog by using the childish argument ‘you didn’t help us push reform through, so we’ll block yours ,nah, nah, nah, nah’ and using silly words like ‘mandate’ and ‘community standards.’ Um, Labor, you lost the election, and you say you have a mandate?

Even when the Premier offers a compromise, the leader of the opposition — and of Labor — the silly old school teacher Eric Ripper comes back with a haggling nightmare of “well, you can extend trading hours by one more hour, if you agree to our terms.”

Eric Ripper, excitement machine, dynamic powerhouse, completely un-gormless non-twit.

Now I don’t want to end on a sour note, so I admit I’m not a Hawthorn fan. However, Jordan Lewis could make me turn — if only he kicked for the other “team!"

Science and scientists aren’t trusted anymore

2009-10-08T20:04:00.005+08:00

Science and scientists aren’t trusted much anymore. Nor are doctors or most professions which have to deal with science — except technology. I'll get back to that.

I don't blame those that think what their GP says is a load of crap. Or that a public think that a bunch of be-goggled, white lab coated boffins have to say on this, that or the other. Or they'd rather get there informed opinion from a naturopath, psychic, astrologer or fraudster. I don't blame them one little bit.

How did this yawning schismatic chasm of trust come about?

In a time before mine, whatever a man in a white coat said was true. How could it be not, he’s wearing a white coat.

A Nazi Officer, Adolf Eichmann, said in his defence that he simply took orders. “Why me? Why not the local policemen, thousands of them? They would have been shot if they refused…”

This prompted Stanley Milgram’s (in)famous 1961-1962 experiments, and 1963 paper “Behaviorial study of obedience.” (Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol. 67.) Simply put, a very high percentage of people will do as they are told, despite seeing the results of what they are doing, when told by a person in authority.

Prior to this revelation, our societies believed in science. Science had won the war, and now chemists were making stuff that killed bugs more efficiently and helped crops grow in impoverished soils. More importantly in the US and Western Europe, science was in a struggle to win the Cold War.

By the time 1970s came along. Environmental Science was becoming respectable, and not some crazy hotchpotch of ideas. Various chemicals that companies said were safe were, in fact, toxic — if not carcinogenic — to humans. Names like organochlorines and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were the catchwords of unexplained tumours, animal deformities and deaths, and all-round general nastiness.

Big companies that were trusted brand names were now the enemy.

I don’t blame anyone for being even a little hysterical after finding out a chemical company knew that something it produced caused cancers or, worse, deaths.

What a bunch of irresponsible scientists!

Medical science seemed to be no different. General Practitioners treated patients with indifference. Often whatever was wrong with little Johnny was put down to a virus. It didn’t matter what virus. But these new-fangled antibiotics will help (which for viruses, of course, they don’t).

And like the subjects of Miligram’s experiments — doctors wore white lab coats after all — people were content with whatever diagnosis the doctor gave, and the prescription. Besides, doctors were good people; they wanted to help humanity.

Yet as medical science progressed, General Practitioners didn’t, or wouldn’t. Residents were too busy and Consultants too set in their ways, or too busy teaching. This didn’t apply to every practicing doctor, of course, but you get the idea.

By the mid 1960s, the younger generations were watching or reading about their Rock & Roll heros visiting mystics, gurus or other eastern teachers. It seemed logical that western medicine was failing, while eastern medicine seemed to be more natural and had a history of thousands of years.

More “westerners” started putting their trust in eastern or alternative practices (even if some of these practices could be debunked very easily, or were nothing more than scams by unethical, greedy persons). It just seemed more logical that if traditional Western Medicine couldn’t cure cancer, then anything that claimed to be natural and claimed cured cancer, then we’ve been fed lies by these people in the white coats and should do what the naturopath or homeopathist or herbalist or chiropractor says. After all, it’s natural, right? And natural must be better than something synthesised in a lab by someone in a white coat.

Well, no.

Whether it’s about a chemical that kills flies, or a pharmaceutical drug that stops epileptic seizures, it all comes from the same foundation of science; it’s not about proving something, it’s about trying to disprove it by controlled, precise experimentation. Any experiment must be repeatable — like a recipe — by other experimenters. Results must be tested and tested, and tested from all angles. Other scientists must be free to debate it.

We lay peoples may not understand the jargon or the terminology. But do we understand the jargon used by alternative medicine practitioners?

We don’t have to know how an iPod works in order to use it. Or how solar cells and Albert Einstein are related. We don’t need to know how the internet works to use it. Or how Google searches the web, and so on.

Yet there isn’t a mass counter-culture against technologists. Those goofy boffins that come up with really cute robots, or a better way to navigate in the car. Even just a better way to communicate full stop. The only difference between a medical researcher and a research engineer is the cuteness factor. Research engineers don’t hurt anybody, they’re trying to make life more sustainable for humankind.

Well, not really.

Technology is neutral — until it’s utilised. We all want ‘good’ technology but not ‘bad’ technology. But the same technology that lets you navigate using your mobile phone (or cell phone) is the same technology that was designed for warfare. The technology that has you gasping in awe at the brightly lit skies from fireworks is the same technology of ancient warfare; refined it’s the technology of today’s weapons designed to kill. The technology that lets you cram thousands of songs onto your MP3 device is the same technology that governments and militaries around the world use to send secret messages; usually not pleasant ones.

So does that mean we should throw out our iPods, mobile phones, TVs, computers and stop this technical nightmare we are in? No. Just because a safety pin was invented by the same person that invented the semi-automatic rifle doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have babies; that’s absurd.

Today more chemicals are tested more rigorously than ever. Over longer time-spans, and the ecological effects are a priority rather than a side-effect.

Medical researches have better understandings and better tools than ever before. They aren’t blindly searching using the hit-or-miss techniques of the 1800s. No, they are like a good detective following a lead.

General Practitioners, Residents, Specialists even Consultants wear more relaxed clothing. They are better at communicating, better at diagnosing, and are constantly updating their skills as more understanding of a problem comes to hand.

As the last of the Nobel Prize functions come to a close, it’s wise to take another look at science with an open mind — after all, that’s what scientists do when they look at our world.

Jack Evan’s Funeral

2009-10-05T22:23:00.012+08:00

I don’t like funerals. But they have a purpose, if not sombre or morbid, to let the family know that we that are left remember them, and are there for comfort.

The funeral will be held Tuesday 13th October at Pinnaroo Valley Memorial Park.

View Larger Map

Vale, Jack Evans.

2009-10-04T10:47:00.002+08:00

Sadly, a friend and mentor, Jack Evans, died in his Waneroo home on Friday, aged 80.

I will miss him. Much Sympathy is extended to his family and friends.

You can read Andrew Bartletts’s obituary to find more about Jack and his achievements on the Australian political scene.

Swine flu and vaccination debates.

2009-10-04T10:45:00.001+08:00

Nothing makes me more angry than deliberate ignorance. If someone doesn't understand, it’s natural to ask questions. Not asking questions is the road to ruin.

A group that calls itself the Australian Vaccination Network doesn’t ask questions, they don’t trust evidence based science. The AVN should be called the Australian Anti-Vaccination Network. The AVN mouthpiece believes her own children had whooping cough, but didn't suffer. One of her children, she claims, was cured using a homeopathic vaccination.

Excuse me? Homeopathic vaccination? A dose of water on a bit of sugar is vaccination?

Read this Whooping cough death on NSW north coast or perhaps this Parents guilty of manslaughter over daughters eczema death

Whether it's an unnecessary death due to pertussis (whooping cough) or an agonising death due to homeopathic treatment of eczema by parents “who should have known better,” let there be no doubt that now the Influenza A (H1N1) vaccine is available (to Australians at least) especially health workers, the young, old and vulnerable; I’m getting my 1st shot this coming Friday.

If someone of the AVN ilk has a question, then they should consult an epidemiologist, or at least a GP. Well researched, peer reviewed articles also have a place; Vaccines and autism: a tale of shifting hypothesis. Not some bunch of scare mongers’ or conspiracy theorists’ web pages and blogs.

As one tweeter put it, “My view: the argument, no vacs in case of side effects, is like saying no seat belt ever for fear of drowning trapped in car underwater.” Well said, @DrMobs.

Living with the Ex. Why?

2009-10-04T10:43:00.001+08:00

So it’s over. Move on! Well, sometimes it's not that easy. Take me (please). I'm a nice guy — no, I'm a lovely guy, yet after 3 years of happy togetherness, it all fell apart. (I can hear the “awws.”)

Problem is I have no where to go. The rabid mining boom in Western Australia had left not only a housing shortage, but a rental market squeezed harder than a US bank. Then, just as we thought the bubble had burst and the world was heading for economic ruin, things actually improved. Affordable accommodation pretty well meant buying a cardboard box. And it hasn't improved since — the boom didn't pop — it merely took a breather.

So here I am, part renting a room from my ex, part couch surfing and part house sitting.

$700 million well spent.

2009-10-04T10:41:00.001+08:00

It's not very often politicians from all sides of the political spectrum share a small tent with standing room only and have more ribbon cutting scissors than there are spectators, but the completion of the Kwinana Freeway extension and Forrest Highway was an exception. Now commuters from Mandurah or even Bunbury can do so on without the lights slowing them down. Money well spent, since the commuter trains from Mandurah or Bunbury are faster and probably cheaper than driving a car. Perhaps the $700 million could have been spent on, I don't know, housing? Hospitals? Schools? Vaccinations? Just a thought.

Mind you, the sojourn to Bunbury during the week was not only wonderful, it was a stress free time for the driver (even if she did find it too easy to speed!)

Gay, but not out (and about).

2009-10-04T10:40:00.001+08:00

I don’t own a car. Don’t have a real need for one. Perth’s public transport system — despite it’s detractors — is better than any city in Australia, including Melbourne. The trains don’t need special operators to get disabled passengers on and off at stations, and nearly all the buses are ACROD rated so again any disabled person can light and alight with ease.

With a station a 10 minute walk away (or the next at 20 minutes, and twice as many trains), there is no excuse not to use public transport. Planing is easy on Transperth. I can look up timetable information from my iPhone when out and about. The real question is “why am I not getting out and about with my fellow movers and shakers?” Well, one answer could be that when I want to go to The Court, my ex has arranged to meet a date there. That would be awkward. “But wait, there are other gay or gay friendly pubs, clubs and bars” protesteth you. Yes, it’s true — gay friendly pubs are everywhere in the ’burbs. Though I’m protesting back; I don’t mind taking public transport to where-ever someone wants to meet up, but please do me the courtesy and not assume I’ll take a taxi for your convenience. Besides, I need to save up some money. The rental costs for we semi-homeless is ridiculously high.

Health-care, or: why I just don’t understand.

2009-10-04T10:38:00.002+08:00

I’ve grown up in a society of universal healthcare. Hell, it’s more than that, it’s a system of welfare. A safety net. If you are part of the “working poor,” or unemployed, or disabled, or retired and pensioned, the Government – that is taxpayers — pick up the tab; for hospitalisation, for surgery and for most medications, and so on. Nearly every reasonable Australian thinks it’s fair. In fact, the welfare system goes beyond the low income earners. Even middle-high income earners can receive benefits for their children. The more children a family has, the higher the benefit for each successive child. Until recently we even had a “baby bonus,” a once off payment for parents for each child to overcome the “greying” of society. That is when these bubs become working citizens, their taxes are helping to pay for their parents pension.

It’s not only an Australian phenomenon; many other countries are “welfare states.” Canada, New Zealand, most European Union Nations like the United Kingdom, France, Germany.

But I don’t understand why some Americans would oppose a universal health care system. What’s the problem? Has the American health insurance industry (Australia’s health insurance industry is subsidised and heavily regulated) wormed its way into the ears of Congressmen and Senators and told them that such welfare and safety nets are intrinsically evil? That the reason for the Holocaust is because Hitler wanted health reform? That any health reform is a form of socialism and as such is incompatible with democracy?

For the record, last time I checked Australia, Canada, France, New Zealand the UK, etc., were all healthy, robust democracies. Australia even managed to avoid the dreaded recession, and posted surpluses in the Current Account and Trade Account. Our only problem is the tumbling value of the USD$, Euro€ and UK£ with a rising Australian AUD$. That and the federal parliament gearing up for a democratic election.

So please, anyone, tell me what the problem with these “You lie!” health reform deniers is all about?