Science and God

Posted on December 5, 2010 by dchawcroft

I’m constantly amazed by the attitude of Science and Scientists towards
the question of God. Capital ‘S’ for Science and Scientists because
that’s the way they see themselves: as, ironically, Godlike Gurus.

But their childish attitude is that ‘There is No God’. End of story. And
they delight in mocking and deriding various believers and faiths.

Instead of looking to see what these beliefs signify they pick them
apart like strands of a fabric and deride each one.

They look into history and find many religions, many gods and take this as ‘scientific proof’ that there therefore is No God. They look into pre-history and find pre-religious rituals and sympathetic magic and such take this as
proof that religion grew from primitive fears and magic and monotheism
grew from the pantheism and that therefore, somehow, it is all proven to
be a sham and this ‘fact’ proves there is No God.

They say all of this can be seen as growing from a natural reaction of primitive, ignorant, almost pro-human beings to the reality of their life on this earth – and that therefore it follows there’s No God and therefore all faiths and all believers are in error and ridiculous and nonsensical.

So they devote all their scientific expertise to finding historical ‘facts’ of religious history and disproving them, to disproving religious documents, historical entities…

They devote all their science to ripping apart stories, stories of religion – in particular, of course, the Christian religion. And for every story they rip apart they claim further proof ‘there’s no god’. But they never seem to take time out to define the God that they are insisting doesn’t exist.

Sort of a basic scientific thing, isn’t it, to define your terms? But they don’t. Not that I ever saw.

At a guess I’d say it goes something like this, the God they say ‘doesn’t exist’: “A God that cares for human beings and to which you can pray and get special consideration.”

And it gets more and more involved but I guess that’s about the core of it. A core closely wrapped in the afterlife bit, I’d suppose:

“A God to whom one goes after death in the body and with whom one lives a continuing life after death.” But isn’t it obvious, to anyone but a ‘science-less scientist’, that there certainly is a God?

That the first reactions of primitive pro-humans to their existence was in fact a reaction to God? That to them, quite clearly, there was nothing but their own selves, their own lives, and the forces surrounding them and the events coming out of the future that both helped and hindered them?

That they quite clearly discerned a difference between self and other? And recognised that ‘man proposes, god disposes’ – i.e. they could only hope and plan and try, but ‘the fates’ decided what would exactly happen.

‘The Fates’ being manifestations of ‘God’ or ‘the other’.

Seeing ‘the other’ as manifold was easy because that’s how nature presents to us, that’s how nature is: fire, flood, wind, sun, war… So it was easy enough for primitive people to populate their worlds with many gods: a god of fire, a god of water, a god of lightning, a god of war… Not fictions, but merely sensible appreciations of facts of nature. Where’s the silliness? The untruth?

In believing you could appease this God? Yes. To us this is plainly a silliness, a misconception, a stupidity, a nonsense. But why? When cause and effect are not clearly understood. When it seems plain that only sentience causes things to happen. Then doesn’t it follow that all things that happen have sentience behind them somewhere?

And that therefore it might be wise to appeal to this sentience?

Yes. Why not? Be on the safe side. And then practice will seem to demonstrate success at some times and failures at others. And the failures can always be explained by the presence of some other factor which has corrupted the validity of the transaction.

But that’s not the real point: the real
point is that it is all a VALID interaction with a reality. The reality is there. Manifesting, to these people, as many ‘gods’. They are reacting to this reality. The reality is there. It IS.

Do not lose the reality. Do not fail to see it. The scientist says this was/is an invalid reaction and interaction with reality because it is a misapprehension of the nature of reality.

It is wrong to sacrifice on an altar or make an offering to god to achieve something because the nature of reality is such that there is no god to see this sacrifice, to accept this offering and respond.

No. Perhaps not. (‘Perhaps’ for we have no proof there is not somewhere, somehow, sometimes, some efficacy in sacrifice, offering, prayer). BUT there was the people, there is the people. The efficacy of this operation may largely subsist in what it did for the people – and that’s not something nothing.

This was the way people interacted with their reality. This was how they expressed their hopes for the future, their lamentations and/or joy for the past. This was the interface between humanity and the reality within which it finds itself.

And the scientist today says it is invalid because there is no God. And so don’t do it. And so the interface is closed. The interaction is ended. The communication is gone.

You interact with reality, the scientist would say, by doing things like touching it, making sounds – mechanically, you interact with reality by observing it, looking at it, taking notes about it and by mechanically manipulating it. And this kind of interaction is ‘scientific’ and you can amass a vast body of scientific principle, rules, laws, facts, observations and gain a great deal of power, ability and be able to do very much.

And that’s just what we have done. Do. We take the humanity out of reality and stand apart from it and observe it, learn about it, discover the physical ‘laws’ of it and work on it. And having separated the two – the warm, living, breathing, pulsating humanity from the inert, cold, dead, mechanical, atomistic physical ‘reality’ of the world, the reality within which we find ourselves we find ourselves alone, cut off, estranged .

I don’t know if the human condition is any better now than ‘before’ – i.e. before God was ‘killed’ by ‘scientific rationalism’ to (perhaps) coin a term – or any worse but it does seem to me that a world which believes in nothing except scientific observation and calculation, that sees itself as separate
from all reality is a world that has seriously diminished its own opportunities.

And is, in fact, living in an error, living in a misbelief, living in a mistaken attitude. For in fact we are part of the whole, inextricably. Not as in discrete components being part of a group, we are not ‘discrete components’, but as areas of the cloud being part of the cloud. Areas of the soup being part of the soup.

That ‘soup’ is the whole of reality. The nature of which is something to do with atoms which divide into sub-atomic particles, which divide into entities
that continually pop in and out of existence. The is the essence of it all.

According to scientists. A seething mass of nothingness continually popping into existence and out of existence and governed by ‘quantum’ laws which state such things as nothing can really be measured without changing it and two things can be connected instantaneously (‘entanglement’) over a distance. A seething mass of madness.

Now that seething mass of madness IS God. “God” is a name for IT. And who knows IT? No one. Who knows what IT is capable of? Consists of? No one. This is why the scientist does not define the God he claims ‘doesn’t exist’.

Because the God he is claiming not to exist is not a god anyone IS claiming exists. He is referring to some God that is ‘smaller’, ‘lesser’, than this God that is it ALL, Everying, the whole. If he were to define this lesser God he’d be laughed out of court, with everyone claiming ‘That’s not MY God, not OUR God”. He is childish in this. He is actually lamenting the loss to himself of some lesser God that he wanted to believe in.

Posted in religion | Leave a comment

Killing Ourselves Again

Posted on November 24, 2010 by dchawcroft

Now North Korea and South Korea are at it again.  Looks to us very much like North Korea is at fault…. but of course, they deny that.

And how blameless are ‘we’  ( I mean South Korea and us, the West, we are on South Korea’s side, right?) ?

Because if they start throwing shells what sort of good result do we expect from throwing shells back?

Hard though it might be to not fire back isn’t it true that we’d look in any international court including the informal court of public opinion, world wide,  much better, much cleaner, much clearer, much more provably and demonstrably ‘right’ if we didn’t fire back?

So that for every subsequent shell they threw they’d make themselves more and more demonstrably in the wrong – bad, stupid, evil?

And what did we hope to gain by firing back?  Start a war? End a war?

There was nothing to gain.  Nothing.

Only lives to lose.  People to die.

The commentators everywhere talking about this incident today – ‘North Korea’ did this and ‘North Korea’ did that.

But ‘North Korea’ did nothing.  ‘North Korea’ is a political concept and/or a geographic concent,  an economic concept – it is a concept, not a thing.

‘IT’ doesn’t do things.

People do things.

It was the North and South Korean people who did all this.

And it is our belief that the North Korean people are acting under duress, under subjugation by an oppressive and evil regime, are not free to do as they wish but suffer deprivation and even starvation under this evil regime.

Which is an argument for excusing the North Korean people and blaming only their leaders – Kim Jong Il and his mob.

In which case the reportage should be ‘Kim Jong Il’ caused shells to be fired today.

Not “North Korea” fired shells.  Because “North Korea” fired shells makes it sound as though each and every person in North Korea was responsible for this.  I’ll wager 99% of them didn’t even know it had happened when it happened.

We should tell it as it is.

But, we, on our side, are supposedly different. We don’t suffer under oppressive regimes and we ARE free to do as we wish.

In which case we have no excuse and you are I must share responsibility for the deaths that occurred in North Korea from ‘our’ return of fire.

We colluded – ‘freely’ – to bring about those deaths and maimings.  You and I, all of us.

‘We’ can say ‘WE’ because we claim freedom.  We claim to be where we want to be doing what we want to do in freedom. Hence we have no excuse and must share responsibility.

Well in that case we also share opportunity for doing things to help.

If we willy-nilly must share responsibility for the deaths and injuries that are caused by our side we also have a responsibility to consider the actions of our side carefully before agreeing with them, condoning them.

And part of ‘considering’ is viewing options, planning strategies, actions.

And as people we’ve never had a better time for doing such.

For the first time we can each do something to effect these conflicts blown up, organised, directed by our ‘masters’.

For too long, far too long, for all of human history, we, the people, have had to struggle, fight, die, be maimed and tormented, tortured in the course of implementing strategies that our ‘masters’ deem appropriate.

Often brother against brother.  As in Korea today.

As people we never before could really talk to each other, not within our own ‘armies’ nor across to folks in the other ‘armies’.

The coherence of a mass of people, the expression of a direction, a will, was only possible by the institution of leaders who were the mouthpieces for this.

Now we have something very different. This robot thing, this intelligent telephone, the computer – soon to be indistinguishable from a phone.

Now the people can talk to any of the people they wish to talk to.

Individually or in groups.

Groups can form and dissolve in moments. Communications continue at bewildering pace like the deafening clamour in a rookery except it is all intelligible within the  realms of the computer and the internet.

I can talk to the whole world here, including the leaders and the generals, the soldiers, the sailors – the injured in the hospitals – those about to die on the front line – on either side! On my side and on the other side!

And we should be talking to each other and saying to each other that we don’t want to hurt each other. That we want to help each other.  Hard as that is.

Lets me practical. Pragmatic: do only what is practically of benefit. Face the human facts of greed and apathy.  Face it that we don’t want to share another’s agony, deprivation, torment, starvation, slavery.  Face it that we don’t want to give up our wealth and ease.

Don’t do a sanctimonious, hypocritical, weaselly cop-out lying pretend about it.  Get real. Tell it as it is.

I got it all and I’m not giving it up.

BUT:  I got so much I can spare a little.  If it don’t hurt me too much I can help.  And I can be truthful about the limits of my greed – how much I don’t want from you – how much I am not looking to cheat you, steal from you, increase your pain and tribulation.

I can stand before you revealed as a fat, spoilt, greedy, idle westerner and admit to it – but I can also insist as I stand revealed that I don’t want your last forests, I don’t want to enslave you in one of our international mega companies slaving in filthy and dangerous conditions for a pittance, I don’t want our soldiers to come to your village and destroy it and kill your people, I don’t want our guns trained on you and your people, I don’t want your land, I don’t want to occupy your land:  I bear you no ill will!

AND – I would like to help you if I can – given the limitations of my greed and indolence and fear of discomfort.

We can expose ourselves, the increasingly hated Western ‘developed’, ‘materialist’, ‘capitalistic’, ‘imperialistic’, ‘industrialised’ west as what we are.   We are not that  bad. And we suffer, too.

Until we expose ourselves and discover our counterparts in the other nations and the other armies we all on both sides will continue to be dumb pawns, cannon-fodder, in ridiculous wars and conflicts…

It needs our solutions. It needs US to talk to US because it it WE who suffer.

Led by a PM or a President – going to war and dying because of this in this day and age. Killing thousands, bringing terror and destruction, disease and deprivation on thousands and thousands is ludicrous.  It is Middle Ages thinking. It comes from the time of Khengis Khan.

We have always been cut off from each other. That was our weakness.  And ‘leaders’ have always been able to manipulate us so that part of US oppresses another part of US.

Together we stand. Divided we fall.  And, historically, the people of the world are always divided.  Divided in the first place by the necessary fight for food for survival which pits family against family for scarce resources.

Presided over by families that don’t have this primitive imperative because they overcame it some time ago and now through the generations they simply maintain their position and increase their web of contacts, friends, allies, while you and I, generation after generation, start again with nothing but our family, our little nuclear family, essentially alone in the world versus the rest.

So we have this wonderful new tool which enables us all to come together.  The computerised internet.

We can meet, think, plan, know here.

And like the missionaries once travelled the world with the aim of telling everyone about ‘The Bible’ and ‘The One True God’ in order to bring everyone together and create a New World we should be travelling the world to get everyone onto the internet with equal access.

And a prime target for that is the people in North Korea.

We need to get through to them.

We need everyone of them to have access to the rest of us, via the internet.

So we should be dropping thousands and thousands of internet capable cellphones to them.

That’s what we should be shelling them with.

Love. Friendship. Ability. Opportunity. New Dawn. New Horizons. Greetings. Welcomings.

Posted in Uncategorized, War | Leave a comment

Renting Is Such A Buzz…….

Posted on November 20, 2010 by dchawcroft

Have you ever rented your home?

I don’t mean single man/woman renting somewhere to live for a while, a room, an apartment – somewhere to camp while engaged in the young, furious, totally engrossing business of living….

I mean family people renting a ‘home’ for their family.

I never see it discussed.

We have newspapers that are so big, even today when they’re supposed to be dying, that it takes a crane to pick one up and they print every stock market price possible, they list every horse race, they give intimate details of every asinine hollywood ‘star’ they can find… but when it gets to renting all they’ll do is discuss for a short while how the rising rents may effect the average person.

They’ll discuss, if you search for it, at much greater length how the well-heeled (or aspiring) capitalist will be effected in their profit making by rising rents (which, it goes without saying, aren’t rising fast enough for them).

But they never discuss the grim realities of Renting For a Family.

And I think most people are unaware of it, them, those ‘grim realities’.

Let me tell you some of them and try to make you appreciate the impact of them:

I speak here of private rentals. Renting from the Government in ‘housing trust’ or ‘housing commission’ or whatever it might be called shares some of these problems but not all. Overall renting from the government is much to be desired as against private.

So:

. Tenure

Every six months or, at best, probably, one year, you have to search the papers and the internet to find another place to live. Because you don’t know if your lease will be continued.  It may not be  renewed.  You don’t know. You can’t know.

Usually you can’t talk to the owner. Only to his ‘agent’.  The ‘agents’ of course are totally on the side of the owner.  Why? Why can’t they be fair, impartial?  Well… think about it…

So you can only ask the agent and the agent will probably stall you and put you off and promise you… but you’ll really know nothing until it is virtually at the end of the lease.  It may be two weeks prior to the end of the lease when you finally hear that it will be continued… IF you agree to pay more rent.

So meanwhile what have you done?  You’ve searched everywhere.  You’ve considered the hassles of moving everything. Estimated how much money it will cost to employ movers.. how much you can do yourself.

You’ve expressed interest at numerous places. You’ve tried to juggle your leaving time with times when a new place will come available.

You’ve planned ways to cover the gap if there is one… where to live, what to do with your stuff, if you have to get out and the next place isn’t available until three or four weeks later… or more…

All your plans are contingency plans… you can’t give anyone a definite ‘yes’.  Everything depends upon hearing from the owner, via the agent.

If your are on six month leases then perhaps it took a month to get settled in and you must begin this work a month before the end: you’ve had a bare four months of relative ‘peace of mind’.

. Moving

If you have to move then you are up for costs which are not in any way cheap and probably some hard work and definite disruption to the family routine which may involve disruption to actual getting-to-work.  i.e. you might have to take time off from work.. more money lost.

Moving means disruption or change to neighbours, friends, patterns of life, children’s habits, friends, favourite haunts…..

Moving often means dumping stuff there’s possibly no room for in the new premises, or which wouldn’t survive the move or which was simply too hard to move or there turned out not to be space for or which was purpose built or bought or designed for the existing circumstances/premises and which would be useless in the place you are going to: a lawn mower for instance when moving to a place with no garden, no grass, such things as that.

Moving is hard when you do it and Renters do it far more often than the rest of us and even when they are not doing it – the threat of having to do it is always there.  It is terrible.

Lifestyle, truth, promise, fairness, justice.

Some fancy words there but what I mean is that when you contract to rent a place the landlord can renege on his promise and you can’t.

How so? I suppose every true lawyer and every backyard barrister and every honest landlord will emphatically deny this.

Well not so. Take a look at: These Garden Pics

They represent the garden in a house we once rented.  We took the place, which had many drawback, mainly because of the garden.  I show you the pics because it gives you some idea of how we felt about it, the beauty we found in it, the happiness it brought to us.

The garden made up for the cracked concrete of the ancient stone place and the cement and plaster dust that you always get in them. Made up for the difficulty of having to park in a very narrow drive with walls at each side so’s getting in and out of the car was a squeeze – but no other choice.

And with two cars: always shunting in and out.

Made up for the shower which trickled cold water,  for the lack of a bath, for the cracked, dirty, torn floor coverings….

Made up for being Renters, for living that miserable life, in large part.

For the garden had three great gum trees, one of which, the pride and joy, stood right in the centre of the garden and soared up to the sky and shaded the ground beneath to offer some relief from the searing summer sun… to give a chance for some soft grass to be tended and grow, to allow the children some place to play…

A micro climate these gums created.  So that all those plants in those pictures were able to thrive.

So that on searing summer days you could ‘wander’ through this tiny garden, making paths around the bushes and between the gums and the saplings….

You could sit in different spots and find totally different views… some so dense with vegetation you couldn’t hardly see the house and could imagine yourself in the country.

It was very beautiful.

The landlord had all the gums cut down. While we were living there. During the course of the tenancy, before we knew if we’d have a continuation or not.

And turned the garden into a desert.

Destroyed totally the biggest part of what we’d contracted to rent.

Reneged utterly on his agreement.

Cheated us totally.  Remorselessly.  And with deception.  For one gum died from an infestation and he asked us if it would be alright for the men to come in at such and such a time to remove that gum.

And we said alright to that.  And he had the other done.

And don’t imagine it was any other than callous deception because had there been any desire, any wish, any thought whatever to mitigating the destruction of this asset, this beauty, this integral part of our life in those premises, there would have been some talk and some attempt….  Plant more?

But nothing.

And then it happened that when we learned that the lease was not to be continued unless we paid more – yes, pay more, for less – we decided to leave as soon as possible and asked the agent (because we couldn’t talk to the owner) if we could leave early by a few weeks because another place was available… well, actually, the place we bought ( with extreme difficulty but sick, sick, sick of this rental thing..).

Thinking the landlord was doubtless keen to do something with the place, now the garden was a wilderness looking like a bomb cratered scene of destruction.. and the house always with many problems…   then the sooner we were out the quicker he could get started, get finished and relet or sell…

And, yes, the agent said ‘yes’, sent us a letter saying ‘yes’.

So we went.

And then found the owner, via the agents (creatures of the owner) would not return our bond monies… a substantial amount and we strapped for a dollar now…

Claiming we had left, quit the lease, before we should and were liable to pay out the lease.

Now we had this letter.

But we had to front the Rent Tribunal.  True.

Why?  Because, it turned out, the letter should never have been written.  The employee of the Agents who wrote that letter and gave us that permission made a decision his superiors did not agree with.

But, as an authorised agent of the agents his decision was valid.

So: they sacked him (charming) and STILL tried to steal our money in the Rent Tribunal!

They sacked him because they knew he’d given us valid permission.

Knowing we had valid permission they STILL tried to get (to retain, they’d always had it, of course) our money.

Now if that isn’t a cynical, unfair, deliberate attempt at victimization and even theft then I’d like to know what is.

But here’s the point:  We went to that Tribunal armed with the permission, which settled the matter before it even started, but also keen to complain and air the question of the destruction of the garden.

The wanton, deliberate and deceitful destruction of the larger part of the value of the asset which we contracted to rent and maintain and which the landlord contracted to maintain.

What did the magistrate have to say about it?

‘Of no consequence’ he said. I paraphrase. After all this time I don’t remember his actual words.  But he was saying it doesn’t matter. The landlord could do what the hell he liked with the garden,  it didn’t matter a damn.

Why?  Because renters are trash, scum, rubbish, of no consequence and with no standing and deserving of no justice.

Then why did they give us ‘justice’ and decide for us with this letter in our hands?

Because of the letter of law, their law.  This was the magistrate happy to enjoy his day in the sun..  he was talking, man to man, to the agent and the business, his cronies,  people of  his ilk, those with whom he did business day after day, week after week, guarding their rights, finding in favour of them ninety percent of the time or more (we were told by others, is the general way of it).

He had nothing to say about the propriety of attempting in a court to win a judgement they well knew they didn’t deserve.  He heard them declare they’d sacked the man who wrote the letter.

His manner, his tone, his words were as one who talks to a friend and suggests you be a little more careful next time and never, ever write letters like this, which (unfortunately) meant he’d have to find for us.

Nothing to say to us about how we could conduct ourselves to avoid the rapacious attacks of agents and landlords…

So there, that’s  “Lifestyle, truth, promise, fairness, justice”.

For the Renter, all gone by the board.

. Make Your Environment Beautiful

You would think it a basic human right and need to make one’s environment beautiful, wouldn’t you?

But a renter cannot do it.

Under the guise of preventing a renter damaging a property there are laws and regulations and conditions that prevent a renter improving a property.

If you hang a picture on a wall you’ve damaged a wall.

Do you know how much money to get a nail hole/screw hole/rawlplug hole in a wall fixed?   It can cost hundreds. It could involve getting the whole room repainted.

If you hand a picture in some clever way that doesn’t pierce the wall – as we did in a previous (government) tenancy – then after time the wall around it will fade and when the picture is removed you’ll see a ‘shadow’ of the picture.

Up for repainting the wall – then the wall won’t match the room – repaint the room.  Do it yourself, save some money? No. Not allowed. They keep the bond. They employ a contractor. The contractor employs a painter at a nominal $50/hr and charges him out to the government (or privately, same mechanism privately) at $70 or $80 an hour.

What about building shelves, cupboards and such?  Don’t think of it. Not on.

Do some work outside? Garden path. No.  Do something to the shed? No.

Nothing, nothing, nothing. You can touch nothing.

You do not ‘have’ anything. It is not ‘yours’.  The Rental agreement is a lie, a con, a cheat. You haven’t rented IT.  You have rented a minimal use of it.  They want it back the way they gave it to you.

Nothing remains the ‘way it was’.  But a rented property must.

Oh, no, they say… there’s ‘fair use’ provisions.  There sure are. But how much attention do they pay to them? Nil.  You have to be prepared to fight in  Rental Tribunals and such and your chances are slim.

The renter is prohibited from making his/her environment better.

. Children, Free and Expressive.

You’ve got little children? Love to see them learning, doing things for the first time, expressing themselves? Drawing? Painting? Writing?

Not in a rented house.  A scribble on a wall can cost you dear.  A scratch on a cupboard.  A stain on a carpet.  Any signs of child life can cost you dear.

You must neurotically constrain your children from their first signs of life…

And there’s more.

What about ‘Inspections’ ? People from the Agents periodically poking and peering and prying into your home, checking off long lists of items…  great long lists… but never an item to cover things you’ve done at your expense in time and work to benefit and improve and maintain and fix the landlord’s property… never an item for that…

But enough.  This post has gone on long enough. Far longer than I thought it would, far longer than I’d like – probably far longer than anyone would wish to read.

Sufficient to say:  Pity the poor Renters.  It is a terrible inequity.  Their lives are destroyed.  Their lives are made into a living hell of perpetual constraint and perpetual anticipation of major expense and upheaval…  not good soil to grow a family in at all…

Contemplation of this does do some good, however.  It gives a faint intimation of what it must be like for those poor sods living in countries infested with war and terrorism…

We should fervently thank God, even if we don’t believe in god, for our Australia….   even those godless sods the landlords…

Posted in Money, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

CEO’s and Money, Money, Money….

Posted on November 17, 2010 by dchawcroft

Radio National (probably the world’s premier radio station), “Breakfast”, 17th November 2010,  “AM With Tony Eastley” reported that the ACTU  (The Australian Council of Trade Unions) is saying that they’ve looked at salaries in the Australian Top (biggest, richest) 50 companies.

They found that CEO’s, top executives, typically get salaries that are 100 times greater than those of their employees.

They found that in the last year CEO’s  salaries have increased by an average of $940,000 which represented about 17% of their salary.

Workers salaries increased in that period by about $3200 and this represented about 5% of their salary.

They (The ACTU) claims that the difference between the two salaries is widening as time goes by.

They (The Companies and their apologists) claim that salaries are market driven.

The Companies also claim that you need the best managers, executives, CEO’s else you lose your competitive edge, lose market share, lose share value, etc….  Lose.

The fact is that CEO’s and managers, executives everywhere have been proven in the last decades to be virtually unable to manage.

They have a poor record of management. They cannot justify their salaries even if their salaries were at the lowest cleaner rate.

It is a fact much discussed and it is mooted that the reason is the rise of the ‘Business School’ and the MBA (Master of Business Administration ) qualified Manager.

You can research and discover much discussion on this. It is thought that these ‘managers’ are trained to be ‘professional managers’ at business schools, universities and such and in fact learn nothing about any specific business.

They, in fact, know nothing.

They don’t know the telecommunications business to quote a popular business of today.  Or the Steel Business. Or ship building.  Or transport. Or anything else.

All they know is Business School and ‘General Theories’.

Because of this they practice ‘general theories’ when they are in management.

And their businesses, which need specific knowledge, not general theories, inevitably suffer.

We’ve already seen that the leaders of the financial world know nothing despite their lofty claims: funds typically can be shown, are shown, to have made no better gains under their leadership than they would have by either random selection of investments or no investments at all!

Now we find, unsurprisingly really, that the managers, the leaders, of the rest of the business, big money world are equally ineffectual, false, deceptive, ruinous.

This ‘market driven’ claim should have the price of managers falling as more and more executives and managers come onto the market…   but it doesn’t.

And it would have the price of proven good managers increase as their track record rises…  but no one’s track record rises…

None of them are any good.

So what is going on?

It is a club. That’s what’s going on.  You’re either in or out. If you are IN then you’ll get offered positions.  Self-serving positions where you distribute the wealth amongst cronies.

If you take a position and try not to do that you’ll soon be outed with a black mark against your name and you’ll not get another such position anywhere they’ve heard of you.

Managers are not placed by the workers. Not even by the shareholders. They are placed by other managers – board members and such. They are placed by people ‘In the Club’.

The divide widens because the Club is like a boat sailing from shore.. as it gets steam up the speed increases, they plot the course, they pull up the gangplank, they close down communications and assert their right to rule their own domain… and steam on, and away…..

What land, what country do they steam away from?

From us, the people. From our right to control our money. From our right to exert our authority over them.

Even from the government’s right to exert authority over them.

Does it sound villainous? Does it sound terrible? Does it sound like criminal banditry? Well it is. But it is natural. All bad things are natural.

Those who have will seek to keep what they have.

And the more they have then the more resources they have to put towards keeping what they have.

Or: power grows.

Power corrupts not from some vicious, machiavellian, deep, dark, cunning plotting – it corrupts simply because of a natural desire to protects one’s self and one’s own.

So if you are rich and powerful you’ll find work, jobs, positions, money, opportunity for you family, your children, your friends.. and then for those who will help you and then for those who will pay you……

And the tip over from legal helping to illegal theft and corruption is stealthy and hard to see….

And it is easy to separate yourself from humanity.

It is the nature of the human being to separate himself/herself/the family/the organisation from ‘the rest’.

Join something and the feeling of ‘belonging’ can quickly grow.

There very quickly becomes ‘Us’ and ‘Not Us’.

Policemen are, I think, well known for this. They live in their world and feel many things within their world that divides them off from the rest of us.

Soldiers feel this. Come back from Wars and can’t join again.

Nurses, social workers, firemen… on and on… the more you look at it the more you see because in fact it is true – we readily separate ourselves off.

And, of course, the rich do it, too.  They feel different.  They ARE different, obviously, they have the good salaries, they have the good jobs, they have the good homes, the good environments, the jealousy and envy of the world….  they are different.

So it is perhaps even easier for them to separate themselves off than for any of us.

And when separated off they then begin to refine the nature of living and working within their own sphere.  They develop their own habits and customs, their own languages and modes of expression, their own postures and attitudes.

They subtly develop a whole range of things that serve at one and the same time to separate them off and to make themselves identifiable to themselves – so that they can recognise their own members.

Those who ‘belong’ know how to demonstrate that they belong.

Those who don’t ‘belong’ can, perhaps, never belong.

This was once a very popular theme and the subject of numerous books and movies – the new rich who couldn’t become accepted – the working class boy/girl who couldn’t be accepted and so on….

Times have changed a bit but the mechanism remains the same.

And thus by a perfectly normal mechanism an overclass of leeches and pretenders is born and grows and feeds on us.

And the only way to deal with it is not to wait until everything is on the brink of disaster and bring out the guillotine but to see things as they are NOW and start doing reasonable and sensible things about them, now.

So again we finish up with the same old thing: it is all, really, our own fault and the remedy in our own hands……

🙂


Posted in Money, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

WE Don’t Need The Banks.

Posted on November 13, 2010 by dchawcroft

Big news now, the Banks.

With good reason: they make record profits, they nearly brought the world to a stop with their practices, they’ve been shown to have no more business acumen (with respect to stock/share/derivative trading) than a brick wall yet they still pay stupendous salaries and impose stupendous charges – at a whim! backed by spurious or downright untrue justifications.

Who says this?  An idiot like me without any special knowledge?

No. Many specialists in the subject, up to and including our own Treasurer, Wayne Swan.

Wayne Swan is obviously going head to head with the banks.

On the grounds of what is financial responsibility and good banking practice.

Not on a matter of taste or aesthetics, but on a matter of principle, of logic, of law.

They obviously aren’t both right.

And if the banks are wrong they should be put in prison for massive fraud.

If the Treasurer is wrong he should be sacked and thrown out of politics for virtually the same reason.

It seems pretty obvious to me that the banks are wrong.

But it is also pretty obvious the whole banking system is wrong.

The whole world agreed about that at the time of the ‘financial meltdown’ – but I believe that nothing has been done to change it.

The fundamental flaws are two, the way I see it:

1.  The banking system provides the capital for driving the capitalist system by drawing on our funds – us, the people, in fact ‘non-capitalist’ capitalists because we effectively have no capital.

2.  The capital supplied to the ‘capitalists’ within our system – the developers, the project devisers and implementers, the ‘major players’, the big corporations and such – is a many times multiple of the real funds available.

So: using our money for ‘seed’ they lend out multiples of that amount… they create money.  Read Wikipedia about it HERE

Typically deposits of $100 can create $400 of ‘money’ in circulation, causing things to happen.

$400 worth of building going on (or $400 million) because you and I deposited $100 ( or $100 million ) of cash.

This is the capitalist system.  This is how it all works.

Fine while it works.

But if it ever starts going backwards and ‘unwinding’ it can lead to ‘rolling’ disasters, failures, crashes and that’s what’s happened more than once.

Before you get too fancy you can see right there at the beginning that uncertainly and danger are built in from the start when banks are allowed to lend out $80 of $100 deposited.

This means from the very beginning that if we ever turned around and all asked for our money back it wouldn’t be there.

That’s a ‘run on the bank’ and it is always, in every case, theoretically the end because the money’s never there.

Now the point is the capitalist world needs this shonky mechanism to ‘capitalise’ or fund ventures.  The capitalist world requires large sums of capital to do anything.

Simple highway road building costs $1 million a kilometre or somesuch I’ve heard.

Olympic games cost billions.  Building shipyards, building new mines… whatever.

The world needs this mechanism.

So the world should have it, I guess.

But WE don’t need it.

WE need somewhere to put our money that is safe from bank failure.

This was recognised in the recent crisis when banks were guaranteed all over the world by governments, to stop a ‘run on the bank’.

We need that protection.

We also need protection against shark-like bank practices that are nothing to do with this underlying mechanism of financing the growth and maintenance of our capitalist world but are simply greedy attempts to steal our money.

Fees and charges.  Interest on deposits that we don’t get.  Bank expenditures that should not be allowed – gratuitous wastes of funds from marble halls to CEO salaries and handouts.

All of this stuff is wrong, wrong, wrong.

The exorbitant ‘marble halls’ are truly temples to Mammon and within that temple to Mammon you are made to pay tribute, you get robbed.

Lucky today to have your money in a bank and have it grow at all. But if it does grow it will not grow as it should have.  You will not get your fair share of the profits made by the bank.

And you will always be waiting there to lose everything if the overlying system collapses.

No. We need none of that.

And surely the truth will out, in this day of the internet and internet banking and millions of good ordinary (meaning not exceptionally avaricious, thieving, lying, conniving…) people devising every new things, software, methods, connections, abilities.

We need somewhere to put our money where it is safe and where when it is used in a profitable investment the returns are returned to US.

We need plain and simple banks.  Like tin boxes under the bed.

Let our banks be safe and simple and let the avarice and conniving and treachery and trickery of the big banks and the wheeler-dealers of the world be somewhere else.

Perhaps there’s something like that around right now.

I don’t know. I haven’t looked into it – perhaps I should be ashamed to say that. But maybe that is what Building Societies are. I must look.

Because it is obvious, written large and repeatedly that banks are not my friends, at all.

p.s.

‘The Week’  29 Oct 2010  News:  (paraphrase) The Big Four banks expected to report a combined cash profit of $21billion in 2010 – a rise of 32% on 2009.

And they scream poor mouth………

It seems obvious to me that what is going on here is plain and simple a tussle between the banks and the government to see who really runs this country – and the banks are winning….

Posted in Money, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

They’re Stealing Your Super

Posted on November 8, 2010 by dchawcroft

Who’s stealing your Superannuation funds?  The Fund Managers, that’s who.

According to an article in ‘Dissent’ Autumn/Winter 2010, by David Ingles and David Richardson.

They point out that Funds charge for fees a percentage of the funds invested in the Fund.

Not a flat fee.

Not a percentage of earnings: gains.

I never thought of it. Never knew it.

Turns out that if you’ve got say $100,000 in a Fund (and, of course, you’re adding to it periodically, via your salary or somesuch) then they’ll charge you a percentage of that $100,000

So the more you’ve got the more you pay.

Typically about 2%

So that’s $2000 per annum you’d pay that Fund for ‘managing’ your money.

If there’s any justice, any fairness, any rationality, then that’d mean that the more money  you got the harder it’d become for them to ‘manage’ your money.

Which essentially means ‘make money’ from your money.

Which in fact is a nonsense.

The more money you’ve got the easier it gets to make money.

That’s the whole capitalist paradigm.

If you had enough money, for instance, you could start a Super Fund, or a Bank…..

So if that Fund earns $4000 for you that year – a 4% return on your investment – you’d only get 2% – $2000.

Their article states that we pay,  nationwide, about $14 billion  to have our funds ‘managed’ for us.

Elsewhere you can research it for yourself it has been shown again and again that Funds return no better profits than random investments in the market.

In fact it is shown sometimes in some studies that the more management the smaller the return.

These are gross returns, I believe.

‘Net’ returns – i.e. what you actually get after fees and charges, taxes, whatever, would be of course considerably less.

So we’re spending $14 billion a year on nothing, essentially.

Nothing except supporting a certain class of people: professional financial sector managers, Fund managers, finance gurus, professional CEO’s, professional Board members, ‘Executives’, the professional ‘Executive’ class.

It is fashionable now to mock and scorn conspiracy theorists.

But here’s a fact: there’s a conspiracy to maintain this kind of robbery, this kind of unfairness, this kind of deception.

It is not a formal ‘cloak and dagger’ , ‘meetings in secret’ of a devilish club of villains.  It is not formalised at all as a ‘conspiracy’ by  those who participate in it.

They would stoutly deny that they conspire at all.

But they do.

It is human nature.

They don’t ‘let the cat out of the bag’, they don’t tell the truth, they don’t rock the boat, they do whatever they can to maintain the status quo, they preserve the current system, they love the current system, they make their livings and their lives from the current system.

It is a de facto conspiracy.

Why call it a conspiracy? Isn’t it just an example of like minded people working together?  No more a conspiracy than the collective actions and thoughts of all those who believe and do everything they can to bring about anything else at all: perhaps a prevalence of goat farming or a nationwide adoption of green values or buckminster fullers architecture?

No…  though the ‘informal’ and ‘de facto’ aspects of it are exactly the same – a sharing of enthusiasm, a concerted action without overt organisation, direction, goal – it has this distinguishing feature that makes it worthy being labelled ‘conspiracy’:

It is to the detriment of the nation as a whole and to the free individuals in the nation, it is contrary to the intent of the very thing itself (Superannuation Funds), it is a despoilation, a destruction, a deceit, a trickery and a theft.

It is to the benefit of the weak, the sly, the tricky and treacherous, the plausible scoundrel…..

And we let it happen……..

That’s something else in that article, I think, they point out that we simply let it happen………..

We get what we deserve..

Posted in Money, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Who Are These Actors????

Posted on November 3, 2010 by dchawcroft

Who are these Actors and other ‘Celebrities’ ?

Mainly actors, arent’ they?  T.V., movies.  Actors.

Lionized. Adored. Worshipped. Followed. Publicised. Why, why, why?

They are just ordinary people for the overwhelming majority. They have nothing special to say, no special understandings,  no special insights, no special abilities, do nothing special.

They ACT !  What they do is not real. It is an ACT!  They don’t do what you think they do!  They just ACT as though they do.

And what is acting?  Think about it.  We all know something about it nowadays, after all these years, all this television.

Acting is largely a question of doing tiny little segments which get filmed and stuck together later.

We all know that.

You might do all the swimming scenes down on the beach and then all the talking scenes in the studio.  In tiny segments.  All the scenes supposed to occur over a period of months, or days or years or whatever – all done the same day!

That is: they don’t even look like doing what they are ‘acting’ they are doing.

For instance: acting at being a shop assistant.

If you ‘acted’ as a shop assistant you’d do the job for an hour, a day, a week or something, wouldn’t you?

But they don’t.

They maybe do a number of short takes filmed standing behind the counter in different poses.

Then they may do a couple of scenes talking to a customer across the counter.

They may do a scene pretending to put money in or out of a cash register.

AND THAT’S IT!

Nothing remotely like actually going through the working day or even a part of the working day of a shop assistant. Nothing like it.

After acting this scene a thousand times they’d still know nothing about being a shop assistant.

What they are is know-nothings!  That’s what they are.

I just saw Bruce Willis invited on Jon Steward’s Daily Show.

That’s a show that had the President of the United States on it a while ago.

That’s amazing enough in itself, staggering in itself, bewildering in itself – what’s the President of the USA doing on a pathetic little comedy show like that?

Apparently it is about the best topical comedy parody and satire show the USA can muster.  That and Colbert.

Which says something awesome about the state of the USA today.

But okay. That’s it.  So it has the power to get the President of the USA on to it.  Where he didn’t inspire me at any rate. But that’s another story.

You can see why a topical comedy would have the President there. It could have been a very significant thing. It maybe was. Maybe the very tepidity, the very uninspired nature of it was the most significant thing that has happened in American public affairs this month.

So have the President, yes.

But why Bruce Willis?

And he was treated with even more respect than the President.

Why?  Is the world, our world, totally insane?

Well that’s ironic, if so, because Jon Steward just had a rally in the interests of a ‘return to sanity’ I think, didn’t he?

I wonder how it turned out?

Posted in society, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Cyberspace, Illegality, Bandits, Terrorists

Posted on October 31, 2010 by dchawcroft

There’s much news about cyberspace of course, all the time, isn’t there?

And the major part of the news is always concerned with CD piracy – people stealing pop songs.

And the desperate unremitting efforts of the media organisations to put a stop to this awful piracy which jeopardizes their ‘earnings’, they say. And I put ‘earnings’ in quotes advisedly, I think you’ll understand.

But listen, sick joke though that might be there’s one that’s even sicker:  What is the Government doing to protect YOUR computer?

The answer is: nothing.

But YOUR computer is prey to every internet hacker/attacker/terrorist/bandit that might exist.

In fact it would be a PRIME TARGET.

Because probably the easiest way to attack government and business computer systems is via our home computers.

When I was a student of computers we learned that the way to hack into a mainframe or a network, the easiest way, was to get access to an existing account.

In fact it is virtually the only way.  It is not the only way – we all know access is gained via communication protocols such as ftp, http and so on… but  I’d say that still the number one, mainstream, ‘front door’ approach to hacking into a system is to find an existing account.

And once in we find that accounts are constrained. They are limited in what they can do. They are not ‘administrator’ accounts as they are known in the Windows world, or ‘superuser’ accounts as they are known in the Unix world.

They are limited, constrained, carefully controlled standard user accounts.

BUT: many system operators, many network supervisors, many managers, just don’t know enough about their own networks, systems, computers, operating systems, to prevent the knowledgeable breaking out of those constraints, once they are in the system….

So: get in through a normal front door and then go wild…

That’s the way it goes.

And – where are all the easiest accounts to get into?

On OUR computers. On the home computers.

The home computer thing represents a massive, a gaping gulf of a hole in the nation’s cyber security.

There’s radio networks in many homes to satisfy the need for computers for the kids… but those networks also network dad’s computer and he’s a branch manager of the bank, a big wheel in a corporation, a security man, a politician, a manager……. anything.

Get the idea?

And the software for hacking into computers is getting better and better and better…..

Don’t think it is getting worse, that they are being beaten by our modern counter-virus tools that get touted so widely on the web, don’t think they are relaxing their efforts because you haven’t read in the papers about NASA being hacked recently or somesuch…

No.  They are not relaxing and they are not being beaten.

They are getting so cunning you wouldn’t believe.

They manufacture anti-virus software – and even charge you for it sometimes – which IS A VIRUS!!

They make virus’s that take special tools to root out, that often, often are NEVER rooted out and live in your computer unknown to you for years.

Doing what? Could be anything, could be nothing. Could be just waiting to be called into action. Could be just spreading itself around. Could be networking computers together ready for some event such as a massive attack.

So – can you see it?  Our computer’s security is a national problem!

It is not right that you and you and you…. that all of us individually have to fight our own battles to keep our computers free of virus’s of unwanted software, of attacks….

Because, en masse, we can’t, there are too many incapables amongst us and why not? Computers are there to be used by anyone.. they are not there to be only used by computer aficionados with all kinds of esoteric in depth knowledge of computing and computers…

No, they are there for your granny to view knitting patterns and recipes and skype her grandkids if she wishes….

And how easy would she be to attack?

And if she does her banking online? And Medicare? And perhaps her husband has an old account with where he used to work…?

And so on.

There’s not a million computers there’s only one. We are all joined courtesy of the net. There’s only one computer now. The weakness of my computer, the hole in my computer’s security compromises your security and together we compromise the nation’s security.

Simple as that.

Posted in society, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Kind Of Adults Needed

Posted on October 29, 2010 by dchawcroft

Here’s an excellent page: http://www.holisticeducator.com/schooling.htm

and here’s a paragraph from it:

“Mass education was the ingenious machine constructed by industrialism to produce the kind of adults it needed. The problem was inordinately complex. How to pre-adapt children for a new world – a world of repetitive indoor toil, smoke, noise, machines, crowded living conditions, collective discipline, a world in which time was to be regulated not by the cycle of the sun and moon but by the factory whistle and the clock.The solution was an educational system that, in its very structure, simulated this new world…The most criticized feature of education today – the regimentation, lack of individualization, the rigid systems of seating, grouping, grading, and marking, the authoritarian role of the teacher – are precisely those that made mass public education so effective an instrument of adaptation for its place and time…”

A quote from Alvin Tofler.

“the ingenious machine constructed by industrialism to produce the kind of adults it needed”

Well said. Very well put. Precisely it.

We are and we are producing ‘the kind of adults needed’ for industrialism.

NOT the kind of adults needed for ‘ a better world’ , ‘ a better human’,  ‘ a happier person’ – or any other catch-phrase, concept, notion you may come up with.

We are purely the product of a need for a slave to service machines.

And so successful has it all been that no one, I imagine, virtually no one, questions this any more. No one doubts it. No one is ‘unhappy’.

The slaves accept their lot and know only it and are satisfied by it.

Every year, every decade, every generation seeks for less and less and gets less and less and becomes more and more faceless clones and machine-slaves, virtual components of the machines.

The change is so rapid.

In my life I have seen it.

The change from people meeting and talking, discussing, knowing and wanting to know, exploring, thinking, questioning – to people meeting and sitting in silence watching a television.

I well remember the shock I felt when it first happened in my life. When I first began visiting people and finding them in darkened rooms watching the television with the injunction ‘don’t talk’ , ‘be quiet’.

I couldn’t understand how they could find watching those (in those days black and white) pictures more interesting, more ‘real’, than looking at each other, talking with each other, being active, being in the world.

I remember when a man (especially a young man, starting out) went out looking for work full of confidence, expectation, happiness – fully expecting to find himself wanted, accepted, useful.

And finding just that. Being invited in here and there to join the work, trained on the job.  In hard times work found for him if a full time job couldn’t be found.

Now anyone, everyone, knows it is hopeless to look for work unless you are armed with all kinds of qualifications.  You are not valued. You are not given a job. Your qualifications are valued and are given a job. Only the function you will perform is valued and is given a job.

I remember when home lots in Australia were a quarter acre.  That’s about 1000 square metres.  Nowadays a ‘traditional lot’ in Ipswich, Queensland can be as small as 450 square metres.  And ‘cottage lots’ can be less than 300 square metres. See here:   http://www.weplan.com.au/minimum-lot-size-ipswich

That’s all here in Australia.

Once Australians occupied bigger homelots. Once they had better work prospects.  Once they had more freedoms. Once they had better working conditions and salaries.  Once Australia was better and was on its way UP and better yet, in everyone’s mind.

But that upward trend has finished and now Australia has joined the ‘developed’ world in the ‘cloning’ and ‘depersonalising’ and ‘economic rationalising’ and ‘monetarising’ trends.

If must not be forgotten, of course, that immediately prior to the great times in Australia the people in the ‘old world’ – i.e. England – did not enjoy anything much at all.

Small pokey terraced houses, primitive harsh working conditions for six days a week.  A class ridden society.

Prior to the World Wars it was fairly terrible.  After the World Wars it was still pretty bad.

Hence Australia was truly a paradise.  A pinnacle.

My point is that it has turned out that it was indeed a pinnacle, and we’re coming down the other side now.

And the thing is the crushing, deadening, stultifying silence, the apathy, the lack of awareness or concern – it is like we are all opiated out of existence.

But while we are dumb obedient opiated clones the rest of the world represents the ‘barbarians’ of old – tumultuous, undisciplined, irreverent, hungry, fierce, needy, desperate.

The result seems fore ordained, doesn’t it?  But no. I think not. The world is not as it ever was. Now we don’t have soft, sybaritic civilization and hungry barbarians free to roam and conquer.

We have hard monster machines served perhaps by soft,  servile unknowing, unquestioning creatures – but the machines themselves are hard and cruel and controlled by masters of the same ilk.

The barbarians will have to try to take down those machines.

Perhaps that’s what we’re seeing now, with all this ‘terrorism’, except that the world’s terrorist crisis or war seems nothing more than a hysterical media beat up when you look at it. The traffic fatalities in any country being far more than anything attributable to terrorism.

The terrorism thing seems like a sideline, a sideshow, organised to deflect our attention.

No, the real ‘barbarians’ are just what’s left of real humanity, of real people, here on the planet. People who have not been seduced by tv and cinema and alcohol and whatever – and who haven’t been trained from birth to be servile servants of the machine – and who have interests that go further than playing with their fashionable toys of the day…

The barbarians of today don’t look like barbarians of old. They are no longer fierce bearded warriors mounted on shaggy horses and  bearing long rifles and swords and plundering, raping, killing – no.

It is strange that our ‘terrorists’ are presented to us in that likeness, isn’t it?  Afghani Taliban or Al Qaeda, dressed in flowing robes, bearded, fierce countenance, long rifle even, sword or dagger even…

A joke.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Highway Robbery

Posted on October 28, 2010 by dchawcroft

Every get the feeling of being hunted, persecuted, trapped, even robbed right out there on the highway?

By the very people that are supposed to be looking after you?

The lawmakers, the politicians, the ‘city fathers’, the police?

Yes, well you would. Because it IS what is happening and has been for a long time.

There are fines imposed by authorities that have no right to impose them.

There are fines imposed on evidence that is properly inadmissible

There are speed cameras full of faults.

There are speed cameras positioned and used where they are not lawfully positioned and used.

And it goes on and on………….

I’ve been getting emails for a long time now from an organisation called Aussiespeedingfines which you can and should check out for yourself.

Unfortunately they look like a bit like a money raising organisation rather than a pure public spirited organisation, such as a charity, devoted wholly to helping you.

They look to people as suspicious as I am to be perhaps more interested in looking after themselves than me and having found a handy little hobby horse way of doing it.

So I have never ‘joined’ them or bought their ebook.

But I have been with them for so long now and followed so many of their links and read so many of the articles they’ve directed me to, and seen so much supporting evidence on tv and heard it on radio and experienced it myself that I’m now totally convinced that they are bone fide and should be treated as such.

And we’d all benefit by joining them, getting and reading their ebook,  learning, benefiting from their advice and signing their petitions, helping their movement.

Which is a movement for justice. Justice for the motorist, justice for the public. Proper behaviour on behalf of authorities. Which itself is justice for the public.

What I’ll do here is just list the links they sent me in their last email and you can follow a couple and see what you think.   What they essentially do it point to numerous flaws and illegalities in the traffic fining system, illogicalities and improprieties.

Here’s a few, complete with a bit of the surrounding text from their email:

because many motorists there still do not have our information – http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw-act/nsw-motorists-hit-for-1-billion/story-e6freuzi-1225937846195

The biggest problem with this article is that they fail to mention that local councils have no lawful authority to issue parking fines at all – again, information that is detailed in our e-book and can be confirmed via the letter from the Attorney General’s Office that is on our News/Updates page – http://www.aussiespeedingfines.com/pages/News%7B47%7DUpdates.html – and About Parking Fines –http://www.aussiespeedingfines.com/pages/About-Parking-Fines.html – page.

The next article details how motorists in Queensland are being screwed over by unjust and unlawful fines –http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/new-fixed-camera-on-pacific-motorway-at-the-gold-coast-could-reap-250k-a-day-in-fines/story-e6freoof-1225939577403

speed cameras do not save lives, all they do is raise revenue! The following article from Sydney even has a lawyer confirming this fact – http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw-act/rta-faces-check-on-raising-of-revenue/story-e6freuzi-1225941414719

And, if you feel that way too, then we would urge you to go to our on-line petition page –http://www.aussiespeedingfines.com/pages/Petition-To-Remove-Cameras.html

And finally, we have an article from Victoria – the state which has the lowest speed tolerances in the country, has had the highest number of faulty cameras and steals the most amount of money each year from its motorists. This article details yet more faults with the Victorian speed camera program – http://bigpondnews.com/articles/National-Regional/2010/10/18/Fault_forces_speed_camera_shutdown_527386.html

Okay, that’s it. Back to me. All of that was courtesy of:

The Team at Aussie Speeding Fines
www.aussiespeedingfines.com

And I suggest you take a look at some of it.

Because we need some sanity back in this country and a good place to start would be with putting justice back on the roads and getting our coppers back as policemen to protect us rather than as highwaymen to prey on us.

🙂

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment