eastern us into canada -who turned out the lights?

[nabraxas]

worrying pictures on the news this am.

auxin(& all the other american members)- don't know where you guys are, but i hope you & yours are all ok.

[Torsten]

it's kinda funny to think that the most important thing for americans is power (at least their whole society can't function without it) and yet their system is so vulnerable.

Some american commentators/experts were laughing at New Zealand when their power went out for several days, saying that it is a 'symptom of their society'... I wonder what those smart asses think now

If a technical problem (ie lightning strike) can cause such a mess then just think how vulnerable they would be to targeted sabotage. In summer it is just an inconvenience, but in winter this could have caused many, many deaths (just think back to the el nino black outs a few years ago).

In australia black outs are a fairly common thing - especially in country areas. People cope quite easily. Sure there is loss of productivity, but then again we were never that phased about such things

I hope everyone is safe and the lights have come back on.

[mescalito]

It's the aussie way I think!

No worries mate,she'll be right , I reckon we're miles ahead as individuals and groups here in OZ as far as coping,I know a bloke that can weld with a coat-hanger (another use Tors'?)

Respect to the indigenous people and 'late comers' though!

[Auxin]

Yup, I'm still here

Just sitting back a few hundred miles away from the action laughing at the fools that though it was a nuclear strike by Saddam Hussein.

[Torsten]

Ha! It gets better.

What's the difference between the British rail system and the US powergrid??

Nothing really, as both were privatised and have since become overloaded, undermaintained and unexpanded. The problem with privatisation is that suddenly no one is interested in actually spending money on a communally used system. Each company only cares about how many train tickets it can sell per train or how many Gigawatts it can sell per town. How the trains or the electricity actually get there is simply not a priority anymore.

Turns out the blackout in the US was caused by a short circuit from a fallen powerline. The spike then looped back on itself and shut a large portion of the east coast grid down, including into Canada. Arrogant as the US is they immediately blamed the "incompetent and underdeveloped Canadians", but a few hours later had to eat humble pie (its hilarious to watch these sorts of progressions).

Anyway, apparently such a spike is nothing out of the ordinary and there are many safeguards in place to make sure the spike can't travel more than a short distance before it is eliminated, thus causing minimal damage. All well and good in theory, but kinda useless when no one bothers maintaining these safeguards cos no one really cares anymore.

So now you know what you can expect from the upcoming privatisation of Telstra. People in the country have already felt the effect of the power privatisation and are sick of it. And we don't care much for the private employment services either. But screwing with our telephones is really going to piss people off. I am just glad that it affects the same people who voted the privitisation guru into office in the first place.

Ah yeah, and what's the solution?? well, in europe several countries have started de-privatising some essential services. In the UK the government is seriously looking at buying back the rail system as it simply can't find a good solution.

So why is that such a bad thing? well, when services are privatised, the government gets a lot of money, but looses the steady income. So the benefit for the government of the day is huge, but shortlived. From then on shareholders get all the profits and in most cases shareholding is NOT your average mums and dads, but big business. Telstra has been an exception to this rule, however the balance here is starting to shift too.

So when a government has to buy back the service, it is usually run down and needs lots of cash to get it back up to scratch. Confidence is usually lost and competitors have moved in on the market, thus driving up costs and making the service inefficient. And in the end you paid for all that with your taxes.

The bottom line is that when the government privatises something it essentially increases your taxes, as the value of the service was built from your money. ie, your money goes back to the government and what used to be a public service then becomes a user pays system.

Go on, vote for it if you still think this is such a good idea....

[nabraxas]

anyone remember the UK miners strike?

that was the first battle in thatcher's war to end the role ov the state in running the market.

her first victory was to convince the public that the mines were unproductive/unprofitable, & should close. that was all too easy, as being nationalised industries(the very term sounds archaic now)--they had never been run to make a profit, & were pretty laxly financially managed.

it was the same w/the rest; initially on bringing market forces into the management ov huge nationalised industries(coal, gas, steel, shipping, oil, water, telecommunications- to name a few) it was easy to show a huge "turnaround" in profit---at the expense ov some labour.

as far as telstra goes--my no.1 prediction is that they'll(whoever's in) sell it despite the opposition--& the first thing a private telstra will do will be to bring in timed local calls--"to bring us in-line with the rest of the world"

no more sitting on the phone/modem for hours on end for just 40cents

glad to know you're ok auxin.

[Torsten]

further to the economics of privatisation...

the other day I was offered to employ someone who is a "long term unemployed". I would have to keep them for 13 weeks and wouldn't have to pay them any more than award wages. That means a wage bill of about $6,000 for that period. For this the government would give me $3,300... essentially a little more than half.

A Byron Bay employment agency was recently paid $420,000 (by the federal government) to keep 10 people in full time employment for a year. That means they got substantially more than these 10 people would have cost to simply hand them a cheque and let them go surfing.

In general about 5% of the population are unemployable and a further 5% prefer not to work as long as they get a dole cheque. The government reduced the first number by making entry requirements so strict and often unattainable by someone with a disability, that many simply fell off the statistics. And the 5% dole bludgers are now being forced to take jobs from those people who's lives are worthless without employment.

This has created a crisis in the volunteer community as many simply don't have the 'spare time' anymore.... and that at a time when more and more needy people are being cut off their benefits and need the volunteers more than ever.

The true value of a society lies in its compassion and care for one another and this is being undermined at the highest level.

[Darklight]

In general about 5% of the population are unemployable and a further 5% prefer not to work as long as they get a dole cheque

Having been one of those unemployables for years before I got my shit together, I'd say this isn't a statement of condemnation People move in and out of situations in life, and the notion that a persons current situation necessarily predicts their future situation is one that Centrelink holds onto in order to justify their persecution of 'clients'. People mess up, are messed up, and time out to deal with it often results in more positive solutions than those enforced from above

And I spent a few years on the dole while doing volunteer work on the committee and crews of a local bush fire brigade with 120 members. During the fire season- about 8 months of the year- we'd do up to 80 hours a week and figured we'd earned our dole cheque several times over. No way we'd be able to do that now. I completely agree with Torstens stand on volunteer work and the conundrum it presents to Centrelink or whatever they're called lately, and am concerned that in 20 years time the notion of unpaid but valuable effort will be no more than a quaint myth

Personally I'd rather see someone happily occupied doing useful volunteer work and putting everything they can into it than being ripped off by some of the dodgy employment schemes they've had over the years, providing they have the financial skills and resources to cope with the pitiful amount a dole cheque provides. Without ppl's unpaid work there is much in this area that simply wouldn't happen.

And I'd rather my tax bucks went to someone who is happy to watch daytime television forever, shit I'd give them a damn payrise if that would eradicate the layers of beaurocratic garbage that calls itself the unemployment industry and justifies its existence by claiming to eradicate a problem when in fact it just creates more. The amount of time taken to deal with Centrelink these days is practically the same amount you need to attend a 75% full time job, then they expect you to go for interviews and training to top it off. And lets face it, giving money to the poor is far less socially destructive than funding wars, John Howard and a bunch of socially approved unemployables ( ex-politicians ) lifetime superannuation privileges

what were we talking about again? sorry

[nabraxas]

that's another trick, making the unemployed into "bludgers"-- the unemployed are actually an essential part ov the economy---perfect consumers, w/no production 'costs'.

[gomaos]

Re private employment agencies:

That's definitely the worst of changes the Howard Government hs made until it took over.

Just like Torsten says further up:

It cost over $420000 to keep those ten people employed permanently (who's wages are probably lower than 40000 a year), they have to work their asses of for little money and those bloody employment agencies make big money sitting on their asses doing NOTHING.

Yeah that's right nothing, the last time I tried to use one such agency, I was referred to them, which means they get paid for me, had one interview together with a few other people, which was totally useless, and after that THEY NEVER BENT A FINGER TO FIND ME A JOB.

The name of the employment agency was SARINA RUSSO and they totally suck.

It was great when Labor was still in Government and you could go at 7 am in the morning to the CASUAL CES, and most time you'd get a job, for one day, for a week, sometimes even for months.

And nobody asked for a BLASTED RESUME.

Jeez I totally hate resumes...

they turn peole into wares, into robots...

"Let's just have a look at the resume, see what the robot's been programmed for..."

The Howard government rather pays heaps of money to these corrupt bastards instead of giving it to the needy directly... what stupid wankers this government consists of...

[theobromos]

Who would watch latenight and daytime television if everyone was employed? These are vital parts of our cultural heritage.

And using that as an excuse - I recently saw the ultimate test for a Spanish subtitler on late night Spanish television. Having to translate "Waltzing Matilda", in the film "On the Beach". Neither my Spanish nor my Oz are good enough to know if they succeeded but I know they had a damn good try.

[Rev]

Im with you there Gom!!!

All those supposed employment agaencies are nothing but acrdboard cut-outs!

Pretty sign out fron - go inside and theres some office furniture maybe 1 or 2 people but you are so right they do absolutely nothing to assist you.

Im not on any benefit these days but i still sympathise with the shit those who are get.

Anyone would think you were getting a full wage

3 or 4 hundred dollars a fortnight is not worth the shit shows like ACA and the others give dolies let alone the resulting public opinion that you are the brunt of.

I think is amazing how their thinking would applaud someone who goes out working 8 bucks an hour selling door to door crap no-one wants - or telemarketing - what a usefuless F ing job that is?! have you ever had anything but contempt for those people?

meanwhile they (current affairs) deride the people in our societry on the lowest rung - easy pickings for those current affair bullies i guess. I guess they pick on the weak cos they cant afford expensive company structures and lawyers and such things to get immunity.

[mescalito]

The only job I ever got from the then C.E.S. was when I took a peak at the attendants screen,remembered an address,rode my bike straight there,opened the door and spoke to the boss!

No resume,no fuss just face to face and a hand shake

Stayed with them for 4 years!

The government create the incentive to employers,and then put genuine people through the wringer to justify the expense of a useless,cost in-efficient service.

Not to mention it makes the unemployment figures 'look' good.

Who would put up with that shit?

I'd sooner struggle and door knock for a job than put up with the undertone that fills these places