Archive for the ‘Thoughts’ Category
I know, I’ve said it a thousand times before, almost all subsidies are a waste of time, and end up costing more than any benefit they provide.
There are three reasons:
First, if you are getting a subsidy, you don’t have to worry so much about careful planning, or financial responsibility (because someone else – the taxpayer, usually – is picking up the bills), or whether anyone will like or buy what you produce. In other words, subsidies enourage a lack of efficiency, and the production of goods and services which nobody wants.
Secondly, subsidies are inefficient. Subsidies mean taking money off some people and giving it to other people at the whim of a politician or lobby group. This bad enough, but the process itself, its planning, administration and record-keeping, all cost time and money – which means substantially more money is taken from the taxpayer than ends up in the hands of the recipient. In some instances, the cost of assessing a person or group’s eligibility for a subsidy is more than the value of the subsidy itself.
Thirdly, subsidies (and food and clothing and other material aid, except in the most dire emergencies) discourage potentially viable businesses, and therefore discourage investment of both time and money in creativity, in business, in research and industry. The long term consequence of this is that businesses, artists, causes, etc, that might be successful on their own merits are disadvantaged.
In developing nations, local business people cannot compete with shiploads of food and clothing aid. So the West’s generous subsidies mean local people have no incentive to invest in developing the primary production, trade and industry which produce long-term wealth.
In relation to art, it is sometimes argued that good art is not necessarily commercial. Something may not sell well, and yet be worthy of support.
But who decides this? If no-one wants something enough to pay money for it, on what basis is it judged to be good?
I cannot think of a single piece of visual art or music, or a play or film that people have wanted and enjoyed, or which has shown itself to have lasting value, which depended on subsidies for its production.
On the other hand, there are hundreds of talented artists, musicians and playwrights who stand on their own feet, and who have made the world a more interesting place, by showing us truth or beauty or meaning where we had not seen it before.
My friend Neil Sheppard is one. Neil makes a good living from producing good paintings – that is, paintings that say something worthwhile, and that people enjoy enough to be willing to pay for.
The two major Australian grocery retailers are both currently running offensively sexist ads.
The Coles ad is the less offensive of the two. ‘You shouldn’t be taxed for being a woman’ it says. So Coles will pay the GST on the whole range of feminine hygiene products.
How nice. I don’t think I should be taxed for being a man, either. So why aren’t they paying the GST on shaving products, or hair restoring products?
I also don’t think I should be taxed for having to eat, or having to wear clothes, but I doubt any retailer is going to say ‘Well that’s unfair, we”ll pay the GST on life’s essentials.’
Women spend most of the family income, so it is natural that retailers should target advertising to women. But suggesting that women are somehow being victimised by the taxation system, and that they, Coles, are bravely and generously remedying this injustice is dishonest nonsense.
The Woolworths ad is even worse.
A woman is making scones. She talks about the ingredients, and then says that recipe doesn’t say anything about fancy packaging. Then she looks at her husband, and says ‘I’ve never been worried about fancy packaging.’
Imagine the uproar if the ad went like this instead:
A bloke is in his toolshed. He says that every tool is in its place, and every tool has its purpose. He adds that tools don’t need fancy packaging, and then looks at his wife and says ‘I’ve never been worried about fancy packaging.’
People would recognise this for what it was – a deliberate putdown. They would complain. And they would be right to do so.
So why is it OK for advertisers to belittle men?
Last Monday I had half an hour to spare on my way from Adelaide to catch the ferry back to KI.
I stopped at Second Valley, which is about five minutes off the main road. It was just about sunset.
I thought you might like this photo, taken with my Nokia N95:
This story about the ernormous cost (over $1,000 per taxpayer) of the US’ proposed fast rail system is a few days old. And I like trains. Oh, I said that.
But even so, it is more proof of my view that anything that needs to be subsidised probably shouldn’t be.
That certainly includes wind power, and the arts. Or is that a tautology?
Anyway, governments subsidise things because otherwise they would not be successful. If they would not be sucessful without subsidies, they won’t be successful for long even with subsidies.
In the meantime, they cost you money even if you don’t use them, and cost jobs as well.
Frank Devine, Christian and journalist, is dead at age 77. Frank was born in New Zealand (as I was) but was a genuine Australian.
Like his adopted country, he was dry, beautiful (for his character and his writing), harsh (sometimes) and big of heart.
I looked always forward to reading his next column, and will miss them, and his warmth, honesty and intelligence. I am grateful, too, for his unashamed expresssions of love for his wife Jacqueline, and his championing, from his own experiences, of the value of marriage and of faith.
He was a man of faith and integrity. May God grant him rest with the saints, and joy everlasting.
That could be the headline for a story about Michael Jackson, but it isn’t.
There is an interesting and moving story here of the women’s orchestra at Auschwitz.
In August 1943, the Austrian musician Alma Rose was coincidentally discovered at the experimental medical station. She was named as the new conductor, despite the fact that she was Jewish. The thirty-seven-year-old violin virtuoso was the daughter of Arnold Rose and the niece of Gustav Mahler.
Rose’s fellow prisoners described her as an extremely charismatic woman. The SS treated Rose with respect, often referring to her as Frau Alma (Mrs. Alma). From the beginning, Rose was the protégé of Hoessler and
Mandl. They placed an entire barrack at the musicians’ disposal for their personal and work use. Alma Rose was even allowed to exchange the old instruments for newer ones with better tone; she herself was given a particularly valuable instrument.
Through diplomatic maneuvers, Rose was slowly able to obtain better living conditions for all members of the orchestra. Each woman had her own relatively clean cover, straw mattress, sheet, and slept on her own plank bed. The musicians were able to wash daily and use the provisional toilet.
Nonetheless, music was forced labour, and Rose died before the war ended, probably by poisoning.
But music was also a means of survival, both in the sense of providing some security or (minimal) protection when surrounded by sudden death and unsepakable horror, and as way of finding hope and humanity and beauty.
Some tips from someone who has never made any money out of shares.
But I bet it is as good as any advice you will get from a broker or multi-thousand dollar charting package.
1. Unless you invest in blue-chip stocks and plan to leave your money in the same stocks for years, trading in stocks is gambling. As in any form of gambling, don’t put in more than you can afford to lose.
2. Buy when everyone else is selling, sell when everyone else is buying. The same applies to real estate.
3. Stocks at historic low prices may be a great investment if the company is financially sound. But keep in mind, dead cats don’t bounce.
4. Don’t panic over minor day to day price variations.
5. Low value stocks (penny stocks) may give high profits. If you invest $1,000 in a stock at 2c and it goes up 1c, you have made $500. But if it goes down 1c, you have lost $500.
6. Tracking stock price cycles through charting is a bit like following the racing form guide. Don’t put any more faith in it than that. It isn’t science.
7. Despite all the above, if you watch the news, think about what is happening in the world, what the weather is doing (this affects grain and exploration, amongst other things), and where the cycles are in stock prices (both general trends and the price cycle for the particular stock you are considering), it possible to make a better return on capital trading stocks than any other legitimate investment.
I never paid much attention to Farah Fawcett. I wasn’t fond of Charlie’s Angels, and when I did watch it, enjoyed Kate Jackson more.
Farah was indeed beautiful, and was an actress of considerable ability. But those are not the most important things about who she was.
Years ago I watched Brideshead Revisited with Jeremy Irons and Laurence Olivier. I had read the book as a teenager and loved it. The series was as good as the book – and that is saying something.
The climax of the story is when Lord Marchmain, who has violently rejected the Catholic faith in which he was raised, is lying on his death bed, and at the last moment, makes the sign of the cross.
That scene brought tears to my eyes. It told us that hope and redemption were possible, only a step away, no matter how far we might have strayed.
Now watch this video news story about Farah Fawcett:
Tears again, even though I did not know her. Hope and redemption and joy.
The most important thing about Farah Fawcett was that she was a woman of faith.
Rest eternal grant to her, O Lord, and let light perpetual shine upon her.
You’ve seen the ads. Invest a few dollars on our easy guide, and you’ll be making more money from home in a few hours a week than you ever did in your boring office /factory /farm /driving /whatever job.
Most of those schemes involve selling schemes telling other people how to make money on the internet
So before investing your money and giving up your real job, you might like to read the Work at Home Truth website first.
Avoiding scams is mostly common sense, and not being lazy or greedy. But there are also some non-obvious pointers, and some interesting ideas about home marketing and adsense plans which might actually work.
Google often changes its logo to match the day – public holidays, festivals, even sports get their own logo de jour.
On June 6th 2008 Google remembered the birthday of Spanish painter Diego Velasquez.
I like Velasquez. Las Meninas, the painting suggested in the logo, is a wonderfully rich image that draws in the viewer, and almost forces him or her to wonder, to ask questions, to participate in the painting. It really is one of those rare paintings you can lose yourself in.
On June 6th 2009 Google remembered the invention of the game Tetris. Tetris was a milestone in computer games. It is simple to play, highly addictive, and has probably been played by more people than any other video game.
But hang on. Important as those things might be, June 6th is the anniversary of D-Day.
2009 is the 65th anniversary of the day on which allied forces, mostly men from the US and UK, landed on beaches in Normandy and began to roll back the horror of the Nazi domination of Europe. The beaches were more heavily defended than expected, and losses were horrific.
The film Saving Private Ryan gives a frighteningly accurate portrayal of the conditions under which the landings took place.
I am not the only person to think there is something wrong at Google HQ if D-Day can be consistently considered less important to remember than a painter or a video game. (There is something wrong at Wikipedia as well, but that’s a post for another time).
Time to change search engines.
One of my friends is a dizzy blonde beauty therapist. She spends a considerable amount of time ripping hair off people’s private parts.
Last night she showed me a brochure for a new product – lightening gel for sensitive areas.
Apparently with so many people now permanently hairless down under, looking one’s best everywhere has become a major concern. You don’t want to look brown. Pink is the go.
So you smear this cream on your rectum and it goes a nice pink colour. Celebrites are ordering with confidence, according to the South Beach website.
The process is also known as anal bleaching.
But why would you do it? Who would be looking?
The Tragedy of The Diocese Of The Murray.
You have never cared about me. Nobody likes me. But I am still your bishop, so do what I say. Or give me $1 million and I will leave.
That was the message from Bishop Ross Davies to members of the Anglican Diocese of The Murray at their annual meeting (synod) a week ago.
The Anglican Diocese of The Murray is a small (by Australian standards) diocese in South Australia.
I have known Ross Davies for nearly thirty years. He is an intelligent man, and a capable speaker and administrator.
He was consecrated bishop in March 2002.
At that time I was Rector of Naracoorte and Rural Dean of the South East. I was on the Bishop Election Committee. So was Bishop Ross, who was then Vicar-General of the diocese.
It was not appropriate for him to remain on the committee after his name was put forward. But he did remain, and did not excuse himself when his nomination was being discussed.
Nonetheless, he was elected, and I was happy with the result.
I preached at the Bishop’s consecration at St Peter’s cathedral. Shortly after, I was asked to be the first Dean of The Murray. I declined, believing I was still called to serve in Naracoorte. A year later I was asked again and accepted.
The bishop and I are both conservative anglo-catholics. We were of similar mind in terms of the central issues of the faith, and the role of the Diocese of The Murray in the life of the Anglican Church of Australia, and the wider Anglican Communion.
These, and our long standing friendship, were strong reasons for me to want him to succeed.
Problems began very quickly after the consecration. The Bishop had difficulty keeping his temper, and those who disagreed with him were treated like enemies. Both clergy and lay people reported feeling hurt and confused by his behaviour towards them.
Over a period of time I raised some of these concerns with him, only to be sworn at myself, and told that I had been ‘opposing him at every turn.’
I still supported the Bishop, though often with considerable embarrassment and internal conflict, in relation to some of his public actions, such as participation in the consecration of bishops for the Traditional Anglican Communion, and at his treatment of people who did not instantly agree with him, or were slow to do as he wished.
Eventually ill-feeling in the diocese rose to such a point that I wrote to the Archbishop of Adelaide and to the Primate, listing some of the major issues, and asking them to speak to Bishop Ross.
This did not happen.
As time went on the situation became completely unworkable, with the Bishop increasingly expressing resentment against the people he was called to serve, experienced clergy leaving or being sacked, and lay people refusing to come to church if the Bishop was present.
Claims that allegations of a pattern of predatory sexual abuse of women by the then Vicar-General had been ignored, or worse, deliberately covered up, were the last straw for many faithful worshippers.
The Bishop has been largely absent from the diocese for the last eighteen months.
A number of parishes have made it clear he is no longer welcome. It has been reported that the Diocesan Council has passed a vote of no confidence in his leadership. But Bishop Davies has refused to leave until he is given a payout of close to $1 million.
The Archbishop of Adelaide has complied with a request from the diocesan council of the Diocese of The Murray to open an independent investigation into Bishop Davies’ behaviour. The investigator may then recommend that a tribunal be set up which would have the power to dismiss Bishop Davies.
Bishop Davies disputes the Archbishop’s right to set up such an investigation, and the authority of any tribunal established as a result.
The categories of behaviour which a tribunal can investigate are very limited. They do not include simply being unable or unwilling to do the job of Bishop.
However, Bishop Davies is an employee of the diocese. If he is not able or willing to do the job he was appointed to do, and all attempts at negotiation have failed, the diocese is within its rights to dismiss him.
This has been suggested before, and the response has been that this would be a harsh and unforgiving thing to do. It would not.
There is much to be forgiven. And much has been forgiven. But the question is the suitability of Ross Davies to be Bishop.
It is not unforgiving to recognise that someone is not suited to the position to which he has been appointed. The last five years have been miserable for Bishop Davies and his family as well as for the diocese. The longer this crisis continues, the more harm will be done.
It is time to call an end.
Late term abortionist George Tiller has been murdered outside his church in Wichita, Kansas.
The suspect may be a member of the right to life movement.
Left wing blogs have already begun to claim that Christians are delighted, and that this is just the latest in a long series of violent attacks on abortionists.
In fact the reverse is true. Pro life bloggers and leaders of the pro-life movement have been united in condemming the murder of Tiller, as they have been united in condemming any violent attacks on abortionists or their clinics.
I deplore the murder of George Tiller, and any violence against abortionists or their clinics.
I also deplore the far greater number of violent attacks on pro-life people and organisations (despite the fact that the media has a massive blind spot when comes to reporting violent attacks by abortionists and their supporters).
The murder of George Tiller is a tragedy. His family and his community will miss him. The attack on him was wrong, no matter who did it, or why.
That does not mean we should pretend that what he did for a living was OK. What he did for a living was monstrous.
Late term partial-birth abortion means partially delivering a living human baby, inserting a pair of scissors or other implement into its head, then crushing its skull before completing the delivery.
George Tiller’s death was murder, and must be condemmed. What he did for a living was also murder.
How to avoid being ripped off by scammers.
Don’t be greedy. Don’t be dumb. That pretty much covers it.
If an arabian princess emails you telling you she got your name from a friend, and needs you to help her smuggle $20 million out of Egypt, and she’s willing to give you $5 million for your trouble, and you reply, and end up sending her $10,000 to pay bank fees, are you an idiot? Yes. Are you a greedy idiot? Yes.
If you are selling a car and someone sends you a cheque for $2,000 more than the price of the car and asks you to wire $1,000 of that to a friend in Brazil, and you do, are you an idiot? yes. Are you a greedy idiot? Yes.
Also, don’t buy software from anonymous sellers in China.
I have some simple rules I apply to any argument I undertake, whether in person, in print, or on this site.
Tackle the ideas, not the person. If you can only win an argument by denigrating your opponents, you deserve to lose.
If the person is the problem, say why as clearly and as generously as possible. Don’t write people off because you disagree with them.
State the other person’s point of view fairly. If you have to distort what your opponents are saying to defeat them in argument, then you have lost, or ought to.
Put your own evidence fairly. Be open to the possibility you may be wrong, and be willing to be convinced by the evidence others offer.
It’s OK to make mistakes (occasionally). It’s OK for other people to make mistakes too. Mistakes do not necessarily indicate carelessness or dishonesty.
Yet despite these simple rules, when it comes to wretched hives of scum and villainly, Mos Eisley has nothing on the internet.
Here are the concluding paragraphs of an article by Kevin DeYoung on First Things:
Here, then, a little advice for the tough guys: Save the big guns for the big issues. Don’t try to die on every hill; the hills are crowded already and you only have so many lives to lose. Be courteous wherever possible (Col. 4:6). Drop the rhetorical bombs and launch the satire missiles only as a last resort. Be patient with those who really want to understand (2 Tim. 2:25). And remember, it’s ok to have an unarticulated thought (Prov. 18:2).
And for the tender ones: Dare to not qualify. Don’t pad your criticisms with fluff praise (Gal. 1:10). If you have affirmations of substances, go for it. But don’t be a self-protective flatterer. Don’t be afraid to be misunderstood. Don’t soften a needed jab of logic. And when you get an ad hominen right hook, don’t take it personally (1 Cor. 4:3–4).
And for everyone: please, please argue with actual arguments. Don’t just emote or dismiss the other side with labels. Explain why your side makes more sense. Try more persuasion, less pouting (2 Cor. 5:11). Give reasons, not just reactions (Acts 18:19).
Here’s hoping against hope that thinking adults, Christians especially, can sustain meaningful discourse without resorting to name-calling or cowardly equivocation. Christ calls us to love, which is something entirely different than being a jerk or playing it safe. A.W. Tozer got it right: “The kingdom of God, has suffered a great deal of harm from fighters—men who would rather fight than pray; but the kingdom of God has also been done great harm by men who would rather be nice than right.”