@Arcane Sandwich,
Geologically, continents are temporary platforms partly above sea level. Biologically, continents are big petri dishes for life to escape water logging... in places, of course.

Having their own whole continent each may be why attempts to unite NZ and AU into one country have so far failed. The rest of the world and D. Trump couldn't stand one country owning two whole continents at once.

Just a thought.

Smile sideways

Argentina also has a large beef cattle industry. — Wayfarer

I'm against the oppression of cattle, even as an Argentine. At some point, we all stop being adolescents and we become men and women instead. It is not ethical to oppress non-human beings that are capable of suffering.

Australia is not a continent, the continent is Oceania.

@Wayfarer,
Do you imagine/think that the USA would convert to metric if we and the few other contrary countries converted to driving on the wrong side of the road like Norway, or whoever it was, did in "recent" history? Donny T. could put a tariff on imported measurements then. It could work like a worldwide GST or VAT on everything.

@Arcane Sandwich,
Mmm! Everybody has the right to correct/rewrite history in their own "image". So no argument and no agreement on the continental debate.

paternal but not superior smile

Here's the top 3 Australian movies of all time, as far as I'm concerned:

1) Mad Max
2) Outback Vampires
3) Crocodile Dundee

Do you imagine/think that the USA would convert to metric — kazan

The US seems awfully backwards when it comes to metrics. And also their currency system is dreadful, considering how basic the US dollar is. Trump just banned pennies, about the only practical decision he’s capable of making.

The US seems awfully backwards when it comes to metrics. — Wayfarer

But there's something else that everyone gets backwards, including myself, until very recently: how to correctly think about space in geo-political terms. Here is how I would explain it to someone of your philosophical knowledge:

Earth, as a planet, has four hemispheres: Western, Eastern, Northern, Southern. Yet there are only two poles: the North Pole, and the South Pole. There is no West Pole. And there is no East Pole.

Think about it. Important consequences can be derived from these facts, concerning the very nature of geological poles.

So what's the problem with the electoral reforms?

Independents would have a cap of $800 000 on their spending, while parties would have a cap of 90 million.

Yep, it's an attempt to fix the rejection of both major parties by rigging funding rather than by addressing the issues that have led to voters rejecting them.

Simple solution.
Have a "Keep the Bastards Honest" party with at least 2 alternating ( one comes up each senate term) senate seats for each state, that can't block legislation if/when the people "trust" a major party sufficiently to vote it numerical control of the senate, but otherwise can when the lower house goes off the rails .
Then the H of Reps would be the forum of legislative politics and grandstanding etc, etc. and the Senate would actually be the House of Review.

Just a roughed out "gem" of a thought that needs more work/thought.

The Westminster System relies on 2 strong ideologically distinct parties to work in the lower house and whoever has a conscience to sit in the Senate. So more independent Senators, perhaps.

@Banno,
Agreed.
Who cares what the peons need so long as its a major party's elite who tells them what they can have. Not some grassroots independent with working ears.

"Prime Minister, the peasants are revolting!"
"Yes, they are aren't they."

a skeptic's wink & cynic's smile

All this tariff stuff just means we export elsewhere if the US public doesn't want to pay the tariff. The exporter doesn't pay, the importer's end consumer does. If the tariff is too draconian for the importer's end customers, the exporter finds alternative markets which smart exporters are/should be doing constantly. Egg baskets are never perfectly designed.
Unless Donny says otherwise, of course.

Parthian shot smile

China and India will happily take our aluminium and steel.

@Banno,
And if it's "profitable" ( keeps the industries financially viable) to supply China and India and doesn't stand on our own toes over other geopolitical issues, then tough on the US importers and their customers. They can blame their own Don's bombas'.

smile

The US is about 1% of our aluminium and steel exports, around $1 billion a year.

But a decline in US manufacturing - becasue they will be paying more for raw materials - might lead to a reduction in global demand for iron ore, our main export.

About 11% of our imports are from the US. These will be more expensive, so we will buy elsewhere.

The silly buggers are making things easier for their competitors. But this aspect of the present madness in the US will not have much of an impact on us.

About 11% of our imports are from the US. These will be more expensive, so we will buy elsewhere. — Banno

Why will our imports from the US be more expensive unless we impose tariffs on them? Unless you mean more expensive to the extent that the US industries are unable to absorb their own tariffs on imported (into the US) raw materials and components?

confused smile

confused smile — kazan

That would look a bit like the following:

: S

:S

The 20% tariff has to be passed on to the purchaser. So US goods go up in price relative to imports to AU from other countries. So we buy less from the US, more from China and Korea.

and Argentina.

I think the goal is to shut the rest of the world out of the US market.

The 20% tariff has to be passed on to the purchaser. So US goods go up in price relative to imports to AU from other countries. So we buy less from the US, more from China and Korea. — Banno

Unless no inputs of production are imported into the US and other countries don't reciprocate with anti-US tariffs, then alternative producing countries will possibly be cheaper/more competitive, unless the US can lower their industrial costs of production, offsetting the effects of the tariffs, to a competitive level.
Or the US can diddle the foreign exchange rates short term like China does to keep their exports cheap.

smile

smile — kazan

: )


Yᵒᵘ Oᶰˡʸ Lᶤᵛᵉ Oᶰᶜᵉ

Cutting external (to the US) aid funding of all the forms( e.g. health, military, development etc.) that Donny can think of, could allow for lower taxes within the US and allow US exports to compete internationally... if their companies don't just take the lower taxes as pure profit.

cynical smile

I think the goal is to shut the rest of the world out of the US market. — frank

The US domestic market and/or the US export market?

Curious smile

So far, Donny hasn't "forecast" much change to the International Money Market in which the US plays a key role. Is he wary of China's possible reaction?
How could that affect Aus. through international lending credit classifications and rates?
Does Donny have the big US lenders on his side or are they their usual feral selves?

interested smile

The US domestic market and/or the US export market? — kazan

The US domestic market.

The US domestic market. — frank

Mmm. Lopsided economic rationale, not surprising.

Smile with unsurprised raised eyebrow

Lopsided, yes. "America First"

"America First" — frank

Unfortunately, nationalism finds traction more easily when people feel ( or are encouraged to feel) insecure in all nations/communities.
Aus. is a prime example, some might argue.

cheeky smile

What are your thoughts on the concept of a Collective Criminal Will?

What are your thoughts on the concept of a Collective Criminal Will? — Arcane Sandwich

Immediate thoughts as that concept has never occurred.

"Collective" suggests an "othering" component...rather than an awareness by the "members" of the collective.
"Criminal" calls into question from who else's point of view?
"Will" assumes a degree of intention or ignorance.

So, on the surface, a judgemental oxymoron if "Collective Criminal Will" were to be applied outside of a specific and legal jurisdiction, e.g. another nation's citizens as a whole or predominantly, or a legal convenience if applied within a legal jurisdiction much like the "conspiracy" laws of many nations.
Sorry, just a quick thought. Never given it much thought before because it can be argued ( particularly from a philosophical stance) what is "criminal" to some is something else such as "survival" to others, in a whole range of instances.

slightly apologetic smile