Monday 24 August 2015

Cattle Live Exports and the blind followers of the Vegan Cult.


On the 23rd of August 2015, the ABC Radio station "ABC 720AM" posted the photo below on their FaceBook page. It was accompanied with the following interesting explainer.

Did you know...in the 1880 cattle were shipped from Kimberley pastoral stations to abattoirs in North Coogee, but the jetty for the ships wasn't quite long enough, so the cattle were driven off the boats and forced to swim ashore....
Then the replies flowed in regarding it being disgusting, cruel etc. Cows of course can swim quite ok, some of them can swim better than some of us. Funny how people from crowded Soy Latte quaffing cake houses in leafy suburbs can negatively judge the actions of people from 135 years ago as if the standards and the equipment from today were available back then. I'd expect (yes I'm guessing) the crew had to deliver the load and they had to go off the ship somehow.

Then of course it moves onto "SENTIENT BEINGS" and how their rights were infringed. The whole thread climaxed with the invented claim (among others) that we need to evolve because these days "we don't need to eat meat"

I'm not actually sure which is more staggering. The level of absurdity within the claim or the ability of educated people to swallow it up without even thinking deeply, seriously and all the while deftly side stepping facts, logic and common sense.

Saying we've evolved to a point where we no longer need to eat meat is parallel and equal in stupidity as claiming that we've evolved to a point where we no longer need to enter the ocean and splash around. Peer reviewed scientific study papers please.

If you don't want to swim in the water don't go in the water. Simple.
As for food, same-same. Its your body so you can choose to fuel your body any way you want. Eat a balance diet or go vegetarian or vegan or what ever but do you have to enforce your cult moral laws on all others in Australia?

No meat eater I know is upset or trying to guilt people into dropping their evil immoral vegan ways?
Why? Because no one cares, its your body, fuel it your way. There is no moral law broken by eating meat. No guilt to be had. Heck you can eat triple decker bourbon and coke sandwiches 20 times a day if you want to, wouldn't advise it but if you too silly to stick to a balanced diet that's your choice and no one has the right to impose guilt upon anyone.

As we've said before, "SENTIENT BEING" is a term from philosophy, not science. What definition we can apply to the sentient being is they can feel and experience things, react to stimuli. With that in mind, please remember that bacteria, nematodes, earth worms and many other soil fauna qualify as "sentient" and therefore the number of individuals with rights are being killed in their millions just to produce a kilo of apples, kilo of celery or kilo of any other vegetable or fruit.
Irony much?
 
Never ever seen a doctor say we need to stop eating meat, seen them say we need to reduce sugars and processed foods and get back to proper portions of a balanced diet but nothing about we need to evolve (mentally I assume) and don't "need" to eat meat.

Its very very sad to see educated people in a 1st world country falling for cult like rubbish that is devoid of science, logic and common sense. They're unaware they're following cult propaganda and deeply believe they're pushing a noble and morally superior cause.
Now if Christians knocked on their door to try & spread the Good Word you know they'd be the hypocrites champions of their cult and blow a fuse and the intrusion of intolerance and bigotry.
 
Irony too much.
 


Friday 21 August 2015

New Proposed Electoral Boundary Changes - Problems & Solutions

When the cry is "One Vote = One Value" and things get changed we end up with regular reviews of Electoral Boundaries. Nothing sinister to be seen. It can however cause an extra burden on some MPs which in turn actually reduces a person's effective representation in Parliament.

Here's a picture with current boundaries on the left & proposed new boundaries on the right. ( http://www.boundaries.wa.gov.au/ )

 
There's smaller less obvious changes to the seat of Albany & Wagin which are going to have serious negative impacts as well but with the maps you can see the obvious negative impacts. Three already large, overly large electorates will become 2 behemoth size electorates. The electorate of North West Central will be over 1500 kms in length from east to west. Rough count shows 13 Shires will be in the electorate. One of them being the Shire of Wiluna is 950kms from Perth and over 185,000 square kilometres on its own. Onslow also in the new big electorate, 1100+kms from Perth and 1600kms from the furtherest part of its own electorate. How is this smart?

One vote one value on the head count yes. In reality on the ground and on the Parliament floor no. How can one MP service all that area effectively? That's close to 900,000 square kilometres of environment issues to hover over. That's 900,000 square kilometres of industry to hover over. Then there's overblown problems of delivering education, policing, health, electricity, water and many state based social services. Where somehow the far flung constituents have an equal vote to the residents of the electorate of Cottesloe but on the ground the people of the remote area suffer.

The cost of getting services to all the people of North West Central is one thing, the range of services is not equal to the electorate of Cottesloe who also enjoy many more amenities from the tax payers purse and only covers 38 square kilometres opposed to the proposed  North West Central's 900,000 square kilometres.

The disparity and inequity is every bit as mammoth as the size and remoteness that causes it.

One Vote is One Value only in the seat arrangements in Parliament on a per capita basis.
No public transport in Onslow, Carnarvon, Meekatharra, Wiluna. You can drive a cab all around the Cottesloe electorate far cheaper than you can drive you own car 1% of the way around the North West Central boundary.


ONE VOTE ONE VALUE ? NOT BY A LONG SHOT
 
So yes there is a set of solutions on offer. Offer no service in the electorate of Cottesloe that cannot be offered in the electorate of North West Central to an equal or greater standard. Great solution but won't be introduced. We all know that.

Maybe the only solution we need is a smart solution. But it will require lateral thinking and on those grounds many won't get their head around it. It would face opposition but it would raise the standard of effective representation of the far flung people of the proposed new North West Central and yet maintain the metro area's cherished One Vote One Value aspect.


The large electorates maintain one vote in the seat of parliament they occupy but the bigger electorates have 2 or more MPs elected working as a team, representing their constituents more equitably than they currently can. Yes electors on election day elected not a candidate but elected 2 or 3 candidate team of MPs who collectively have only one vote.


That or we see MPs rotated so the Premier for example has to spend one term as the members for Eyre etc. No another nice thought that would never happen.


Imagine 2 or 3 MPs covering the proposed new North West Central all from the same elected party. Gets it down to around 300,000 square kilometres each, still far greater than Colin Barnett's 38 square kilometres but a vast improvement and allows the MP to have only 4 shire councils to liaise with instead of 13+.

 
Tell me it can't be done & I know I'm talking to a barrier to equity in representation in the Western Australian Parliament.

If you're on social or not, copy the link, spread the concept and maybe, just maybe a political party will see the merit & run with it