Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Someone has an agenda to push (Score 1) 342

I do agree with you on that, but you can't have it both ways. It either raised no money and wasn't effective, or it was hurting people in exactly the right way.

The point of raising people's power bills wasn't to make them hot in summer, it was to make them consider new tech such as the air-conditioners that the power company can turn off suburb by suburb 10 minutes at a time to manage peak load. This stuff is coming thankfully and it should help end gold plating.

I guess I must concede the point that it wasn't effective, because the pressure should have been put on suppliers to make these changes, not allowed to be passed straight to struggling families.

Hoping that you're staying on top of your power bills,

Aaron.

Comment Re:Cost (Score 1) 550

It's funny what some people consider an unavoidable expense.

My mother recently looked into this, it was $3000 per eye for laser surgery, which she was going to do until she heard that they can now replace your lenses whollus-bollus for $800 an eye.

It was an even scarier procedure, but it worked a charm and she can now read (which she does a lot) without glasses and is basically 20/20.

Comment Re:Dissappointed (Score 1) 291

When the pendulum swings the other way you probably have a great deal of tolerance for supposed electoral mandates.

You may be correct, but I've yet to see it happen. Tony Abbot's mantra of "we have a mandate" is almost as scary as the "we don't comment on operational matters" one. They both seek to treat the entire electorate, including a proportion of their own voters I'll bet, like they are completely stupid. You can vote Liberal but still think it's inappropriate for someone else to control who you can and can't marry. Tony Abbot would stand up and say he has a mandate on that too - in fact I'm surprised he hasn't.

The moral certitude you indulge has you reaching for some thread that would grant immunity to your agenda despite election results.

I don't think I was indulging or attempting to push any agenda and if I was it certainly wasn't to depose the democratically elected government of my country, merely to point out the sheer numerical weight AGAINST the idea of having a clear mandate on any one topic without having had a specific referendum on that topic.

As someone already pointed out, they voted Liberal to get rid of Labour (an action I find irresponsible but anyway...). That means at least one person didn't vote for repealing the carbon tax, but voted Liberal. Does that mean that they now have "mandate-1"? No, it just reinforces the fact that they don't have a mandate on anything.

Slashdot Top Deals

"If you want to know what happens to you when you die, go look at some dead stuff." -- Dave Enyeart

Working...