Thanks for the non-advice hint :-) You're right, I certainly should shop around more. What bugs me is that with my checquered employment, I tend to get shafted by ongoing fees and insurance. Of course I have since cancelled the insurance, but what I found (with REST incidentally) is that I would start with [let's say] $1000 in there, and pay in another $400 over the quarter. At the end of the quarter, I'd have about $1200. These aren't the real numbers, as I can't find my statements right now (and wouldn't put them on a public forum anyway) but the point is that cash stuffed into a mattress would have $1400 over the same period. A term deposit of course would perform much better.

OK, sure, I understand that If I had more money in there, then fees would represent a smaller percentage of my overall money. But still, I don't see how superannuation could possibly be better than (gasp!) allowing ME to prepare for my retirement by _not_ giving 50% of my contributions to some bank. Is there even a mandate that these funds have to show a decent return? Because it seems to be that they're basically given carte blanche to whatever they want with this money, safe in the knowledge that you and I can't claim it until we hit 65, which for me is quite a long way away, long enough that the guy in charge of the fund will have long since retired himself.

I don't want to get into a flame war about Aussie banks, but there's a reason they keep posting such spectacular profits. Yes, we are lucky to have a certain level of regulation. But let's remember that it's easy to run a profitable bank if you're getting 9% of what every Australian earns to speculate with.

And REST? In my experience they're reaming every young kid with a casual retail job, because that kid will probably never claim the super from that job they had in high school. It's a while since I've dealt with them, I know Super Choice has introduced a bit more competition into the system, but I have to say, I still think my mattress fund is competitive.

unlike if you're an Australian abroad, when the embassy will tell you "tough shit, you're not in .au now." If you're lucky they'll call your folks back home who can send you a care package in whatever foreign prison you land in.

If you're female however, you might have a chance, because you look good in the tabloids and can whip up a good old-fashioned racist fear of our white girls being defiled by brown people. (read also: Schapelle Corby)

TL;DR: Australian taxes buy you no protection overseas. Either find a UK grandparent, and get a UK passport, or do what other Aussies abroad do and pretend to be from New Zealand. This last part is analogous to those American college kids backpacking thru Europe who have the Maple Leaf sewn onto their backpacks, so that the locals don't hassle them about US foreign policy :-)

My superannuation (Australian government-mandated retirement fund a bit like a 401k in the USA) consistently has _less_ money in it than I deposit, mostly due to fees charged by the [obscenely profitable] banks who run these funds and choose where to invest the money.*

Every Australian employer has to send 9% of each employee's wage to one of these funds. The employee can [usually] choose the fund, but they can't just choose to stick it in a term-deposit, or under the mattress.

Under the mattress currently shows a lower loss than allowing Macquarie Bank et al to gamble with this money.

Again, what seemed like a good idea (mandatory retirement savings for all working Australians) has turned into free money being handed to the banks to gamble with.

I repeat, not only does superannuation not keep up with inflation, it actually goes BACKWARDS. Stuffing the money in a mattress would be a far superior investment, but alas I'm not allowed to do that.

Fuck superannuation. Any Aussies have a better solution? How hard is it to set up so-called "self-managed super"?

*It's not their money, and the investor (me) can't claim it until I retire (like 40 years from now) so it's effectively a blank cheque for these arseholes to invest in any flavour-of-the-month IPO with absolutely no repercussions when they lose all (my) money.

Deceleration is different. It's best to lift-off the throttle entirely, which will completely shut off the injectors so that you are burning ZERO fuel during engine braking [I have driven some vehicles in the USA where this is *not* the case - the ECU continues to throw fuel into the engine on overruns to reduce NOx emissions]

Yes, a higher top speed will have an exponentially higher increase in aerodynamic drag, but you were talking about acceleration. When accelerating, it's best [for fuel economy] to have the throttle as wide open as is practical, and change gears as early as practical, to minimise frictional losses which increase with RPM.

I'm sure there are fringe cases, but in absolute terms, an otto-cycle [normal gasoline engine} engine is most efficient at wide-open-throttle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption

The vertebrae? That can't be a comfortable way to wear an iPod!

Those two lines are absolute gold. You should copyright them or something, because that is very quotable.

Yeah I suppose a giant, state-sponsored player could pull it off. This supports my idea that waking up in a bath tub of ice is still just an internet rumour though. As usual, travellers abroad should be more concerned about their camera and cash. I have certainly heard of tourists being drugged to steal those.

I though that the whole "wake up in a bathtub full of ice after being the victim of illegal organ theft" thing was pretty much just a cool internet rumour, for several reasons:

1. transplants have to be matched. Not just blood type but also MHC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_histocompatibility_complex, which narrows the compatibility even more.

2. Organs don't last long outside the body. The recipient has to be right there waiting for the organ, it can't just be tossed in the fridge waiting for a compatible customer to show up.

3. Anti-rejection drugs don't just grow on trees. Securing a LIFETIME supply of these things can't be easy if you're not on record as having had a transplant... And surely they're not in as much demand as other prescription drugs.

In summary, there are practical and biological reasons that there really isn't a massive black market for organs.

I may well be wrong, can anybody correct me?

Bender is Mexican, if that helps.