HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lightw@cetra.trl.OZ.AU (Liron Lightwood)
Subject: Re: Info wanted on Freaked Out Flower Children
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 03:44:13 GMT

brian@mel.dit.csiro.au (Brian May) writes:


>In article <1992Aug17.055012.7682@trl.oz.au>, lightw@cetra.trl.OZ.AU (Liron Lightwood) writes:
>|> Does anyone know the names of the band menbers of the Freaked Out
>|> Flower Children?
>|> 

>Ummmm, well there's Sophie Lee  :-)  That enough info!

>brian

Nope.  :-)  Who else?

Liron Lightwood                     Internet : r.lightwood@trl.oz.au
Telecom Research Laboratories       Phone : +61 3 253 6535
770 Blackburn Road                  Snail : P.O. Box 249 Clayton 3168 Australia
Clayton  Vic. 3168 Australia        Disclaimer : My views are not my company's
From: socwk@lure.latrobe.edu.au
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: RE: Hinch Notes
Date: 18 Aug 92 14:44:16 GMT
Organization: VAX Cluster, Computer Centre, La Trobe University

I've never seen them, but it sounds like a great idea. Ultra postmodern.
	If anyone finds one, keep it, could be a collectors item! 

Shame, Shame
						Yours
							Brief respite
From: taso@munnari.OZ.AU (Taso Hatzi)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: What's wrong with lowering the dollar?
Date: 19 Aug 1992 19:13:02 +1000
Organization: University of Melbourne
NNTP-Posting-Host: munnari.oz.au
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill) writes:
: 
: So is there anyone out there who knows why so many people in this country
: believe that we should continue to have an overvalued currency?
: 
Rapid increases in prices are inimical to the re-election prospects of
MP's.
From: brendan@otc.otca.oz (Brendan Jones)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: What's wrong with lowering the dollar?
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:09:10 GMT

in article <1992Aug18.050104.12286@trl.oz.au>, c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill) says:
> So is there anyone out there who knows why so many people in this country
> believe that we should continue to have an overvalued currency?

It's not that people want an overvalued currency, it's the problems that *may*
come if, in a period of structural change of the economy, the dollar falls too
far.

Why is this a problem?  We may be leading into a period of sustained economic
growth, but the structure of the economy may not have improved sufficiently to
ensure a continuing and comfortable trade surplus on goods and services we
already produce.

If this is the case, then as the economy grows and industry imports equipment
and materials to expand and/or update, then a lower dollar will in fact worsen
the balance of payments and increase foreign debt.

Also, much of Australia's foreign debt is expressed in foreign currencies.
If the value of our dollar falls against these currencies, our gross debt
increases in $A.  This means we have to produce even more locally just to
stand still.

It's a sort of knife edge.  If you have a trade surplus on your existing
economic base, then a lower valued currency tends to help you, as the
increased value of your exports outweighs the increased cost of imports.

If you have an underlying trade deficit, it may tend to harm you, as your
increased import costs outweigh your increased export prices.

There are also other subtle effects.  There are no universal 'good' or 'bad'
outcomes for a particular movement in the dollar.

At the moment Australia is around the knife edge.  We have had a very good
export performance of late, and have recorded trade surpluses in goods and
services for three of the past four quarters, and in fact overall for 91/92
we recorded a surplus on goods and sevices trade of over $1 billion.  However,
this surplus is only about 0.3% of GDP.

The question is whether this can be sustained when industry grows again and
begins to import a little more ferociously.  The answer is no one knows what
will happen.

(Our main problem in our current account deficit is in servicing the
pre-existing debt.  A $1 billion surplus does little to reduce the debt, in
fact it doesn't pay the interest bill, which last year was about $11 billion).

-- 
Brendan Jones  | ACSnet:  brendan@otc.otca.oz.au               | What does
R&D Contractor |   UUCP:  {uunet,mcvax}!otc.otca.oz.au!brendan | your
Services R&D   |  Phone:  (02)287-3128    Fax:  (02)287-3299   | company
|||| OTC ||    |  Snail:  GPO Box 7000 Sydney 2001, AUSTRALIA  | export?
From: Steve.Williams@f547.n635.z3.fidonet.org (Steve Williams)
Sender: acsnet@csource.oz.au
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: The Role of Government
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 02:35:16 +1000

* Quoting your message of [05-Aug-92, 00:41:05], when you wrote this...

 DYL> From: dyfl@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU (Daniel Y Lam) Organization: Computer
 DYL> Science, University of Melbourne, Australia

 DYL> You're forcing, say, the Medicare levy.  And on whom?  Well, there is
 DYL> one person I can think of off hand -- me.

Are you saying the Medicare levy should be optional? Like all taxes it isn't,
and to my way of thinking I would rather have this one specific levy taken out
of my earnings to ensure my family and I get a reasonable level of medical care
than go back to the "get private health insurance if you can afford it"
mentality of the Fraser years.

The U.S experience with health care leaves a lot to be desired and if we are to
follow them with cheque-book medical services for people that are borderline
then I think that's grossly unfair.

		Seeya...Steve

 * Origin: Info BBS - The place to get informed! (3:635/547)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: dfoott@fcit-c1.fcit.monash.edu.au (David Foott)
Subject: Re: If what I saw was true....
Organization: FCIT, Monash University 
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 04:42:23 GMT

Heck people, you're giving economists a hard time
They've predicted 9 out of the last 2 recessions. What more can you ask?
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: ph@cs.uow.edu.au (Phillip Herring)
Subject: Re: If what I saw was true....
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 23:56:59 GMT


Well, ask yourself this: what is "the economy"? Economists spend
vast amounts of effort trying to understand the way that money
circulates, and postulate all manner of esoteric mechanisms and
laws to describe it. What it comes down to, though, is that money
flowing hither and yon is nothing more than one aspect of our
*culture*. It isn't a distinct process, governed by physical laws.
It's driven by what might be termed (albeit very vaguely) social
forces. The attitudes and values of the people using money make
the wheels turn. (They also make the jobs, generate "wealth", and
so on.) Economists have fallen into an old trap - they believe that
if they can measure something, they somehow understand something.
Money (consisting of nothing more than numeric tokens) is ideal
for measuring. Unfortunately, if you count dollars, you don't
really know anything except how many dollars you have. What counts
is what goes on in people's heads, and that, I'm sure you'll agree, 
is a truth much harder to get at.

Incidentally, it's trendy today to be critical of "ideology"; for
example, economic "rationalism" is a major fashion (never 
mind that it has ideology as its basis; I'm concerned here with the 
arguments against ideology). Folks say that ideology is bad, that it 
stunts "natural" social forces for the common good, and so on. What they
fail to appreciate is that ideology can be the expression, in
summary form, of the values and aspirations of large parts of our
society. As such it's a cultural indicator and it can be far more
useful than counting how many dollars people have in the bank.

-- 

-- Phil.
==========================================================================
        These opinions (c) 1992 Phil Herring (ph@cs.uow.edu.au)
From: webink@peg.pegasus.oz.au
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Radicals Reunion QLD
Date: 16 Aug 92 00:00:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #N:peg:996200259:000:684
Nf-From: peg.UUCP!webink    Aug 15 19:00:00 1992


/* Written  6:59 pm  Aug 15, 1992 by webink in peg:cafe.brisbane */
/* ---------- "Radicals Reunion QLD" ---------- */
SEPTEMBER 5 BRISBANE RADICAL REUNION

To commemorate the Anniversary of 1967 Civil Liberties March in
Brisbane, Two Events Sit-In at Parliament House Anniversary of
1967 Civil Liberties March Commemorative Dinner Venue:
Parliamentary Annexe Alice Street Brisbane 7.00pm

Perspective & Oral History Teach-In September 5 11.00am - 3pm L
Block Kelvin Grove Campus QUT

Oral history - record your own personal memories and insights
either in groups or individually Films & Video about the period -
some of which have never been shown Open discussion about then and
now
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter)
Subject: Re: Support What Property Rights???
Organization: Monash University
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 13:04:04 GMT

In article <996200261@peg.pegasus.oz.au> cwarren@peg.pegasus.oz.au writes:
>
>
>
>
>Some silly scriptor - suter - seeks sense surrounding "capitalist
>property".
>
>Stupid suter should say sorry.  Sense surrounding sample statement seems
>so simple.........
>
>      CAPITALIST PROPERTY IS NATURAL PROPERTY BUT SUBSEQUENTLY MISUSED
>      BY SOME TO EXTRACT ADDITIONAL "CAPITALIST PROFIT" FROM OTHERS.
>
>      CAPITALIST PROFIT IS PROFIT IN EXCESS OF THE NATURAL RATE ITSELF
>      BASED ON THE RATE OF REAL ECONOMIC GROWTH.  CAPITALIST PROFIT IS
>      ACCUMULATED BY EXPROPRIATING THE WEALTH PRODUCED BY OTHERS.
>
>      NO EXPROPRIATION - NO CAPITALISM.  NO CAPITALISM - NO CAPITALIST
>      PROPERTY.  NO CAPITALIST PROPERTY - NO CAPITALIST PROPERTY RIGHTS. 
>      NO CAPITALIST PROPERTY RIGHTS - NO SUTER.


Well I see we can not   get a reasonable answer from a reasonable
question.
It does appear I am stupid - stupid to even think I can get
a reasonable answer.
d.s.
From: brad@winnie.cs.adelaide.edu.au (Brad Alexander )
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: If what I saw was true....
Date: 16 Aug 92 03:38:08 GMT

In article <brian.713773414@coombs>, brian@coombs.anu.edu.au (Brian) writes:
|> 
|> 	....on last Monday night's 4-Corners prorgam "From Keynes to Choas"
|> then all the arguments which go on here periodically about which economic
|> system is bettter are all basically bullshit becuase the economists in
|> truth don't know their arse's from their elbows.  In addition if nothing
|> else that program pointed the real danger of letting someone like Hewson in
|> control of our government.  Any other comments from anybody?

Wish I had of seen it. Sounds as if it had more than a grain of truth in it 
though. Macroeconomics is attempting to do something that is almost impossible,
and that is model the interaction of millions of parts (people, firms,
governments) over continuous time. There is no half decent numerical method to 
do this. Then you have to take account of the fact that the things that make up 
the economy are people who's behaviour is sometimes unpredictable. 

In the face of all this complexity a lot of economists will state that 
they know how to run things. They become dangerous when politicians and 
voters actually start beleiving them and exacting a huge social cost in 
pursuit of a "more competitive" economy (which is very unlikely to result 
from a policy which lowers the level of funding for public education, health care
and infrastructure). (oops a bit of a long sentence..)
-----------
Brad Alexander.
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: miw@cc.uq.oz.au (Mark I. Williams)
Subject: Re: If what I saw was true....
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 01:21:03 GMT

brian@coombs.anu.edu.au (Brian) writes:

>	....on last Monday night's 4-Corners prorgam "From Keynes to Choas"
>then all the arguments which go on here periodically about which economic
>system is bettter are all basically bullshit becuase the economists in
>truth don't know their arse's from their elbows.  

I would say the economists know a fair bit about economics, but nobody
is interested in listening to them. If you hear a real economist talking
what he really believes, you will hear him/her say that we don't really
have all that much control over the economy. Trouble, the press and
people don't like that kind of talk and want to hear things like "If we
do A, then B will happen" when in fact economists don't claim anything
of the kind. So Charlatans like Keating make all the running,
entertaining us with phrases like "voodoo economics" and "bringing home
the bacon" and "J-curve" and "banana republic" and "recession we had to
have" etc. etc. etc. All very rousing stuff, and it hid Keating's
ignorance of matters economic very well for a long time, but it ain't
economics.

Don't blame the crap you get on channel 9 or SBS on economists, please!
It's like blaming the public's perception of information technology on
computer scientists rather than on the journalists and on the public's
preference for simple answers over correct ones.

>In addition if nothing
>else that program pointed the real danger of letting someone like Hewson in
>control of our government.  Any other comments from anybody?

Why Hewson in particular? I suspect it indicates the possible dangers of
having *anyone* in control of the government. At least Hewson probably
has some inkling of the limitations of economics and might just take the
treasury line with a pinch of salt.

cheers,

--
Mark Williams         The University of Queensland       miw@cc.uq.edu.au
+61 7 36 54012   (w)  Prentice Centre
+61 7 36 54477  (fax) Qld 4072  Australia
Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementiae fuit.  -- Seneca
From: Frank.Scott@f364.n632.z3.fidonet.org (Frank Scott)
Sender: acsnet@csource.oz.au
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: HELP SOMALIA !
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 17:29:59 +1000

This is a plea to all bbs users in Australia and the world.

HELP SOMALIA !

If you have seen the articles on todays TV you will no doubt have been touched 
by the incredible hardship these proud people are going through. 

Over 1,000,000 p[eople are starving following a dreadful war between the govt 
and bandits resulting in 100s of thousands either dying of starvation or 
terrible wounds.

The pictures of a 3 year old girl having to suffer the horrifying ordeal of 
being operated on to remove MORTAR fragments WITHOUT anesthetic brought tears 
to both my and my wifes eyes this afternoon, prompting this message.

Please send any donations to the Red Cross ( Kavanagh St. Sth. Melb Vic).

With many thanks
Frank Scott
 

 * Origin: The Coffee Shop OPUS CBCS   (3:632/364@fidonet)

  

Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: miw@cc.uq.oz.au (Mark I. Williams)
Subject: Re: What's wrong with lowering the dollar?
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 01:44:11 GMT

c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill) writes:

>So is there anyone out there who knows why so many people in this country
>believe that we should continue to have an overvalued currency?

Actually, I think the important thing is to have a currency that is
*stable*. Large currency fluctuations make trade difficult and risky.
Having a currency that is continually falling causes inflation and tends
to mean that you have to have higher interest rates to impose a given
tightness of monetary policy. It also causes foreign debt to grow, since
that is almost always computed in foreign currency. That is, if the
aussie dollar falls, the commonwealth has to pay more interest and
higher principle repayments.

cheers,


--
Mark Williams         The University of Queensland       miw@cc.uq.edu.au
+61 7 36 54012   (w)  Prentice Centre
+61 7 36 54477  (fax) Qld 4072  Australia
Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementiae fuit.  -- Seneca
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: brian@coombs.anu.edu.au (Brian)
Subject: If what I saw was true....
Organization: Computer Services Centre, Australian National University
Date: 14 Aug 92 06:23:34 GMT

	....on last Monday night's 4-Corners prorgam "From Keynes to Choas"
then all the arguments which go on here periodically about which economic
system is bettter are all basically bullshit becuase the economists in
truth don't know their arse's from their elbows.  In addition if nothing
else that program pointed the real danger of letting someone like Hewson in
control of our government.  Any other comments from anybody?



--
Brian Ross____________________________________________________________________
"I express many absurd opinions.  But I am not the first man to do it; 
	American freedom consists largely of talking nonsense."
____________________________________ E.W.Howe, Preaching from the Audience____
From: c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill)
Subject: Re: If what I saw was true....
Organization: Telecom Australia Research Laboratories, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 00:25:49 GMT

In article <8184@sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au> brad@winnie.cs.adelaide.edu.au
(Brad Alexander ) writes:
>In article <brian.713773414@coombs>, brian@coombs.anu.edu.au (Brian) writes:
>|> 
>|>      ....on last Monday night's 4-Corners prorgam "From Keynes to Choas"
>|> then all the arguments which go on here periodically about which economic
>|> system is bettter are all basically bullshit becuase the economists in
>|> truth don't know their arse's from their elbows.  In addition if nothing
>|> else that program pointed the real danger of letting someone like Hewson in
>|> control of our government.  Any other comments from anybody?
>
>Wish I had of seen it. Sounds as if it had more than a grain of truth in it 
>though. Macroeconomics is attempting to do something that is almost
impossible,
>and that is model the interaction of millions of parts (people, firms,
>governments) over continuous time. There is no half decent numerical method to

>do this. Then you have to take account of the fact that the things that make
up 
>the economy are people who's behaviour is sometimes unpredictable. 
>
>In the face of all this complexity a lot of economists will state that 
>they know how to run things.

Yes, that's the frightening thing.  We are now suffering from a definitive
example of how economists do not know how to run things.  Part of "knowing how
to run things" is being able to predict the consequences of actions such as
imposing high interest rates.  The Treasury economists' prediction of GDP
growth in 89-90 was 2%. The actual growth was -1.1%.  This is one of the worst
examples of Government economic mismanagement in the history of Australia (for
which we can thank the Treasury economists).

> They become dangerous when politicians and 
>voters actually start beleiving them and exacting a huge social cost in 
>pursuit of a "more competitive" economy (which is very unlikely to result 
>from a policy which lowers the level of funding for public education, health
care
>and infrastructure).

Yes, unfortunately the Government's facade of credibility is more important
than acting in the best interests of the country.

Chris O'Neill
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill)
Subject: What's wrong with lowering the dollar?
Organization: Telecom Australia Research Laboratories, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 05:01:04 GMT

Readers may be familiar with frantic efforts by the Reserve bank to prop up the
value of the Australian dollar during times when it undergoes a sudden decline.
 Various commentators talk about how terrible it is to have a lower valued
dollar.

I can understand that the reserve bank does not want rapid fluctuactions in the
value of the dollar but I don't understand what the problem is with having a
lower valued dollar on a long term basis.  It is pretty obvious that any
country that has a chronic balance of payments problem has an over-valued
currency.

I know that people put up the argument that devaluation causes inflation but
there are two reasons why this is a weak argument.  First, it only causes
inflation of imports and import components (and these days inflation cannot be
used to justify wage rises) and second its inflation is temporary which is the
argument used by proponents of the GST for justifiying the inflation it causes.

So is there anyone out there who knows why so many people in this country
believe that we should continue to have an overvalued currency?

Chris O'Neill
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: yar@cs.su.oz.au (Ray Loyzaga)
Subject: Re: If what I saw was true....
Reply-To: yar@cluster.cs.su.oz (Ray Loyzaga)
Organization: Basser Dept of Computer Science, University of Sydney, Australia
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 02:01:08 GMT

In article <brian.713773414@coombs> brian@coombs.anu.edu.au (Brian) writes:
>	....on last Monday night's 4-Corners prorgam "From Keynes to Choas"
>then all the arguments which go on here periodically about which economic
>system is bettter are all basically bullshit becuase the economists in
>truth don't know their arse's from their elbows.  In addition if nothing
>else that program pointed the real danger of letting someone like Hewson in
>control of our government.  Any other comments from anybody?

I just was listening to the radio and heard how those horrible
waterside unions have been rorting the system for years,
if nothing else that program pointed the real danger of letting someone
like Keating in control of our government. Any other comments from anybody?

Welcome to National Facile argument week! Your host this week is ...

>
>
>
>--
>Brian Ross____________________________________________________________________
>"I express many absurd opinions.  But I am not the first man to do it; 
>	American freedom consists largely of talking nonsense."
>____________________________________ E.W.Howe, Preaching from the Audience____

Obviously a very free man in American terms.
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: Christopher.Vance@adfa.oz.au (Christopher JS Vance)
Subject: Re: If what I saw was true....
Originator: cjsv@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz.au
Organization: Computer Science, University College, UNSW/ADFA, Canberra, Australia
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 12:26:15 GMT

In article <brian.713773414@coombs> brian@coombs.anu.edu.au (Brian) writes:
| 	....on last Monday night's 4-Corners prorgam "From Keynes to Choas"
| then all the arguments which go on here periodically about which economic
| system is bettter are all basically bullshit becuase the economists in
| truth don't know their arse's from their elbows.  In addition if nothing
| else that program pointed the real danger of letting someone like Hewson in
| control of our government.  Any other comments from anybody?

Would you rather *not* have an economist PM or *not* have a
bureaucracy run by economists?  Bananaman hasn't been the best for the
country, either, and at least partly because he: a) thinks he's an
economist, b) listens to economists, c) looks like an economist,
d) talks like an economist, e) is an economist, f) all of the above,
or g) none of the above.

Sigh.

Disclaimers: a) I didn't see Four Corners; b) none of my best friends
are economists.

Opinion: economists are just like lawyers, doctors, judges, car
salesthingies and real estage agents - nobody wants to admit being
even related to one.
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: s8923098@macnab.mqcs.mq.oz.au (Josef WIDJAJA)
Subject: Re: If what I saw was true....
Organization: Macquarie University, School of Mathematics, Physics, Computing and Electronics
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 09:40:17 GMT

In article <brian.713773414@coombs> brian@coombs.anu.edu.au (Brian) writes:
|	....on last Monday night's 4-Corners prorgam "From Keynes to Choas"
|then all the arguments which go on here periodically about which economic
|system is bettter are all basically bullshit becuase the economists in
|truth don't know their arse's from their elbows.  In addition if nothing
|else that program pointed the real danger of letting someone like Hewson in
|control of our government.  Any other comments from anybody?
|

I believe that we still need economists but I also think that economic
rationalism and  free market dogma have been given too much emphasis
in government policies.
 

--
 _________Josef Widjaja____________  
|  s8923098@mackay.mpce.mq.edu.au  |
|  Macquarie University, Australia | 
|__________________________________| 
Newsgroups: aus.politics