"Pirates of the Caribbean "is a very successful movie series that has grossed $3.7 billion at the box office, and now a deal has been struck to film a new episode here in Australia. This week the contract was inked with the Disney studio for "Dead men tell no tales " to showcase Australia in a similar manner to the huge success achieved by "Crocodile Dundee "a few years ago - and it is hoped that it will create another tourist bonanza.
The locations will be Port Douglas and Cairns for semi tropical outdoor scenes and much of the show will be created in Roadshow's Gold Coast studios. It will provide thousands of jobs over the months of filming and the Australian film and television industry is hopeful that some of the budding acting talent under training here will get an opportunity to expand their experience - and possibly make it into the big time.
The magazine industry is positively salivating at the prospect of stars Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom gracing our shores. It is a long time since a major film was located in Australia and "Pirates "is a guarantee of worldwide distribution. The people who orchestrated this deal are crowing at their success and it is getting wide coverage in the media.
A lot has changed in the movie world since Crocodile Dundee. A long time ago the movie industry came cap in hand to get permission to film in many countries and the local authorities were rapacious in imposing fees for traffic disruptions and allowing the use of public amenities. Now the situation is reversed. Bringing a film location to a country has become a bidding war because a successful film is now seen as the motivation factor in attracting tourists - and big spending tourists are the means of balancing national budgets.
Both the Federal government and the Queensland government will pony up $ 21.6 million in offset incentives to sweeten the deal that will see "Dead men tell no tales " with an Australian background. No doubt "advisers " will be on hand to help the film technicians select the right locations that will then be extensively used in our overseas tourist promotions - with reference to the film shot there to tie the connection in the minds of the public.
Hopefully, if the production of this film results in a blip in tourist numbers it may persuade governments to be more generous in backing our local film industry. Hollywood has the name and the connections to push a film into cinema showings on a world wide basis and our local industry needs a big slice of luck to have a film make big time. In many cases a deserving theme is passed over simply because the financial backing can not be negotiated. It would be helpful if governments could be persuaded to take a chance on the success of films with the backing of our most experienced film makers - and help our local industry to expand.
That $ 21.6 million seems well spent to attract a "Pirates "movie that will be assured prime showing on the world stage. If a similar amount were available to help the local industry no such guarantees would be possible - but the entire Australian film industry would be greatly strengthened - and an element of risk is usually the key to success !
Saturday, 4 October 2014
Friday, 3 October 2014
Car Warranty Challenge !
Remember the days when the first FJ Holden rolled off the assembly line at Fisherman's Bend in Victoria - and the new car warranty was a skinny "twelve months or twelve thousand miles, whichever comes first "?
Nothing changed - for many decades. The luxury content of newer models travelled ever upward - and so did the price - but car manufacturers were very slow to extend their warranty to two years, and there it stuck until near the end of the twentieth century.
New Korean car manufacturer Daewoo shocked the car world when it offered a three year warranty back in 1985 and later Mitsibishi bit the bullet and extended it's new car warranty across the range - to five years or 130,000 miles. The impact of a full factory warranty was now an issue to buyers when making a sales choice.
South Korea has become one of the foremost challengers in the automotive field and both Hyundai and Kia are making sharp inroads into world sales with their offer of a five year unlimited warranty across their range. It is painfully obvious to their competitors that they are becoming a force to be reckoned with.
Kia is about to throw down a very new challenge - and offer a seven year full factory warranty. This will certainly have buyers think deeply about the warranty offer on the world's high priced prestige cars. If they are so well designed and mechanical marvels, why is this not reflected in the warranty offered ? Would it not be reasonable to think that a car with a $ 90,000 price tag would come with a ten year warranty ?
The bean counters of the car world have a problem with the top end of their range. They only manufacture the car body, engine and drive train. Most of the other parts come from independent suppliers, and yet when they become part of the vehicle they come under the maker's new car warranty. If the failure of a tiny, unimportant add on results in the car returning to the dealer for a warranty repair, that cost is sheeted home against the manufacturer - and the cumulative cost can be enormous.
Some owners of top end vehicles like to boast about it's luxuries. Electrically heated exterior mirrors are probably fine if you plan to cross the Alps - but even our most southern state of Tasmania does not get cold enough to need that innovation. Then there are heated driving seats with lumbar memory to configure to twenty-seven individual driving positions - and probably the ability to play Auld Lang Syne on the bagpipes on command. Imagine what a malfunction there would cost ?
Each new model comes with more added "goodies ". We now expect reversing cameras and navigation aids to be part of the car structure and it looks like "self parking "will feature on most new models - and the age of "driverless "cars is certainly on the horizon. The "on board computer "is now a reality and car service has moved well beyond the scope of mechanics who do not possess factory training - and the electronic equipment to communicate with the car on a computer to computer basis.
No doubt Kia is driving a hard bargain with its parts suppliers and saddling them with the repair costs of any warranty claims pertaining to their product, but that seems to be the way of the manufacturing world. It is all part of the risk analysis. Probably the very fact that the lower end of the car price range consists of fewer non basic components that can go awry is the reason that the warranty has been extended.
In car sales - the motto of "Who dares wins "applies. The number of car manufacturers is constantly shrinking - and their product is getting ever better. It seems that warranty is becoming the game changer of the twenty-first century !
Nothing changed - for many decades. The luxury content of newer models travelled ever upward - and so did the price - but car manufacturers were very slow to extend their warranty to two years, and there it stuck until near the end of the twentieth century.
New Korean car manufacturer Daewoo shocked the car world when it offered a three year warranty back in 1985 and later Mitsibishi bit the bullet and extended it's new car warranty across the range - to five years or 130,000 miles. The impact of a full factory warranty was now an issue to buyers when making a sales choice.
South Korea has become one of the foremost challengers in the automotive field and both Hyundai and Kia are making sharp inroads into world sales with their offer of a five year unlimited warranty across their range. It is painfully obvious to their competitors that they are becoming a force to be reckoned with.
Kia is about to throw down a very new challenge - and offer a seven year full factory warranty. This will certainly have buyers think deeply about the warranty offer on the world's high priced prestige cars. If they are so well designed and mechanical marvels, why is this not reflected in the warranty offered ? Would it not be reasonable to think that a car with a $ 90,000 price tag would come with a ten year warranty ?
The bean counters of the car world have a problem with the top end of their range. They only manufacture the car body, engine and drive train. Most of the other parts come from independent suppliers, and yet when they become part of the vehicle they come under the maker's new car warranty. If the failure of a tiny, unimportant add on results in the car returning to the dealer for a warranty repair, that cost is sheeted home against the manufacturer - and the cumulative cost can be enormous.
Some owners of top end vehicles like to boast about it's luxuries. Electrically heated exterior mirrors are probably fine if you plan to cross the Alps - but even our most southern state of Tasmania does not get cold enough to need that innovation. Then there are heated driving seats with lumbar memory to configure to twenty-seven individual driving positions - and probably the ability to play Auld Lang Syne on the bagpipes on command. Imagine what a malfunction there would cost ?
Each new model comes with more added "goodies ". We now expect reversing cameras and navigation aids to be part of the car structure and it looks like "self parking "will feature on most new models - and the age of "driverless "cars is certainly on the horizon. The "on board computer "is now a reality and car service has moved well beyond the scope of mechanics who do not possess factory training - and the electronic equipment to communicate with the car on a computer to computer basis.
No doubt Kia is driving a hard bargain with its parts suppliers and saddling them with the repair costs of any warranty claims pertaining to their product, but that seems to be the way of the manufacturing world. It is all part of the risk analysis. Probably the very fact that the lower end of the car price range consists of fewer non basic components that can go awry is the reason that the warranty has been extended.
In car sales - the motto of "Who dares wins "applies. The number of car manufacturers is constantly shrinking - and their product is getting ever better. It seems that warranty is becoming the game changer of the twenty-first century !
Thursday, 2 October 2014
The ever present " Opportunists " !
The scientific world is predicting hotter and more fire dangerous summers and before September ended Sydney had a day of 35 degrees that broke records. Homeowners have long complained that when they try and meet the recommendations of the fire service and clear away combustibles around their homes they are stymied by a plethora of rules from local councils and the various ecology groups that restrict their right to trim or remove trees. Everything seems to revolve around a long and costly application process - and in the vast majority of cases - this ends with a refusal.
The government heard their pleas - and acted. On August 1 the 10/50 rule became law. It freed owners living 350 metres from bushfire prone land from the need to get permission to clear trees 10 metres from homes and vegetation growing within 50 metres. Fire safety was now within the grasp of homeowners and it was hoped that this would be a less stressful fire season.
Pity the professionals who are tasked with framing laws and who must study the legal effect that may result in"unintended consequences ". There are always opportunists waiting in the wings and many have sharp legal eyes to discover where a law change offers "opportunity "!
So it was with some residents of Sydney's north shore and the northern beaches. This is where Sydney Real Estate has it's greatest value and one of the factors that creates that value is what is termed "view ". A home that has an unrestricted panorama of the coastline and ocean will bring a better price than an identical property where this view is screened by neighbouring trees. In the past, this had led to tree poisoning and illegal pruning and clearing - to improve the view and property value.
This law change was seized upon and mercilessly applied. Owners used the law to chop down trees and trim vegetation that had little to do with a fire risk, but at lot to do with improving the value of their property. Ecologists were aghast at the sheer speed with which these actions happened and they brought heated protests from neighbours and ecologists.
The state government moved quickly to amend the law - and now it only applies to those living 150 metres from category 2 vegetation. The distance has been drastically reduced and the much more dangerous category 1 have been excluded, and returned to the need for a clearing permit.
This will clip the wings of those seeking to improve their view, but the damage has already been done and vast swathes of the northern beaches are far less "green "than their previous appearance. Perhaps the mistake was to promote change by way of a general "catch all " law that could be interpreted in many ways.
It might have been a better idea to empower the fire services with the decision to issue clearing permits. They are the people with the greatest fire safety knowledge - and putting that decision in their hands removes the issues of politics, personal opinion, peer pressure and often empire building that haunt getting a decision out of councils or statuary authorities.
Nothing could be more simple than a clearing request resulting in an inspection by trained fire people who know from experience how to reduce risk - and who have the authority to issue a permit that can instantly be applied - without delay by appeals or interference from other sources.
What is called the KISS formula applies. Keep it simple - stupid !
The government heard their pleas - and acted. On August 1 the 10/50 rule became law. It freed owners living 350 metres from bushfire prone land from the need to get permission to clear trees 10 metres from homes and vegetation growing within 50 metres. Fire safety was now within the grasp of homeowners and it was hoped that this would be a less stressful fire season.
Pity the professionals who are tasked with framing laws and who must study the legal effect that may result in"unintended consequences ". There are always opportunists waiting in the wings and many have sharp legal eyes to discover where a law change offers "opportunity "!
So it was with some residents of Sydney's north shore and the northern beaches. This is where Sydney Real Estate has it's greatest value and one of the factors that creates that value is what is termed "view ". A home that has an unrestricted panorama of the coastline and ocean will bring a better price than an identical property where this view is screened by neighbouring trees. In the past, this had led to tree poisoning and illegal pruning and clearing - to improve the view and property value.
This law change was seized upon and mercilessly applied. Owners used the law to chop down trees and trim vegetation that had little to do with a fire risk, but at lot to do with improving the value of their property. Ecologists were aghast at the sheer speed with which these actions happened and they brought heated protests from neighbours and ecologists.
The state government moved quickly to amend the law - and now it only applies to those living 150 metres from category 2 vegetation. The distance has been drastically reduced and the much more dangerous category 1 have been excluded, and returned to the need for a clearing permit.
This will clip the wings of those seeking to improve their view, but the damage has already been done and vast swathes of the northern beaches are far less "green "than their previous appearance. Perhaps the mistake was to promote change by way of a general "catch all " law that could be interpreted in many ways.
It might have been a better idea to empower the fire services with the decision to issue clearing permits. They are the people with the greatest fire safety knowledge - and putting that decision in their hands removes the issues of politics, personal opinion, peer pressure and often empire building that haunt getting a decision out of councils or statuary authorities.
Nothing could be more simple than a clearing request resulting in an inspection by trained fire people who know from experience how to reduce risk - and who have the authority to issue a permit that can instantly be applied - without delay by appeals or interference from other sources.
What is called the KISS formula applies. Keep it simple - stupid !
Wednesday, 1 October 2014
Tiananmen Square Revisited !
Hong Kong is fast becoming a flashpoint and it seems that the choice of China's relationship with it's former British colony will be entirely in the hands of the country's new leader, Xi Jinping. When Britain handed back Hong Kong to Chinese control in June of 1997 it was on the basis of "One country - two systems " and this was backed by what was called "The Basic Law " which applied to the citizens of Hong Kong - and not to those of mainland China.
So far this arrangement has worked reasonably well. Hong Kong has continued to be a rich enclave with a vibrant banking sector, export hub and vast tourist trade, which includes a steady flow of curious mainlanders exposed to liberties not available in their part of China. Hong Kong people guard the rules of the Basic Law very carefully.
In the early years the governor of Hong Kong was chosen by Bejing, but the terms of the Basic Law call for universal franchise commencing from 2017 - and that is where fracture lines are now starting. Bejing has stated that Hong Kong residents will certainly get to vote on who gets the top job in 2017, but the nominees for that post will first have to be approved by Bejing. It seems that the concept of freedom of choice will not be permitted by the Chinese Communist party.
Despite this election being three years into the future, the reaction in Hong Kong has been huge. The financial district has come to a halt as hundreds of thousands of people poured into the streets in protest and there have been wild scenes with police firing tear gas and making baton charges to try and restore order. So far, Bejing has been content to stay aloof and leave the matter in the hands of it's nominee governor, but there are no indications that the protests are subsiding.
Most Hon Kong residents see this as the litmus test of Bejing's intention to adhere to the Basic Law long term, or whether it will insist on the iron hand of the Communist party smothering any attempt for the people of Hong Kong to select their own leader - and that has far wider implications.
China regards Taipei as a renegade province and insists that it must eventually be reunited with mainland China - by force if necessary. It was hoped that the Hong Kong handover from Britain could become the method by which Taipei could be peacefully reintegrated and this relied on a seamless acceptance of Hong Kong being folded into the "One country - two systems " model to prove to Taipei that harmony was possible.
If Xi Jinping backs off and retreats from the demand that Bejing gives approval first to the candidates offered to a Hong Kong vote it will foster similar demands from many parts of the restive Chinese empire. It also runs counter to the hallowed concept that the Communist part will not permit any form of opposition.
It is fast developing into a contest of wills. The numbers on the streets of Hong Kong must be very disturbing to Xi Jinping as he watches the events on television. If the crowds start to overwhelm the police, there is a danger that he may send in the People's Liberation Army ( PLA ) to assert control - and that could easily degenerate into another "Tiananmen Square "massacre - which China has gone to great pains to totally expunge from the memory of the Chinese masses.
China has gone to great lengths to present a friendly, smiling face to the world of nations that it needs to supply resources and accept it's exports. A bloody crackdown in Hong Kong would do enormous damage - and probably block any remaining hope of negotiating a friendly end to the Taipei dispute. There is also that little matter of a cold war treaty era guarantee of American protection to Taipei.
Xi Jinping may think time is on his side and he can "talk this issue to death "by protracted negotiations because of the 2017 nature of the vote, but the crowds in Hong Kong seem determined to bring the matter to a head - here and now. It seems that there is constant underground irritation with Bejing meddling in Hong Kong affairs and wise heads know that the type of democracy promised in "Basic Law "can be subjected to "death by a thousand cuts ". But forcing the issue is not without risk.
The pot on the table in this poker game is huge - and it includes all the freedoms that Hong Kong now enjoys. If Xi Jinping softens his stance and allows Hong Kong to choose it's leader the concept will inevitably flow on to village level and help wipe out the kleptocracy and corruption that is inevitable when party leaders hold unlimited power. China badly needs the rule of law - and that is unlikely under the present regime.
If the Hong Kong situation leads to another Tiananmen Square massacre all vestiges of freedom will be swept away and in this age of social media it seems impossible that the facts could be covered up. How the vast Chinese masses would react to that situation is the unknown. The decisions facing Xi Jinping on how to treat the leadership of Hong Kong may well decided the future of the Chinese nation - and it's relationship with the rest of the world !
So far this arrangement has worked reasonably well. Hong Kong has continued to be a rich enclave with a vibrant banking sector, export hub and vast tourist trade, which includes a steady flow of curious mainlanders exposed to liberties not available in their part of China. Hong Kong people guard the rules of the Basic Law very carefully.
In the early years the governor of Hong Kong was chosen by Bejing, but the terms of the Basic Law call for universal franchise commencing from 2017 - and that is where fracture lines are now starting. Bejing has stated that Hong Kong residents will certainly get to vote on who gets the top job in 2017, but the nominees for that post will first have to be approved by Bejing. It seems that the concept of freedom of choice will not be permitted by the Chinese Communist party.
Despite this election being three years into the future, the reaction in Hong Kong has been huge. The financial district has come to a halt as hundreds of thousands of people poured into the streets in protest and there have been wild scenes with police firing tear gas and making baton charges to try and restore order. So far, Bejing has been content to stay aloof and leave the matter in the hands of it's nominee governor, but there are no indications that the protests are subsiding.
Most Hon Kong residents see this as the litmus test of Bejing's intention to adhere to the Basic Law long term, or whether it will insist on the iron hand of the Communist party smothering any attempt for the people of Hong Kong to select their own leader - and that has far wider implications.
China regards Taipei as a renegade province and insists that it must eventually be reunited with mainland China - by force if necessary. It was hoped that the Hong Kong handover from Britain could become the method by which Taipei could be peacefully reintegrated and this relied on a seamless acceptance of Hong Kong being folded into the "One country - two systems " model to prove to Taipei that harmony was possible.
If Xi Jinping backs off and retreats from the demand that Bejing gives approval first to the candidates offered to a Hong Kong vote it will foster similar demands from many parts of the restive Chinese empire. It also runs counter to the hallowed concept that the Communist part will not permit any form of opposition.
It is fast developing into a contest of wills. The numbers on the streets of Hong Kong must be very disturbing to Xi Jinping as he watches the events on television. If the crowds start to overwhelm the police, there is a danger that he may send in the People's Liberation Army ( PLA ) to assert control - and that could easily degenerate into another "Tiananmen Square "massacre - which China has gone to great pains to totally expunge from the memory of the Chinese masses.
China has gone to great lengths to present a friendly, smiling face to the world of nations that it needs to supply resources and accept it's exports. A bloody crackdown in Hong Kong would do enormous damage - and probably block any remaining hope of negotiating a friendly end to the Taipei dispute. There is also that little matter of a cold war treaty era guarantee of American protection to Taipei.
Xi Jinping may think time is on his side and he can "talk this issue to death "by protracted negotiations because of the 2017 nature of the vote, but the crowds in Hong Kong seem determined to bring the matter to a head - here and now. It seems that there is constant underground irritation with Bejing meddling in Hong Kong affairs and wise heads know that the type of democracy promised in "Basic Law "can be subjected to "death by a thousand cuts ". But forcing the issue is not without risk.
The pot on the table in this poker game is huge - and it includes all the freedoms that Hong Kong now enjoys. If Xi Jinping softens his stance and allows Hong Kong to choose it's leader the concept will inevitably flow on to village level and help wipe out the kleptocracy and corruption that is inevitable when party leaders hold unlimited power. China badly needs the rule of law - and that is unlikely under the present regime.
If the Hong Kong situation leads to another Tiananmen Square massacre all vestiges of freedom will be swept away and in this age of social media it seems impossible that the facts could be covered up. How the vast Chinese masses would react to that situation is the unknown. The decisions facing Xi Jinping on how to treat the leadership of Hong Kong may well decided the future of the Chinese nation - and it's relationship with the rest of the world !
Tuesday, 30 September 2014
The Hardest Decision !
The Reserve Bank of Australia is mulling over it's responsibility to guard the citizens of this country against what is shaping up as an unprecedented housing price bubble. Every weekend sees home prices rising to new heights and auction clearances are nothing short of a bidding frenzy.
Half a century ago the loan formulae for new home buyers was fairly strict. The lending authorities required buyers to have at least a ten percent deposit and the monthly loan repayments should not exceed a third of that persons income, and the preferred loan length was twenty years.
Economists at the bank are aghast that the deposit gap is ever narrowing and the loan length ever increasing - and even with interest rates at a historic low - many people are committing an unsustainable portion of their income to servicing their home loan.
One of the options being considered by the Reserve bank is to impose a new requirement for lowering the deposit ratio to under 90% of the loan and requiring the borrower to prove that a rate rise of between 3 and 4 % would be sustainable within their earning capacity. They could also impose new capital holding rules on the banks to force them to gear the cash they must retain to a direct link with their home loan portfolios. This would sharply curtail the banks ability to make home loans more widely available.
This would certainly slam the door shut on most moderate income home loan applicants - and would probably pop that price bubble. It could in fact send the momentum into reverse and cause a dramatic - and dangerous - fall in house prices, with disastrous repercussions for the Australian economy. People who have recently entered the home market with a minimum deposit and unsustainable repayments could find themselves with a loan that far exceeds the new value of their home holding - as happened in the 2008 recession.
It could also throw the entire Australian economy into a tailspin. The same criteria that existed before 2008 is evident in many people's minds. There is an expectation that house prices will continue to rise and therefore even a short holding will result in a profit. It is the old game of "Musical Chairs " - and if the Reserve bank implements these proposed changes - it will be the moment that the music stops !
The Reserve bank is wrestling with a moral responsibility. It is inevitable that interest rates will not remain at their present low level and when they rise a lot of people will be in dire financial trouble. Even a hint of bank foreclosures will spook the market and see home prices tumbling - and people slam their wallets shut and stop spending. That is precisely the situation that sparks off a recession - and that can quickly mushroom through the entire economy.
On the other hand, to let the present situation remain unchecked is to knowingly place decent people in jeopardy by allowing banks to fund unsustainable home purchases. It is the duty of the Reserve bank to guard against such risks, but in doing so it could trigger an even greater calamity if it saps public confidence by implementing harsh measures.
This public warning is probably intended to put a shot across the bows of the banks and warn them to modify their deposit and repayment ratios to a more sustainable level. A word in the ears of those at high level in the banks may see a tightening of the criteria, but at a level which simply slows home price increases and lowers a frenetic market to a more reasonable tempo.
The Reserve bank has draconian powers at it's disposal. It seems to be choosing the " softly Softly " approach to ease an overheated housing market back to a sustainable level, without creating what could be termed " unintended consequences " !
Half a century ago the loan formulae for new home buyers was fairly strict. The lending authorities required buyers to have at least a ten percent deposit and the monthly loan repayments should not exceed a third of that persons income, and the preferred loan length was twenty years.
Economists at the bank are aghast that the deposit gap is ever narrowing and the loan length ever increasing - and even with interest rates at a historic low - many people are committing an unsustainable portion of their income to servicing their home loan.
One of the options being considered by the Reserve bank is to impose a new requirement for lowering the deposit ratio to under 90% of the loan and requiring the borrower to prove that a rate rise of between 3 and 4 % would be sustainable within their earning capacity. They could also impose new capital holding rules on the banks to force them to gear the cash they must retain to a direct link with their home loan portfolios. This would sharply curtail the banks ability to make home loans more widely available.
This would certainly slam the door shut on most moderate income home loan applicants - and would probably pop that price bubble. It could in fact send the momentum into reverse and cause a dramatic - and dangerous - fall in house prices, with disastrous repercussions for the Australian economy. People who have recently entered the home market with a minimum deposit and unsustainable repayments could find themselves with a loan that far exceeds the new value of their home holding - as happened in the 2008 recession.
It could also throw the entire Australian economy into a tailspin. The same criteria that existed before 2008 is evident in many people's minds. There is an expectation that house prices will continue to rise and therefore even a short holding will result in a profit. It is the old game of "Musical Chairs " - and if the Reserve bank implements these proposed changes - it will be the moment that the music stops !
The Reserve bank is wrestling with a moral responsibility. It is inevitable that interest rates will not remain at their present low level and when they rise a lot of people will be in dire financial trouble. Even a hint of bank foreclosures will spook the market and see home prices tumbling - and people slam their wallets shut and stop spending. That is precisely the situation that sparks off a recession - and that can quickly mushroom through the entire economy.
On the other hand, to let the present situation remain unchecked is to knowingly place decent people in jeopardy by allowing banks to fund unsustainable home purchases. It is the duty of the Reserve bank to guard against such risks, but in doing so it could trigger an even greater calamity if it saps public confidence by implementing harsh measures.
This public warning is probably intended to put a shot across the bows of the banks and warn them to modify their deposit and repayment ratios to a more sustainable level. A word in the ears of those at high level in the banks may see a tightening of the criteria, but at a level which simply slows home price increases and lowers a frenetic market to a more reasonable tempo.
The Reserve bank has draconian powers at it's disposal. It seems to be choosing the " softly Softly " approach to ease an overheated housing market back to a sustainable level, without creating what could be termed " unintended consequences " !
Monday, 29 September 2014
Not so Sweet !
Sugar has been getting a bad rap from the health people. It seems to be the main contributor in the chain of events that lead people to become obese - and then go on to develop diabetes. It is an addictive substance and it made fortunes when earlier explorers found the islands of the Caribbean and the sugar cane plant, and introduced slave labour to bring this new luxury to the dinner tables of Europe.
Many people have reduced their use of sugar and replaced it with artificial sweeteners, but it is hard to measure because it is present in much of the food we consume. When "fat "became the nutritional enemy, food manufacturers quickly replaced fat but found their product lacked "taste " - and quickly restored that balance by increasing the sugar content. A can of fizzy drink usually contains the daily sugar amount a healthy adult should consume.
Now it seems that the medical world is having second thoughts about the wisdom of using artificial sweeteners - and there have been suggestions that they cause some people to actually gain weight. Aspartane - as the basic chemical is called - is not directly bad for people but it can have a wide spectrum of differing reactions with the zillions of tiny microbes that live in people's guts, and this is opening up a very interesting new field of medical science.
It was a long held theory that human gut microbes would be consistent across the human spectrum, and that is proving to be false. What we eat and drink and the conditions in which we live seem to make the contents of our intestines very much a microbial mix that is as much a personal identification as our DNA or fingerprints. It is quite possible that if we have the wrong mix the reaction to Saccharin can increase rather than reduce our weight.
Just as the Glucose or Sucrose that we know as sugar causes the human body to extract energy and is spread across the wide food chain, Aspartane is similarly represented in everything from tooth paste to hiding the unpleasant taste of pain killing medicine. It is virtually impossible to banish either sweetener from a person's diet.
Experiments with mice have shown that rebalancing the microbes in the human gut can restore the conditions that cause the lack of some microbes to cause us unpleasant reactions. It seems that gaining an understanding of what microbes should ideally be present in the human gut is fast becoming a new branch of medical science. Unpleasant as it sounds, it has been found that transferring faecal matter from a healthy gut to one lacking balance quickly results in the missing microbes recolonising the new host - and restoring gut equilibrium.
This seems more than just an interesting theory. There must be very few people who have not from time to time developed some ailment that has resulted in them being prescribed an antibiotic. The aim of this substance is to kill the specific bug that is causing ill health - but at the same time it also decimates the entire structure of microbes - both good and bad - that live in our gut.
That presents an entirely rational explanation of why - in the aftermath of having treated some ailment with an antibiotic - we find that there is a new and puzzling change to our health that was not present previously. Having wiped out the entire gut spectrum in our body we have undergone a new process of restoration and the prevailing conditions have delivered an entirely new mix. Our body is learning to live with a new microbe family - with consequent change.
Hopefully, the future may see more of a medical focus on evaluating just what microbe mix is present in each human, and creating the optimum balance to deliver good health. In the interim, the choice between sugar or artificial sweeteners - seems to be in the lap of the Gods !
Many people have reduced their use of sugar and replaced it with artificial sweeteners, but it is hard to measure because it is present in much of the food we consume. When "fat "became the nutritional enemy, food manufacturers quickly replaced fat but found their product lacked "taste " - and quickly restored that balance by increasing the sugar content. A can of fizzy drink usually contains the daily sugar amount a healthy adult should consume.
Now it seems that the medical world is having second thoughts about the wisdom of using artificial sweeteners - and there have been suggestions that they cause some people to actually gain weight. Aspartane - as the basic chemical is called - is not directly bad for people but it can have a wide spectrum of differing reactions with the zillions of tiny microbes that live in people's guts, and this is opening up a very interesting new field of medical science.
It was a long held theory that human gut microbes would be consistent across the human spectrum, and that is proving to be false. What we eat and drink and the conditions in which we live seem to make the contents of our intestines very much a microbial mix that is as much a personal identification as our DNA or fingerprints. It is quite possible that if we have the wrong mix the reaction to Saccharin can increase rather than reduce our weight.
Just as the Glucose or Sucrose that we know as sugar causes the human body to extract energy and is spread across the wide food chain, Aspartane is similarly represented in everything from tooth paste to hiding the unpleasant taste of pain killing medicine. It is virtually impossible to banish either sweetener from a person's diet.
Experiments with mice have shown that rebalancing the microbes in the human gut can restore the conditions that cause the lack of some microbes to cause us unpleasant reactions. It seems that gaining an understanding of what microbes should ideally be present in the human gut is fast becoming a new branch of medical science. Unpleasant as it sounds, it has been found that transferring faecal matter from a healthy gut to one lacking balance quickly results in the missing microbes recolonising the new host - and restoring gut equilibrium.
This seems more than just an interesting theory. There must be very few people who have not from time to time developed some ailment that has resulted in them being prescribed an antibiotic. The aim of this substance is to kill the specific bug that is causing ill health - but at the same time it also decimates the entire structure of microbes - both good and bad - that live in our gut.
That presents an entirely rational explanation of why - in the aftermath of having treated some ailment with an antibiotic - we find that there is a new and puzzling change to our health that was not present previously. Having wiped out the entire gut spectrum in our body we have undergone a new process of restoration and the prevailing conditions have delivered an entirely new mix. Our body is learning to live with a new microbe family - with consequent change.
Hopefully, the future may see more of a medical focus on evaluating just what microbe mix is present in each human, and creating the optimum balance to deliver good health. In the interim, the choice between sugar or artificial sweeteners - seems to be in the lap of the Gods !
Sunday, 28 September 2014
Refugees ? Now the Aftermath !
The government has succeeded in stopping the boats arising from Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard's disastrous meddling with John Howard's successful immigration containment, and now it is time to sort out those waiting on our shores in limbo. It has been decided to issue Temporary Protection Visas ( TPV's ) to the 30,000 who have been waiting to have their immigration status decided and this seems to be at least the first step in a decision to allow them permanent residency.
A different fate awaits those who defied the warning that arriving by boat will result in them never being allowed to permanently settle in Australia - and saw them moved offshore to detention camps on Nauru and Manus Island. A deal has been struck with Cambodia and we will pay the Cambodian government $ 40 million to settle these people and accept them as permanent residents. Predictably, there are howls of rage from the political left and the charge that Cambodia is a third world country totally unfit to integrate those that this country has rejected.
The present turmoil in the Middle East is being cited to garner sympathy for refugees. Television pictures showing women and children scrambling over the border into Turkey in fear of being raped or beheaded by a fanatical army of religious zealots is harrowing, but there is a very big difference. These refugees want nothing more than the fighting to stop to allow them to return to their home country. They have left behind their homes and way of earning a living and this is a temporary displacement - to save lives.
The "Boat People " had a very different objective. They were not scrambling over Australia's border in dire fear for their lives. They probably had fled their original country in fear, but they had refused to register and accept political asylum in the first country they entered, as is the rule imposed by the United Nations. They travelled through various countries in their stated aim to "force themselves on Australia " and along the way they seemed to find extraordinary sums of money to pay "People Smugglers "to bring them from Indonesia or Malaysia - to Christmas island.
Now their journey is coming full circle. Cambodia can not deliver the rich life they expected here, but it offers safety. It is also a developing country and industrious new arrivals can ride the tide of progress that is sweeping through Asia - or move on and develop new aspirations. For them, the door to Australia is firmly closed.
Hopefully, once the mess of people arriving unannounced in leaky boats is cleaned up the doorway for legal immigration to this country will revert to the former orderly flow. We are a nation of immigrants - right from that time in 1788 when the first settlers came ashore in Sydney Cove. We have still to make lasting peace with this country's Indigenous inhabitants but old wrongs are being righted and all seem assured of a prosperous future.
We need - and we accept a steady flow of new immigrants to this country and a badly stressed world has many waiting. The queues are long, but it is essential that new arrivals come in the numbers we can assimilate and we are fortunate that we do not share a common border - as is the case in many other parts of the world. It is within our capacity to control our borders - as we are now showing the world.
Our good wishes go with those destined to become citizens of Cambodia and hope that they achieve a happy and successful life. Their arrival here was simply a matter of "unfortunate timing "! They were the " Bunnies "left standing in the game of "Musical Chairs " - when the music stopped !
A different fate awaits those who defied the warning that arriving by boat will result in them never being allowed to permanently settle in Australia - and saw them moved offshore to detention camps on Nauru and Manus Island. A deal has been struck with Cambodia and we will pay the Cambodian government $ 40 million to settle these people and accept them as permanent residents. Predictably, there are howls of rage from the political left and the charge that Cambodia is a third world country totally unfit to integrate those that this country has rejected.
The present turmoil in the Middle East is being cited to garner sympathy for refugees. Television pictures showing women and children scrambling over the border into Turkey in fear of being raped or beheaded by a fanatical army of religious zealots is harrowing, but there is a very big difference. These refugees want nothing more than the fighting to stop to allow them to return to their home country. They have left behind their homes and way of earning a living and this is a temporary displacement - to save lives.
The "Boat People " had a very different objective. They were not scrambling over Australia's border in dire fear for their lives. They probably had fled their original country in fear, but they had refused to register and accept political asylum in the first country they entered, as is the rule imposed by the United Nations. They travelled through various countries in their stated aim to "force themselves on Australia " and along the way they seemed to find extraordinary sums of money to pay "People Smugglers "to bring them from Indonesia or Malaysia - to Christmas island.
Now their journey is coming full circle. Cambodia can not deliver the rich life they expected here, but it offers safety. It is also a developing country and industrious new arrivals can ride the tide of progress that is sweeping through Asia - or move on and develop new aspirations. For them, the door to Australia is firmly closed.
Hopefully, once the mess of people arriving unannounced in leaky boats is cleaned up the doorway for legal immigration to this country will revert to the former orderly flow. We are a nation of immigrants - right from that time in 1788 when the first settlers came ashore in Sydney Cove. We have still to make lasting peace with this country's Indigenous inhabitants but old wrongs are being righted and all seem assured of a prosperous future.
We need - and we accept a steady flow of new immigrants to this country and a badly stressed world has many waiting. The queues are long, but it is essential that new arrivals come in the numbers we can assimilate and we are fortunate that we do not share a common border - as is the case in many other parts of the world. It is within our capacity to control our borders - as we are now showing the world.
Our good wishes go with those destined to become citizens of Cambodia and hope that they achieve a happy and successful life. Their arrival here was simply a matter of "unfortunate timing "! They were the " Bunnies "left standing in the game of "Musical Chairs " - when the music stopped !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)