Australian DIARY


ARCHIVES 1997-2007  --- ARCHIVES 2007 +



Last month I reported that:

In early December a husband and wife team murdered 14 and severely wounded another 20 odd in San Bernadino (East of LA.)  ISIS has not claimed responsibility, but it has applauded.

The husband and wife were Muslim of Pakistani stock.  The husband was born in the USA.  The wife was a new immigrant after marrying her husband apparently while he was in Mecca on Hajj.  She produced a baby who is less than a year old.  They left the baby with the husband's mother.

The murders occurred at a conference centre.  The Husband's workmates were there.  He would probably have known if any were armed.  California has among the most restrictive gun laws in the USA.

I do not feel safe in Australia.  We have very restrictive gun laws.  That means no law abiding citizen can be in public with a concealed gun.  Of course the terrorists and criminals will have guns.   The fact is that the authorities cannot stop tons of illegal drugs entering Australia each year.  So how can I have any confidence that the authorities are able to stop military grade weapons from entering Australia and finding their way into the hands of terrorists.

I would feel safer if I knew that law abiding citizens around me were armed.  Sure there are the nanny staters, who think that total control is the way to go.  So why is it the most gun law restrictive states in the USA get most of the per capita gun violence?

Please, Prime Minister, use your influence to relax the gun laws in Australia.  In the USA the relaxation of gun control has produced less gun crime, and reduced incidents of mass killing in those places where gun controls are reduced.  OTOH the mass killings happen with increasing frequency in those cities/states (Ca, NY, Boston, Chicago)  that have restrictive gun laws.

Failing that, I wish I could afford to move into a gated community with lots of armed guards.

In the meantime, I avoid crowd events, shop where possible on the internet, and avoid public transport (especially aircraft).

I am thinking wishfully of attempting migration to Texas, or a similar gun liberal state of the union.

This world situation can only degenerate.  Our political leaders are hopelessly compromised.


Christendom (and atheists) are not going to solve the problem with conventional arms.  I suggest we get out, and sell guns at giveaway prices to everyday citizens in those Arab countries we abandon.  Why should our sons and daughters solve their problems?

At least, if we arm civilians, the terrorists will have to be a bit more careful about whose daughter they rape, whose mother they kill, whose boys they recruit or murder.

And just maybe we will end up having a viable caliphate rather than a bunch of murderous mullahs.


In the news, Finland plans to abandon it's unemployment social security scheme and replace it with what a website called calls "Helicopter money".

The plan is to pay everyone (employed and unemployed) a minimal living amount.  This amount would not be reduced (as at present) if the recipient obtained employment.  Hopefully the disincentive to find employment would thus be removed, and the economy would boom.

The Swiss plan to vote (Swiss style referendum) in 2016 on a similar scheme.  Apparently the Swiss parliament is dead set against the scheme. 

It is reported that the proportion of Swiss citizens who would vote for the initiative has recently risen to the high 40s%


I am becoming increasingly cynical of the narratives promulgated by our media.  The Australian (Murdoch Press) for instance seems to report with great glee on the trials and tribulations of Clive Palmer.    The ABC seems to only ever report the negative aspects of guns, is ultra apologist about terrorists, and favours Gillian Trigg's contribution to refugees (how many lives did she save?) over Tony Abbott's saving of hundreds of refugee lives.

And Donald Trump (The US version of Clive) is reportedly loathed by the elite and wealthy.  The polls show Donald to be way ahead of republican contenders, however the latest attack by the media elite is that Hillary would beat him.  Perhaps they should wait for Donald to shift his focus to Hillary?  At the moment he has very successfully destroyed and deflected all the attacks on himself.

Fortunately the media is a diminishing issue.  Newspapers are in rapid decline, and the ABC is doing such a bad job that hopefully someone in government will make further cuts to their budget.

But what is to replace the mass media?  Will it be some sort of community facebook?  Can we trust Zuckerberg not to twist communications?

Perhaps a network of websites will arise.  Perhaps providing entertainment?  Already I watch the internet comic strip "girlgenius online" and "Questionable Content" linked to from my links page.  Perhaps those authors should provide links to other politically active sites?


The news is that IKEA has increased sales by 13% whilst reported profits (and presumably tax) in Australia had fallen by 30% (Source Eli Greemnblat, The Australian, 28th December).  This transfer of profits to low tax regimes is a worldwide phenomenon, and there does not seem to be an effective solution.

In the same issue of The Australian, the founder of IBISworld wrote an article arguing for an increase in the GST.  Being a logical person, he addressed other possible taxes.  In several paragraphs he argued that Business and personal income taxes were regressive, and then wrote:

"Some suggestions involve removing tax breaks on superannuation, negative gearing on property, other exemptions, and introducing a land tax.  But the amount of taxes raised are either politically too brave or won't raise enough anyway to balance budgets."

Well....I have already discussed land Tax as an alternative tax source (see "Taxes" heading in my July blog). 

"...politically too brave"?  Yes.  I think I can see that.  Charging say 5% of land value might not make property owners happy.  Especially the elitists (who presumably occupy the best and most expensive harbour frontages in Sydney).   Those people presumably have little trouble avoiding income tax (think all those possible deductions, income splitting, etc. etc.) or avoiding GST (just buy stuff online).

"...won't raise enough anyway to balance budgets"?  My solution would be to increase land tax until (say) the tax rate was so high that 5% of land in any council was abandoned.  The evidence from the July blog is that real estate values collapse as rates increase.

The tax collected should then be paid after costs to the shareholders of "Commonwealth of Australia."

For further information on the advantages of land taxes, read Henry George."Progress and Poverty".

Regrettably, the Elitists have realized the dangers of Henry George, and he and his book get no mention in the media.  (I confess I am surprised that Phil Ruthven had the guts to mention it, even if only to dismiss it.)