Democratic Iraq
There's a government in Iraq now. Although having a set of democratically elected representatives hasn't actually resolved the situation, and appears to present some complications the Bush Administration might have preferred to avoid, the new Iraq may yet prove itself when it sits down to write their constitution. Allawi's party seems pretty clearly out of the running for significant influence on the proceedings. With only about 15% of the seats, even allying with the majority Shiites (51%) just barely edges into 2/3's range for forging the constitution, whereas if the Shiites can form a coalition with the Kurds (27%), they'll have a lock on how the country shapes up. So how the groups align and how they act in the formation of the constitution and how they behave thereafter - whether they maintain amicable relationships or start bickering along ethnic or sectarian lines - will determine the success of Bush's second venture into nation-building.
16 March 2005
Ethnic Enclaves
Nearly every city I’ve been to has a “Chinatown,” and some have a “Little Italy,” “Little Japan,” “Koreatown,” etc. Last night I discovered that Sydney has a Deep South pocket. No offense to Democrats Abroad Australia or to Scott, whom we were gathering to farewell as he prepares to return from the Lucky Country to the Land of the Free, but the highlight of the evening was Victor’s Soul Food Kitchen, a restaurant attached to the Glasgow Arms Hotel in Ultimo, just a few steps north of the Powerhouse Museum. I could have stayed for more meals than the one I managed. Victor, originally from Birmingham, Alabama, runs a deep south kitchen supplying victuals from his native region, and not excepting New Orleans, thankfully. The gumbo was easily as delicious as any I’ve had, and the jambalaya looked good, too. Various blackened preparations were also available, as well as traditional soul food fry-ups. Having elected a “pescatarian” diet, most of the menu was off my list, but that shouldn’t stop anyone else seeking an authentic southern (U.S.) dining experience. I’m sure that for Scott and his partner, it was an opportunity to re-acclimate tastebuds unused to the use of cayenne pepper (although Thai sweet chilli sauce is common enough, it doesn’t really compare). Meanwhile, we wish him all the best back State-side, and thankfully have Victor’s to ease our pain.
Nearly every city I’ve been to has a “Chinatown,” and some have a “Little Italy,” “Little Japan,” “Koreatown,” etc. Last night I discovered that Sydney has a Deep South pocket. No offense to Democrats Abroad Australia or to Scott, whom we were gathering to farewell as he prepares to return from the Lucky Country to the Land of the Free, but the highlight of the evening was Victor’s Soul Food Kitchen, a restaurant attached to the Glasgow Arms Hotel in Ultimo, just a few steps north of the Powerhouse Museum. I could have stayed for more meals than the one I managed. Victor, originally from Birmingham, Alabama, runs a deep south kitchen supplying victuals from his native region, and not excepting New Orleans, thankfully. The gumbo was easily as delicious as any I’ve had, and the jambalaya looked good, too. Various blackened preparations were also available, as well as traditional soul food fry-ups. Having elected a “pescatarian” diet, most of the menu was off my list, but that shouldn’t stop anyone else seeking an authentic southern (U.S.) dining experience. I’m sure that for Scott and his partner, it was an opportunity to re-acclimate tastebuds unused to the use of cayenne pepper (although Thai sweet chilli sauce is common enough, it doesn’t really compare). Meanwhile, we wish him all the best back State-side, and thankfully have Victor’s to ease our pain.
15 March 2005
Idiot Wind
Gale Norton is either stupid or she thinks everyone else is. As Secretary of the Interior, her job, part of it, anyway, is to protect the national wilderness areas of the United States. As Secretary of the Interior for the rapacious George W. Bush, her job is to get into the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and drill for oil. Never mind that she is doing so at the behest of two oil magnates now occupying the highest offices in the land for the benefit of Big Oil, according to her, we can get in, extract the oil, and never harm any aspect of the environment. But if you look at her arguments, it’s clear that she has little concept of “ecosystem” beyond plants and dirt. Stupid. The arguments against drilling in the ANWR go far beyond the set-up requirements. Regardless of ice-built roads, helicopters, and computer-assisted drilling decisions, the effect on the environment of oil exploration are potentially immense and well-known. In addition, there are few enough places on earth where we haven’t stuck our footprint, and plenty of other, non-environmental reasons we shouldn’t do it in Alaska anyway. There’s a reason for having a wildlife “refuge” in a wilderness, and drilling for oil doesn’t support it. Foreign oil dependency should move us off oil, not into destroying more of our few remaining wilderness habitats to get only potentially more. This isn’t about not having enough to heat our homes and run our businesses, this is about having enough to run our SUV’s, enough to profligately expend when a little - just a little – conservation would reduce our needs, and more innovation could replace the requirement for oil altogether. Gale Norton is trying to recast the argument in her master’s service, and we’d better not let her get away with it.
Gale Norton is either stupid or she thinks everyone else is. As Secretary of the Interior, her job, part of it, anyway, is to protect the national wilderness areas of the United States. As Secretary of the Interior for the rapacious George W. Bush, her job is to get into the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and drill for oil. Never mind that she is doing so at the behest of two oil magnates now occupying the highest offices in the land for the benefit of Big Oil, according to her, we can get in, extract the oil, and never harm any aspect of the environment. But if you look at her arguments, it’s clear that she has little concept of “ecosystem” beyond plants and dirt. Stupid. The arguments against drilling in the ANWR go far beyond the set-up requirements. Regardless of ice-built roads, helicopters, and computer-assisted drilling decisions, the effect on the environment of oil exploration are potentially immense and well-known. In addition, there are few enough places on earth where we haven’t stuck our footprint, and plenty of other, non-environmental reasons we shouldn’t do it in Alaska anyway. There’s a reason for having a wildlife “refuge” in a wilderness, and drilling for oil doesn’t support it. Foreign oil dependency should move us off oil, not into destroying more of our few remaining wilderness habitats to get only potentially more. This isn’t about not having enough to heat our homes and run our businesses, this is about having enough to run our SUV’s, enough to profligately expend when a little - just a little – conservation would reduce our needs, and more innovation could replace the requirement for oil altogether. Gale Norton is trying to recast the argument in her master’s service, and we’d better not let her get away with it.
14 March 2005
Then There Were 50
M. has gotten through to the next round. From 100, Project Greenlight has been winnowed to 50. Of course, now there's more work to be done to advance to the next group (20). Each contestant will have to produce a 3-minute "screenwriter video." The official rules say the video will consist of the screenwriter "perform[ing] a scene" to pitch the screenplay, but the actual guidelines haven't been published yet, so that may yet be different. In any event, congratulations; I knew it.
M. has gotten through to the next round. From 100, Project Greenlight has been winnowed to 50. Of course, now there's more work to be done to advance to the next group (20). Each contestant will have to produce a 3-minute "screenwriter video." The official rules say the video will consist of the screenwriter "perform[ing] a scene" to pitch the screenplay, but the actual guidelines haven't been published yet, so that may yet be different. In any event, congratulations; I knew it.
The Damage Done
We finally got around to seeing Collateral - on DVD, of course, because we don’t make it up to the theatres nearly often enough – and it was splendid. Violent, a thriller in the final sequences, but overall a worthwhile piece of cinema. Tom Cruise was, as everyone’s already said, nearly unrecognizable and turned in the best piece of acting I’ve ever seen from him. The political philosophies of the two men, and how they expressed the choices they made from their respective world views (not to mention the choices themselves), were presented in the best tradition of post-modern cinema: subtly, making use of the medium, exploiting what it means to see and to be seen, even while never leaving anything untold.
On the other hand, Dogville, which would usually fall into the post-modern classification, was, ultimately, so tremendously flawed, that even what was good about it, and what was post-modern, failed, perhaps not least because of John Hurt’s narration throughout. It wasn’t entirely the fault of the movie being presented as a stage play, because it was obvious immediately that Lars von Trier was twisting Our Town inside-out, although that did make for some wooden performances, but the script itself was so over-moralizing, and explicated every element of the film’s action and intentions, and not just in the voice-over, as to spoil the entire film. Does von Trier really believe this is all there is to present-day America, that there are no such flaws elsewhere, in Europe, for example? The bloodbath in which he resolves his critique is simplistic, and a surprise coming from the director of Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark. Everything worthwhile in the movie was lost. The Idiots is playing on SBS late tonight, and we’ll probably tape it, but I don’t know if I can screw up the courage to watch it.
We finally got around to seeing Collateral - on DVD, of course, because we don’t make it up to the theatres nearly often enough – and it was splendid. Violent, a thriller in the final sequences, but overall a worthwhile piece of cinema. Tom Cruise was, as everyone’s already said, nearly unrecognizable and turned in the best piece of acting I’ve ever seen from him. The political philosophies of the two men, and how they expressed the choices they made from their respective world views (not to mention the choices themselves), were presented in the best tradition of post-modern cinema: subtly, making use of the medium, exploiting what it means to see and to be seen, even while never leaving anything untold.
On the other hand, Dogville, which would usually fall into the post-modern classification, was, ultimately, so tremendously flawed, that even what was good about it, and what was post-modern, failed, perhaps not least because of John Hurt’s narration throughout. It wasn’t entirely the fault of the movie being presented as a stage play, because it was obvious immediately that Lars von Trier was twisting Our Town inside-out, although that did make for some wooden performances, but the script itself was so over-moralizing, and explicated every element of the film’s action and intentions, and not just in the voice-over, as to spoil the entire film. Does von Trier really believe this is all there is to present-day America, that there are no such flaws elsewhere, in Europe, for example? The bloodbath in which he resolves his critique is simplistic, and a surprise coming from the director of Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark. Everything worthwhile in the movie was lost. The Idiots is playing on SBS late tonight, and we’ll probably tape it, but I don’t know if I can screw up the courage to watch it.
11 March 2005
The New Feudalism
The credit card companies have won. Barring defeat in the House (and how likely is that?), the Senate has sold out the country to the interests (and that's at nearly 20%?) of their corporate masters. God forbid anyone should ever get into such debt as to need to declare bankruptcy, but with these "reforms" it may not even be possible. Is there a provision in this bill for debtors prisons or workhouses?
The credit card companies have won. Barring defeat in the House (and how likely is that?), the Senate has sold out the country to the interests (and that's at nearly 20%?) of their corporate masters. God forbid anyone should ever get into such debt as to need to declare bankruptcy, but with these "reforms" it may not even be possible. Is there a provision in this bill for debtors prisons or workhouses?
Public Art
I almost want to live in this building. Dupain’s photos are often truly amazing, right up there with the works of Bresson et al., and Australia, especially Sydney, hangs on to their imagery as quintessentially iconic. Etching one of them into a building may seem to be going a little far to some, but I think the whimsy, as much as the iconographic element, is one of the more worthy architectural efforts I’ve seen. I suppose, if I'm going to quibble, I'd wonder why this isn't out at Bondi itself, rather than over by Darling Harbour, but maybe Bondi's seen enough development for now.
I almost want to live in this building. Dupain’s photos are often truly amazing, right up there with the works of Bresson et al., and Australia, especially Sydney, hangs on to their imagery as quintessentially iconic. Etching one of them into a building may seem to be going a little far to some, but I think the whimsy, as much as the iconographic element, is one of the more worthy architectural efforts I’ve seen. I suppose, if I'm going to quibble, I'd wonder why this isn't out at Bondi itself, rather than over by Darling Harbour, but maybe Bondi's seen enough development for now.
Crying Hitler
As A. points out, Senator Robert Byrd deserves to be listened to, and if he's pulling out the comparison, its legitimacy has to be seriously considered. The restrictions of civil liberties and the procedural changes being instituted to the benefit of a single party presently in the majority aren't simply matters of "well, if the Democrats (or Left or [insert anti-GOP affiliation here]) were listening to what Americans wanted, they'd be doing this themselves or would be the majority," but rather a consolidation of power entirely consistent with the actions of the fascist governments of the 1930's. As eminent mathematician Kurt Goedel once showed, it can happen here. It can happen anywhere. The Consitution isn't a complete safeguard, only the people it serves.
As A. points out, Senator Robert Byrd deserves to be listened to, and if he's pulling out the comparison, its legitimacy has to be seriously considered. The restrictions of civil liberties and the procedural changes being instituted to the benefit of a single party presently in the majority aren't simply matters of "well, if the Democrats (or Left or [insert anti-GOP affiliation here]) were listening to what Americans wanted, they'd be doing this themselves or would be the majority," but rather a consolidation of power entirely consistent with the actions of the fascist governments of the 1930's. As eminent mathematician Kurt Goedel once showed, it can happen here. It can happen anywhere. The Consitution isn't a complete safeguard, only the people it serves.
09 March 2005
Water Park
Cook & Phillip Park, situated in front of St Mary’s Cathedral, is mainly a skateboarder hang-out. For some reason, the designers of the plaza decided to build the area in front of the water features as a sort of amphitheatre. I suppose events of one kind or another are held there, but the main result visible has been the damage to the stone benches along the inclined areas. There’s something to be said for building skateboard parks.
Meanwhile, one of the more attractive features of Sydney is the water, and not just in the harbour
or at the beaches. The city has, as so very many do, a wealth of fountains, some more creative than others. Cook & Phillip, for example, turns the concept into a miniature wetlands:

More traditional waterworks are also present:

I’m not sure of all the figures represented, although Perseus and Diana are definites. That may be Jason with the goat and ram, and the guy on the top? It would have been helpful if any of the plaques didn’t just say the fountain was a gift of the Archibalds, but perhaps I’ll encounter someone with a better grounding in Greek or Roman sculptural representations. But at least they’re pretty, unlike some others:
Cook & Phillip Park, situated in front of St Mary’s Cathedral, is mainly a skateboarder hang-out. For some reason, the designers of the plaza decided to build the area in front of the water features as a sort of amphitheatre. I suppose events of one kind or another are held there, but the main result visible has been the damage to the stone benches along the inclined areas. There’s something to be said for building skateboard parks.
Meanwhile, one of the more attractive features of Sydney is the water, and not just in the harbour
or at the beaches. The city has, as so very many do, a wealth of fountains, some more creative than others. Cook & Phillip, for example, turns the concept into a miniature wetlands:
More traditional waterworks are also present:
I’m not sure of all the figures represented, although Perseus and Diana are definites. That may be Jason with the goat and ram, and the guy on the top? It would have been helpful if any of the plaques didn’t just say the fountain was a gift of the Archibalds, but perhaps I’ll encounter someone with a better grounding in Greek or Roman sculptural representations. But at least they’re pretty, unlike some others:
Too Old to Fly, Too Expensive to Ship
Cui Yu Hu is 104 years old and, until yesterday, an illegal immigrant. Now Immigration Minister Amanda Vanstone has kindly allowed her to stay. For the last 10 years, she’s been “illegal,” having been denied an aged parent visa. She had what’s known as “bridging visas” issued over that time, so how exactly she’s been illegal is hard to figure. One of those technicalities, I suppose. Meanwhile, she’s also been denied passage on any airlines as too frail to make the passage back to China. Now, not only can she stay with her adopted daughter and son-in-law, but she’ll also get Medicare. Not that she’ll cost much to the system, I expect, at her age.
This should never have become such an issue, but the focus on MP Vanstone’s portfolio and performance over these past months has been deservedly intense, and the requirements to get her attention on anything sufficiently formal as to ensure a protracted and painful process. With the policy of mandatory detention for refugees regardless of whether family or community support is already established and regardless of age, followed by the high-profile Cornelia Rau case, various other diplomatic screw-ups, and now bureaucratic efforts towards deportation of helpless centenarians, it’s pretty clear there’s a problem.
Government is hard; there are many competing interests clamoring for preference; but it doesn’t have to be hard-hearted: that’s why these ministers have these positions; and, sure, there is a problem with an open immigration policy in Australia, as in many other places, although perhaps for many other reasons. It’s pretty much undeniable that Australia simply cannot support too large a population. We’re pushing the water-use borders right now, and the housing and transportation infrastructure is getting a bit stretched. With socialized medicine and other economic safety-net programs, there has to be some concern that the bludgers don’t take all the rest of us for a ride, but there doesn’t appear to be any substantial concern that the country is approaching an inability to meet the requirements it’s set out for itself, unless you want to count the apparently about-to-fail private health insurers Tony Abbott keeps throwing our money at.
We’re told over and over that we live in a “post-September 11” world and that our policies and actions need to reflect that, but what I see is a hardening of previously set positions or a return to Cold War strategies and paranoia. Every immigration issue that comes up, among other policy-related events, points to the entrenchment of fear and makes me suspect the cynical motivation of those digging in up on the hill.
Cui Yu Hu is 104 years old and, until yesterday, an illegal immigrant. Now Immigration Minister Amanda Vanstone has kindly allowed her to stay. For the last 10 years, she’s been “illegal,” having been denied an aged parent visa. She had what’s known as “bridging visas” issued over that time, so how exactly she’s been illegal is hard to figure. One of those technicalities, I suppose. Meanwhile, she’s also been denied passage on any airlines as too frail to make the passage back to China. Now, not only can she stay with her adopted daughter and son-in-law, but she’ll also get Medicare. Not that she’ll cost much to the system, I expect, at her age.
This should never have become such an issue, but the focus on MP Vanstone’s portfolio and performance over these past months has been deservedly intense, and the requirements to get her attention on anything sufficiently formal as to ensure a protracted and painful process. With the policy of mandatory detention for refugees regardless of whether family or community support is already established and regardless of age, followed by the high-profile Cornelia Rau case, various other diplomatic screw-ups, and now bureaucratic efforts towards deportation of helpless centenarians, it’s pretty clear there’s a problem.
Government is hard; there are many competing interests clamoring for preference; but it doesn’t have to be hard-hearted: that’s why these ministers have these positions; and, sure, there is a problem with an open immigration policy in Australia, as in many other places, although perhaps for many other reasons. It’s pretty much undeniable that Australia simply cannot support too large a population. We’re pushing the water-use borders right now, and the housing and transportation infrastructure is getting a bit stretched. With socialized medicine and other economic safety-net programs, there has to be some concern that the bludgers don’t take all the rest of us for a ride, but there doesn’t appear to be any substantial concern that the country is approaching an inability to meet the requirements it’s set out for itself, unless you want to count the apparently about-to-fail private health insurers Tony Abbott keeps throwing our money at.
We’re told over and over that we live in a “post-September 11” world and that our policies and actions need to reflect that, but what I see is a hardening of previously set positions or a return to Cold War strategies and paranoia. Every immigration issue that comes up, among other policy-related events, points to the entrenchment of fear and makes me suspect the cynical motivation of those digging in up on the hill.
UNaction
God knows the United Nations needs a shake-up, and maybe putting one of the more aggressive critics in as ambassador will help, although I’m not convinced just from Condoleezza Rice’s say-so. It isn’t so much whether the UN was good or bad on Iraq – because in the last round in Iraq, they weren’t allowed to do their job or believed insofar as they were able to produce anything towards a result – but the inaction in Africa has been an embarrassment, or would have been to any remote observer, if any such were possible, whereas for most of us, well, were as complicit as our governments fail to act, whether with the UN or in some other coalition or even alone, as happened in Rwanda and now in Sudan. So oil-for-food scandals aside, there are diplomatic progress problems.
Unfortunately, it’s the permanent members of the Security Council who, in wielding their absolute vetoes, cause the problems, and the U.S. isn’t the least of the trouble-makers there, even if the neocons and Iowa farmers believe it’s the French. Pressing for action, getting movement more than mere resolutions, those are the kinds of activities I want to see, but I expect, perhaps cynically, something much different. The UN could be effective, if the rich and powerful nations of the world would make it so, and starting with the U.S., and then John Bolton’s concept of shifting and opportunistic alliances, the kind that have gotten us into trouble in various other regions of the world, wouldn’t be necessary, allowing more idealistic, global efforts. The appointment of John Bolton seems to perpetuate the worst diplomatic tendencies of the Bush administration.
God knows the United Nations needs a shake-up, and maybe putting one of the more aggressive critics in as ambassador will help, although I’m not convinced just from Condoleezza Rice’s say-so. It isn’t so much whether the UN was good or bad on Iraq – because in the last round in Iraq, they weren’t allowed to do their job or believed insofar as they were able to produce anything towards a result – but the inaction in Africa has been an embarrassment, or would have been to any remote observer, if any such were possible, whereas for most of us, well, were as complicit as our governments fail to act, whether with the UN or in some other coalition or even alone, as happened in Rwanda and now in Sudan. So oil-for-food scandals aside, there are diplomatic progress problems.
Unfortunately, it’s the permanent members of the Security Council who, in wielding their absolute vetoes, cause the problems, and the U.S. isn’t the least of the trouble-makers there, even if the neocons and Iowa farmers believe it’s the French. Pressing for action, getting movement more than mere resolutions, those are the kinds of activities I want to see, but I expect, perhaps cynically, something much different. The UN could be effective, if the rich and powerful nations of the world would make it so, and starting with the U.S., and then John Bolton’s concept of shifting and opportunistic alliances, the kind that have gotten us into trouble in various other regions of the world, wouldn’t be necessary, allowing more idealistic, global efforts. The appointment of John Bolton seems to perpetuate the worst diplomatic tendencies of the Bush administration.
07 March 2005
Creature Features
While M. was out flying the high-culture flag with her Hollywood friends at the top-100 after party, I was similarly engaged in ensuring that only the highest examples of filmic art came anywhere near my brain. Alien vs. Predator is right up there with all the finest of the "x meets x" horror genre. You can take that however you like, but for just over an hour and a half, I was marginally entertained. Like most of the Frankenstein entries, the biggest problem is that the main characters don't speak English. "Hiss" says Alien. "Click-click-click" says Predator. "Aiee" says all the humans. "Ugh" says I. What is it that compels me to watch these things?
While M. was out flying the high-culture flag with her Hollywood friends at the top-100 after party, I was similarly engaged in ensuring that only the highest examples of filmic art came anywhere near my brain. Alien vs. Predator is right up there with all the finest of the "x meets x" horror genre. You can take that however you like, but for just over an hour and a half, I was marginally entertained. Like most of the Frankenstein entries, the biggest problem is that the main characters don't speak English. "Hiss" says Alien. "Click-click-click" says Predator. "Aiee" says all the humans. "Ugh" says I. What is it that compels me to watch these things?
04 March 2005
Taxing Spending
Here in Australia, there's been the GST, the Goods and Services Tax, for a few years already. The GST applies to everything you spend money on, with the exception of "essential food items." But a coffee, pay a tax. Hire a lawyer, pay a tax. 10% of the purchase is tax. In New Zealand, I understand it's 15%. Is that, essentially, what Alan Greenspan is proposing? In would be a big shift, but it sounds more like a ploy to distract everyone from privatizing Social Security.
Here in Australia, there's been the GST, the Goods and Services Tax, for a few years already. The GST applies to everything you spend money on, with the exception of "essential food items." But a coffee, pay a tax. Hire a lawyer, pay a tax. 10% of the purchase is tax. In New Zealand, I understand it's 15%. Is that, essentially, what Alan Greenspan is proposing? In would be a big shift, but it sounds more like a ploy to distract everyone from privatizing Social Security.
03 March 2005
Gains, and Ill-Gotten Gains
Does Tony Abbott own stock in the private health care companies? Over the last 3 years, premiums have been increased by more than 7% annually under his watch, with a nearly 8% average increase this year as well. Inflation doesn’t account for it. In fact, according to Abbott, it’s due to gains in the standard of private health care. I don’t really get that. Was private health care substandard? Or is private care now so advanced beyond what’s available under the Medicare scheme that my coverage should be able to keep patients alive and healthy substantially longer than the rest of the population? The truth lies in his statement regarding future rate rises: "All I can say is that the only rises that will be approved by this Government are rises which are absolutely necessary to ensure that the funds can continue to pay out benefits to members." In other words, the insurance companies are doing such a lousy job of managing their business that they can’t afford to stay in business unless they keep raising rates. As the Howard government attempts to force more and more of the population to sign up for private cover, it’s possible that we might eventually see a “group rate” effect, but I’m not counting on it. If it wasn’t for the dental, I’d have dropped our coverage already.
Does Tony Abbott own stock in the private health care companies? Over the last 3 years, premiums have been increased by more than 7% annually under his watch, with a nearly 8% average increase this year as well. Inflation doesn’t account for it. In fact, according to Abbott, it’s due to gains in the standard of private health care. I don’t really get that. Was private health care substandard? Or is private care now so advanced beyond what’s available under the Medicare scheme that my coverage should be able to keep patients alive and healthy substantially longer than the rest of the population? The truth lies in his statement regarding future rate rises: "All I can say is that the only rises that will be approved by this Government are rises which are absolutely necessary to ensure that the funds can continue to pay out benefits to members." In other words, the insurance companies are doing such a lousy job of managing their business that they can’t afford to stay in business unless they keep raising rates. As the Howard government attempts to force more and more of the population to sign up for private cover, it’s possible that we might eventually see a “group rate” effect, but I’m not counting on it. If it wasn’t for the dental, I’d have dropped our coverage already.
02 March 2005
Coelacanth
Actually, thylacine, the “Tasmanian Tiger.” Could they still exist? I’d have to add it to my list of creatures to be spotted in the wild, along with a platypus and an echidna, but I'll have to get out more in any event. Parramatta Park's got little more than kookaburra, cockatoos, and lizards.
Actually, thylacine, the “Tasmanian Tiger.” Could they still exist? I’d have to add it to my list of creatures to be spotted in the wild, along with a platypus and an echidna, but I'll have to get out more in any event. Parramatta Park's got little more than kookaburra, cockatoos, and lizards.
What Goes Up
In April it’ll have been a year since we opted to renew our mortgage with a fixed rate, which we did anticipating the official rate rise that’s only now come to pass. That gives us just two years for the economy or my wage to perform better before we have to feel the pinch, and the Reserve's already touting next month's meeting for another bump-up. (Anyone who bought the line PM Howard was running during last year's campaign had better be more ready than we are.) In one year, my contract will be up for renewal, but because the period is two years, I’ll have to think pretty hard about whether it’s affordable to take the “sinecure” and hope the Reserve Bank’s actions don’t set me up for a problem in 2007, or to look for a job with less security but a higher wage and hope for no repeat of 2004’s events. How many mergers can there be? It depends, I suppose, on whether tougher economic conditions overall result in more or fewer companies becoming targets, or whether that happens when there’s generally more cash around. Maybe I should buy that lottery ticket. . . .
In April it’ll have been a year since we opted to renew our mortgage with a fixed rate, which we did anticipating the official rate rise that’s only now come to pass. That gives us just two years for the economy or my wage to perform better before we have to feel the pinch, and the Reserve's already touting next month's meeting for another bump-up. (Anyone who bought the line PM Howard was running during last year's campaign had better be more ready than we are.) In one year, my contract will be up for renewal, but because the period is two years, I’ll have to think pretty hard about whether it’s affordable to take the “sinecure” and hope the Reserve Bank’s actions don’t set me up for a problem in 2007, or to look for a job with less security but a higher wage and hope for no repeat of 2004’s events. How many mergers can there be? It depends, I suppose, on whether tougher economic conditions overall result in more or fewer companies becoming targets, or whether that happens when there’s generally more cash around. Maybe I should buy that lottery ticket. . . .
Hollywood or Bust
M.'s had her script accepted into the top 100 in Project Greenlight, an outcome I fully expected, of course, but also an achievement worth no little pride. Although nearly 2,000 scripts were submitted, only 720 met the basic criteria, and after a gruelling peer review process, they've been whittled down. Next, the top 50, then 20, then 10, then "Action." At this point the competition is truly fearsome, I expect, although none of the scripts we read made it through, so it's hard to judge precisely. If the titles are any indication, I think M. should anticipate moving ahead. (I mean, "Physics & Chips"? "Where Boys Fear to Tread"? Really. I hope those're just working titles.) Anyway, congratulations; next stop: Oscar.
M.'s had her script accepted into the top 100 in Project Greenlight, an outcome I fully expected, of course, but also an achievement worth no little pride. Although nearly 2,000 scripts were submitted, only 720 met the basic criteria, and after a gruelling peer review process, they've been whittled down. Next, the top 50, then 20, then 10, then "Action." At this point the competition is truly fearsome, I expect, although none of the scripts we read made it through, so it's hard to judge precisely. If the titles are any indication, I think M. should anticipate moving ahead. (I mean, "Physics & Chips"? "Where Boys Fear to Tread"? Really. I hope those're just working titles.) Anyway, congratulations; next stop: Oscar.
01 March 2005
Thank You, Thank You
No big surprises in the Academy Awards last night, except maybe in the rearranged presentations. Having groups up on stage or seated together and introduced from the audience is a good idea; it highlights, however, a certain elitist element, leaving the big award nominees to perform the usual crawl to the aisle and walk to the stage shaking hands with everyone you pass or at least the ones you don’t kiss. But Best Director or Best Actor/Actress are bigger deals, in respect to box office and the price you can subsequently command for your next contract, than are Best Sound Editing or Best Key Grip or whatever. I hadn’t realized that Scorsese has never gotten the gong for Best Director, and now Clint’s gotten it twice. I did think Unforgiven was terrific, and I expect to thoroughly enjoy Million Dollar Baby, once we get to it, but Scorsese must be the most deserving director to ever not win. Some fundamental flaw in his movies? Or is it because he’s never done a western? (Oh, and Hillary Swank’s dress looked like it was on backwards, until she turned around to reveal it had no back. Who dresses these people?)
No big surprises in the Academy Awards last night, except maybe in the rearranged presentations. Having groups up on stage or seated together and introduced from the audience is a good idea; it highlights, however, a certain elitist element, leaving the big award nominees to perform the usual crawl to the aisle and walk to the stage shaking hands with everyone you pass or at least the ones you don’t kiss. But Best Director or Best Actor/Actress are bigger deals, in respect to box office and the price you can subsequently command for your next contract, than are Best Sound Editing or Best Key Grip or whatever. I hadn’t realized that Scorsese has never gotten the gong for Best Director, and now Clint’s gotten it twice. I did think Unforgiven was terrific, and I expect to thoroughly enjoy Million Dollar Baby, once we get to it, but Scorsese must be the most deserving director to ever not win. Some fundamental flaw in his movies? Or is it because he’s never done a western? (Oh, and Hillary Swank’s dress looked like it was on backwards, until she turned around to reveal it had no back. Who dresses these people?)
Closing the Gates
And now it’s over; the biggest art event in NYC since King Tut’s tomb’s contents toured through the Metropolitan Museum. Wrap-up’s, if I can be permitted the pun, are expected from those who were there. And, courtesy of Gothamist, a fitting, seasonal farewell photo:
And now it’s over; the biggest art event in NYC since King Tut’s tomb’s contents toured through the Metropolitan Museum. Wrap-up’s, if I can be permitted the pun, are expected from those who were there. And, courtesy of Gothamist, a fitting, seasonal farewell photo:
Fourth-Form Politics
It wasn’t enough to pay for news stories or to hire male prostitutes into the White House Press Corps, George is so desperate for America to believe Social Security needs to be in the hands of Wall Street fat cats that he’s hiring nine-year-old children to stump for him. He’s nine, but he’s cute, so we ought to believe him. The sad thing is, there are fifty million people who actually will believe this kid, just because arguing against believing him means to them you’re anti-family. I’m not; he’s nine. And a head full of trivia doesn’t make you a genius.
It wasn’t enough to pay for news stories or to hire male prostitutes into the White House Press Corps, George is so desperate for America to believe Social Security needs to be in the hands of Wall Street fat cats that he’s hiring nine-year-old children to stump for him. He’s nine, but he’s cute, so we ought to believe him. The sad thing is, there are fifty million people who actually will believe this kid, just because arguing against believing him means to them you’re anti-family. I’m not; he’s nine. And a head full of trivia doesn’t make you a genius.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)