Artwork for podcast The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove
Episode 408 - Albanese is Morrison Without the Smirk
21st November 2023 • The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove • The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove
00:00:00 01:08:14

Share Episode

Shownotes

In this episode we discuss:

  • What is the point of Labor Governments?
  • Robodebt – 57 recommendations
  • Move to double Qld first-homeowner grant to $30,000
  • Boomers are spending
  • Have Babies
  • Indefinite detention
  • David McBride
  • Optus CEO Quits
  • Tuvalu
  • Gender Pay Gap
  • Uk Rwanda
  • Argentina
  • Gaza
  • Jordan Peterson
  • Elon Musk on Gaza
  • China Update
  • Xi In San Francisco
  • America can’t stop China’s rise
  • Ukraine

To financially support the Podcast you can make:

We Livestream every Monday night at 7:30 pm Brisbane time. Follow us on Facebook or YouTube. Watch us live and join the discussion in the chat room.

We have a website. www.ironfistvelvetglove.com.au

You can email us. The address is trevor@ironfistvelvetglove.com.au



Transcripts

Speaker:

Suburban Eastern Australia, an environment that has, over time,

Speaker:

evolved some extraordinarily unique groups of homosapiens.

Speaker:

But today, we observe a small tribe akin to a group of meerkats that

Speaker:

gather together atop a small mound to watch, question, and discuss the

Speaker:

current events of their city, their country, and their world at large.

Speaker:

Let's listen keenly and observe this group fondly known as the

Speaker:

Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove.

Speaker:

Yes, we're back.

Speaker:

Episode 408 of the Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove.

Speaker:

We had a week off because I was sick.

Speaker:

More about that in a moment.

Speaker:

I'm Trevor, aka the Iron Fist, with me as always, Scott the Velvet Glove, calling in

Speaker:

loud and clear from Regional Queensland.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

How are you, Trevor?

Speaker:

How are you, Joe?

Speaker:

How are your listeners?

Speaker:

I hope everyone's well.

Speaker:

I am a lot better now, thank you.

Speaker:

And tech guy and UK correspondent Joe.

Speaker:

How are you, Joe?

Speaker:

Good morning, all.

Speaker:

Joe's with us.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

So yes, we missed out last week because I was sick and got a bout of pneumonia.

Speaker:

Briefly, I had a virus prior to Melbourne Cup Tuesday.

Speaker:

I lingered around for a week, thought I was getting better, and then after doing

Speaker:

the podcast Tuesday night, woke up with a terrible cough and feeling awful, and what

Speaker:

had basically happened was that my immune system was weakened by the virus, and...

Speaker:

Both Joe and myself, with Crohn's disease, take medication.

Speaker:

Joe, you're on mesosalazine as well, or not?

Speaker:

No, no, no.

Speaker:

I'm on a bunch of other drugs, so...

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

I'm on one that suppresses my immune system, because Crohn's is, to some

Speaker:

extent, sort of a thing where your immune system goes a bit haywire, so

Speaker:

they need to tone it down a little bit.

Speaker:

So, after the virus and taking the medication for Crohn's, I had a

Speaker:

compromised immune system, which allowed a bacteria to get in, and I

Speaker:

ended up with pneumonia and was in a shocking state for five days at home.

Speaker:

I really should have gone to the hospital a lot earlier.

Speaker:

Anyway went on the Monday morning, raised the white flag, went in and spent

Speaker:

three nights at the Wesley Hospital.

Speaker:

A lovely private room, using some of my private medical cover.

Speaker:

I highly recommend the grilled barramundi on the menu, and I was well looked after.

Speaker:

And feeling good now, except if I do anything energetic I run out of gas.

Speaker:

But sitting here and podcasting is something I can do, uh, I'm podcast fit.

Speaker:

At least, so we'll run through the topics of the last two weeks and do

Speaker:

our best to sort of describe what's going on and what's been happening.

Speaker:

If you're in the chat room, say hello, let me see, is anybody there at the moment?

Speaker:

Four people apparently.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

Say hello if you're there.

Speaker:

John Simmons is there.

Speaker:

So, diastrates.

Speaker:

Thanks, John.

Speaker:

Yes, I'm on the road back, but it's going to take a few weeks to get fully back.

Speaker:

Lost a few, lost a bit of weight too.

Speaker:

Lost about three kilos.

Speaker:

I didn't really need, I was at my fighting weight and after losing three

Speaker:

kilos, I looked a little bit like really an old man on, or a bit of a,

Speaker:

sort of a concentration camp victim.

Speaker:

So I was looking really skinny.

Speaker:

So anyway, I'm, I'm trying to beef up, trying to actually put

Speaker:

on weight if you can believe it.

Speaker:

So, there we go.

Speaker:

Get on the bears.

Speaker:

Yeah, that's it.

Speaker:

Indeed.

Speaker:

So, right, we're going to talk about what's the point of this Labor

Speaker:

government robo debt Queensland first home owner grant extended, another bash

Speaker:

at boomers, The indefinite detention sort of decision out of the High Court,

Speaker:

David McBride, Optus CEO, Tuvalu, the gender pay gap, Argentina, Gaza, the

Speaker:

China update, maybe a bit of Ukraine.

Speaker:

See how we go in the next hour as we run through the topics.

Speaker:

But guys, um, a couple of things happened and we'll talk to you about

Speaker:

in more detail, but the, the robo debt.

Speaker:

Inquiry was a really good one and the commissioner in charge of that

Speaker:

came out with 57 recommendations.

Speaker:

Ah, but the government's not mentioning that they're not mentioning number 57.

Speaker:

Correct.

Speaker:

The government's being really sneaky and saying actually there

Speaker:

were only 56 recommendations.

Speaker:

Yeah, they, they mentioned this morning on 7am when I was listening to it,

Speaker:

they reckon it wasn't any, they reckon it wasn't a recommendation, it was...

Speaker:

It was a talking point or something like that.

Speaker:

That's what the government's saying.

Speaker:

But immediately after the report was presented, Bill Shorten

Speaker:

said, there's 57 recommendations.

Speaker:

The report itself says, there's 57 recommendations.

Speaker:

It just happened to be that the 57th was in this sort of final thoughts

Speaker:

chapter, but it was undoubtedly a recommendation, which was basically...

Speaker:

Looking at the way that information is held secret using cabinet

Speaker:

secrecy arrangements, and really information is presented to cabinet.

Speaker:

Well, you want some certain, you want some secrecy around cabinet deliberations.

Speaker:

It's a fair enough thing.

Speaker:

People in cabinet need to be able to talk about potential

Speaker:

decisions and argue about them.

Speaker:

And maybe you might argue we should not do this thing.

Speaker:

And other people are arguing, well, we should do it.

Speaker:

And at the end of the day, the cabinet decides they're going to do it.

Speaker:

You really have this principle of sort of cabinet solidarity and everyone in the

Speaker:

cabinet then gets behind the decision.

Speaker:

You really don't want that sort of backroom negotiation and discussion

Speaker:

to be hashed out in public.

Speaker:

And for ministers to be questioned, to be said, Oh, well, you, you

Speaker:

were initially against the idea and now you're saying you're for it.

Speaker:

Of course, it's all about Covenant solidarity.

Speaker:

So there are legitimate reasons why some things should be kept secret.

Speaker:

What we've got is sort of information going to Cabinet, factual information,

Speaker:

and that then being declared Secret Cabinet business, where really

Speaker:

it's just factual information that should be available to everybody.

Speaker:

And it's being misused and abused.

Speaker:

Well, there was a comment that they've got a trolley that they wheel through the

Speaker:

Cabinet room every week with information that they don't want released, so that

Speaker:

it's being considered by Cabinet because they wheeled it through once a week.

Speaker:

There you go.

Speaker:

That was hyperbole, I don't know.

Speaker:

Yeah, but that's the sort of, gives you an idea.

Speaker:

That's a good description of kind of what's happening.

Speaker:

And so this Labor government has basically said, Oh, well, there were

Speaker:

only 56 recommendations that that final one wasn't a real recommendation.

Speaker:

And everybody knows it was a recommendation.

Speaker:

It's Orwellian doublespeak.

Speaker:

It's a fucking joke that they're trying to describe it as not a recommendation.

Speaker:

Now, if they had a decent, if they had a decent pair on them and that

Speaker:

sort of stuff, they'd actually say to you, look, we accept and we'll

Speaker:

implement 56 of the 57 recommendations.

Speaker:

Number 57 is problematic because it deals with in cabinet incompetence.

Speaker:

We agree that the Tories did misuse this.

Speaker:

But, you know, we don't want to open the doors and that sort of stuff.

Speaker:

Because, you know, it's one of those things.

Speaker:

It's, I agree with you, Trevor.

Speaker:

It's a double edged sword for them.

Speaker:

Because if they say that, if they say they're going to accept number

Speaker:

57, then you could end up with...

Speaker:

Freedom of information requests every other week, and that could actually

Speaker:

end up undoing the whole cabinet of incompetence thing, which I know people

Speaker:

that are all about transparency and that sort of stuff wouldn't have a

Speaker:

problem with, but I agree with you.

Speaker:

You've got to be able to have a forthright debate in cabinet.

Speaker:

And I think that you wouldn't have that forthright debate if there was

Speaker:

any, if there was any chance of it being leaked outside of Cabinet.

Speaker:

I'm sure it would be possible to structure the rules such as, such that things that

Speaker:

should be kept secret are kept secret, and things that should be open are open.

Speaker:

Yeah, so you're going to have to have bureaucrats and that sort of stuff that

Speaker:

actually go through it and that type of thing that they can say, well, we've

Speaker:

got this, we've got this FOI request, so you've got a bureaucrat that goes

Speaker:

through it and that sort of stuff.

Speaker:

Then they're going to have to take it to the ministers and say, this

Speaker:

is why we're going to hand it over.

Speaker:

Yeah, but that happens all the time with freedom of information

Speaker:

requests, they're assessed.

Speaker:

And evaluated.

Speaker:

But an FOI request can't actually undo anything that's in cabinet though, can it?

Speaker:

Correct.

Speaker:

So, look, the way this is handled though, I reckon, is exactly how the Morrison

Speaker:

government would have handled it.

Speaker:

I agree wholeheartedly.

Speaker:

Just a really bullshit explanation and a bluff and, and which is precisely why

Speaker:

I just said, if they had a decent pair on them and that sort of stuff, they'd

Speaker:

actually take it to the public and say...

Speaker:

We are accepting the first 56 recommendations.

Speaker:

Number 57 is problematic.

Speaker:

It's problematic because of ABC.

Speaker:

And then you might have it come back and then you might have journalists

Speaker:

saying, well, can't you do X, Y, Z?

Speaker:

And they say, good question.

Speaker:

We will go away and think about it.

Speaker:

And they can come back and say, well, you can't do X, Y, Z because of 1, 2, 3.

Speaker:

You know, it's just one of those things.

Speaker:

If they had a, like I said, if they had a decent pair and that sort of stuff,

Speaker:

they might be prepared to argue it.

Speaker:

But they clearly don't want to argue with it, and it's one of the things

Speaker:

that's most disappointing about the Albanese government, is they, they

Speaker:

always want to look for the simple things in life, and they want to go

Speaker:

through and tick off the simple things.

Speaker:

And then they can say, well, we've done 70 percent of what

Speaker:

we promised we were going to do.

Speaker:

The other 30 percent is a little bit too complicated, so we're going to hold off.

Speaker:

You know, it's one of those things, I honestly believe I'd have a hell

Speaker:

of a lot more respect for them if they said, we're going to handle

Speaker:

the, the tough 30 percent right now.

Speaker:

We're going to actually talk to you about why we're doing what we're doing.

Speaker:

And we're going to have, we're going to have a lot of you disagreeing with

Speaker:

us, but we've got to actually do this.

Speaker:

And it's this.

Speaker:

Just treat us like adults, not like idiots.

Speaker:

Like Morrison treated us like idiots.

Speaker:

And these guys are doing the same thing.

Speaker:

This is precisely how Morrison would have handled it.

Speaker:

And it's one of those things like, you know, Paul Bongiorno, who turns

Speaker:

up every Friday on 7am talking about it and that sort of stuff.

Speaker:

He says, look, the Albanese government's got to pull their finger out.

Speaker:

He didn't use that language.

Speaker:

But he said, he's got to actually, he's got to actually start taking the

Speaker:

electorate into his confidence and that type of thing, actually talking

Speaker:

through, he's actually got to actually put something on the table and say,

Speaker:

this is what we're going to do.

Speaker:

Because, you know, you've actually got to look at the reforms and that

Speaker:

sort of stuff under Hawke and Keating.

Speaker:

They were not classic Labor reforms.

Speaker:

They were Liberal Party policies that the Labor Party pinched, you know, and

Speaker:

they got up and that sort of stuff.

Speaker:

Argued them, and they actually put up persuasive arguments for them, and they

Speaker:

told the public why they were doing it.

Speaker:

Hmm.

Speaker:

And these idiots are just saying to us, Oh, there was

Speaker:

really only 56 recommendations.

Speaker:

Yeah, I know.

Speaker:

And do they honestly believe it?

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

You know, it's, it's one of the things the Fourth Estate should really

Speaker:

be ashamed of themselves because they're actually swallowing it.

Speaker:

They're actually reporting to the public there's only been 56

Speaker:

recommendations, which is nonsense.

Speaker:

But they know that some of the public is stupid, will accept that.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

I'm going to mention that because my old man will be up there watching Sky News

Speaker:

saying oh yeah, we're going to accept 56 notes, 56 of the recommendations.

Speaker:

So that really struck me as ScoMo esque, the whole approach to that problem.

Speaker:

Oh, exactly.

Speaker:

We've had David McBride before the court, basically the

Speaker:

whistleblower on on war crimes.

Speaker:

And, you know, ScoMo would have run that the same way, just

Speaker:

kept going with the court case.

Speaker:

Whereas you would have hoped a Labor government would have said,

Speaker:

great, a whistleblower exposed what had happened here and...

Speaker:

Yeah, public interest.

Speaker:

He actually, he pleaded guilty didn't he?

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

To three charges, yes.

Speaker:

Yeah, because apparently public interest wasn't a defence, it turned out.

Speaker:

He tried to argue and they said, well no, that's not true.

Speaker:

That's bloody ridiculous.

Speaker:

So we've got Robodebt shenanigans, we've got David McBride hauled through the court

Speaker:

when really he's an honest whistleblower.

Speaker:

We've got something like Tuvalu, a little Pacific Island note.

Speaker:

Sorry, Dave.

Speaker:

I was going to say the whistleblower thing, they were saying that the people...

Speaker:

He has alleged committed war crimes, is still out free walking

Speaker:

and he's already pled guilty, if not been sentenced what the hell,

Speaker:

where, where's the justice in that?

Speaker:

It, it'd have been better off committing the war crime.

Speaker:

than revealing the war crime.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

The way it's panning out.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

It's one of those things I find that really ridiculous that you've got a

Speaker:

situation that the whistleblower is the one, the only one that's going to face

Speaker:

any time behind bars, and the guys that pulled the trigger, they're going to

Speaker:

get away with it completely scot free.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So, as Kamo esque approach, we'll talk about Tuvalu, a

Speaker:

little Pacific island nation.

Speaker:

We're going to provide them with aid, but in return, we're bullying them

Speaker:

into basically handing over their sovereignty for, for their relationships

Speaker:

with other countries, and they have to sort of get the okay from us before,

Speaker:

beforehand, which is something that the Conservative government would have done.

Speaker:

The Slaver government's been reluctant to criticise Israel.

Speaker:

Scammer would have come out and praised Israel, but you know, We've got cuts to

Speaker:

infrastructure spending have happened now because government's got a budget problem.

Speaker:

They're still running through the Stage 3 tax cuts.

Speaker:

We've still got orcas happening.

Speaker:

And we've got no pro sort of secular things happening at

Speaker:

all with this Labor government.

Speaker:

There, we'll talk about the indefinite detention changes with, uh, the High

Speaker:

Court came out and said, well, all these people you've got on detention,

Speaker:

uh, with no hope of actually getting out, you just can't do it.

Speaker:

And we've got a lot of chest beating by Labor politicians saying, Well,

Speaker:

if we could throw them back in the clink, we would do it immediately.

Speaker:

I want them all behind bars, sort of thing.

Speaker:

Rather than just saying, you know what?

Speaker:

We release into the community rapists and murderers all the time.

Speaker:

Exactly, once they've done their time.

Speaker:

Yeah, once they've done their time, absolutely.

Speaker:

Now these guys, these guys have, these guys I take it have already been convicted

Speaker:

in a foreign jurisdiction, have they?

Speaker:

Some foreign, some here, combination, but, you know, many of them have done

Speaker:

more than the time that would be required for the crime that they committed.

Speaker:

And sure, there's some ugly, nasty characters there.

Speaker:

But our prisons have been full of ugly, nasty characters who we eventually let

Speaker:

out, because you just, as a civilised society, can't lock people up for the

Speaker:

rest of their lives, except in the most extraordinary of circumstances.

Speaker:

And so we just got chest beating by the Labor again on that front.

Speaker:

It all just strikes me as, what would have happened different if Morrison

Speaker:

had won that bloody last election?

Speaker:

Would much have changed?

Speaker:

I think, well, the only thing that would have changed is they would have

Speaker:

walked away from the Stage 3 tax cuts.

Speaker:

Morrison wouldn't have.

Speaker:

Yeah, I really reckon he would have.

Speaker:

No, he wouldn't have.

Speaker:

No, I reckon he would have.

Speaker:

He could see, he could see that that was going to give away far too much money.

Speaker:

Oh, there's a theory, Scott.

Speaker:

I know it's a theory, but it's a theory.

Speaker:

It's an out there theory, but it's one of those things.

Speaker:

I think that they, I think they set this up.

Speaker:

to make it very difficult for the Labor Party, it was set up right from

Speaker:

word go to make it very difficult for the Labor Party to oppose.

Speaker:

So they actually, they actually, they voted it through and that sort

Speaker:

of stuff, then they went to the election and rather stupidly said,

Speaker:

yeah, we're going to allow that.

Speaker:

Which I honestly believe he should have actually said, no, we're not

Speaker:

going to, if we win this, if we win this government, we will be tearing

Speaker:

back the stage three tax cuts.

Speaker:

We will be paring them back.

Speaker:

They were too gutless.

Speaker:

I know they were far too gutless.

Speaker:

They were absolutely shit scared of what happened to Bill Shorten.

Speaker:

Yeah, they didn't want to differentiate themselves from the Tories.

Speaker:

And now that they're in office, They still don't want to differentiate themselves.

Speaker:

Yeah, I know.

Speaker:

And oh, God, what's his name now?

Speaker:

DuTton is trying to wedge Albanese on the refugee thing even still.

Speaker:

Yeah, it's all his fault.

Speaker:

Because if you see the Murdoch press, they're all about how Dutton was

Speaker:

holding Albanese to account about this.

Speaker:

It's like it's a high court judgment.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

On a law that I'm fairly sure LNP implemented.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

It's just the gutlessness of this Labor group to try and tell a story.

Speaker:

And instead they have to do the chest beating that's demanded by the

Speaker:

Conservatives and the Murdoch Press.

Speaker:

And gutless, is all I can say.

Speaker:

No, it's like, like Turnbull.

Speaker:

Turnbull was beholden to the figures on the right, and it

Speaker:

looks like Albanese is too.

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

So, we'll talk about some of those things in more detail as we go through

Speaker:

them, but that was just my initial thoughts for this episode, is what is

Speaker:

the point of this Labor government?

Speaker:

We're just getting ScoMo without the smirk, I think, in many ways.

Speaker:

I think it is still preferable to the Tories though.

Speaker:

Yeah, but...

Speaker:

Realistically, is there that much difference?

Speaker:

No, there's not that much difference, but it's still preferable to the Taurids.

Speaker:

Yes, it's a, it's, it's a prettier wrapping.

Speaker:

It's more palatable, but there's a lot of the same shit underneath is the problem.

Speaker:

Absolutely, it's one of those things if you, if you peel it, if you peel away

Speaker:

the onion and all that sort of stuff, all you've got is a smaller, shinier onion.

Speaker:

You know?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So we talked about Robodebt and those recommendations, and that was just

Speaker:

an Orwellian denial by Labor of...

Speaker:

Of the facts treating us like idiots.

Speaker:

Mm-Hmm.

Speaker:

. Did you guys see that in Queensland the state government announced

Speaker:

will double the first homeowner grant from 15,000 to 30,000?

Speaker:

I liked what Saul Slake said about it.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So saw Westlake is a, is a well-respected economist.

Speaker:

And he's had 60, he said we've had 60 years of evidence that giving cash

Speaker:

to home buyers to let them pay more for housing than they would otherwise

Speaker:

results in more expensive housing, not in more people owning their own home.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

All it's going to do is just look after people like me that are

Speaker:

already in the property market.

Speaker:

I already own my place up here in Mackay outright.

Speaker:

I own my place in I donated it outright.

Speaker:

I've got a mortgage on that one in South Ripley.

Speaker:

You know, it's, If you could increase the property values by

Speaker:

30, 000 on all those properties, that would help me out very nicely.

Speaker:

Just a bunch of people who maybe their budget for buying a new home

Speaker:

was 600, 000, it's now 615, 000.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

And Saul S.

Speaker:

Lake said, It's hard to think of a policy that governments have

Speaker:

pursued for so long in the face of such incontrovertible evidence that

Speaker:

it doesn't work than the policy of giving cash to first home buyers.

Speaker:

The news so I was reading this on the Courier Mail website, and it

Speaker:

asked people, Is doubling the first homeowner grant to 30, 000 a good idea?

Speaker:

In the Courier Mail, amongst Courier Mail readers, 90 percent

Speaker:

said no, not a good idea.

Speaker:

Yeah, but hang on, if you ask a Tory readership whether giving

Speaker:

free money, giving taxpayer money to poor people is a good idea, of

Speaker:

course they're going to say no.

Speaker:

True.

Speaker:

And the other thing is, that all those readers of the Courier Mail,

Speaker:

none of them are first time buyers.

Speaker:

Because they're all old boomers.

Speaker:

Yeah, so there you go.

Speaker:

But they don't realise it's going to push the value of their properties up.

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

Ah, okay, what else did he say here?

Speaker:

Saul Eslake said the argument was just bullshit, essentially.

Speaker:

But he did propose a new name for it, didn't he?

Speaker:

What was that?

Speaker:

It was the, it was the House Builders grant.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Because, because, because the value of the money would go straight to home builders.

Speaker:

Yeah, the builders.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So, there we go.

Speaker:

I'm surprised it will actually stop a few of them going

Speaker:

belly up though, wouldn't it?

Speaker:

Builders?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Maybe.

Speaker:

If they could increase their prices by 20, 000 a build.

Speaker:

I don't know.

Speaker:

I think.

Speaker:

I don't know.

Speaker:

Scott?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Thank you.

Speaker:

I mean, a lot of them are in trouble because they entered into fixed contracts.

Speaker:

Yeah, exactly.

Speaker:

It's one of those things that a hell of a lot of them, a hell of a lot of

Speaker:

them bit off more than they can chew.

Speaker:

And what they did was they said to Pepe, yeah, we'll, we'll build your

Speaker:

house for X dollars and we're going to, we're going to, we're going to honor

Speaker:

that contract price for years to come.

Speaker:

I mean, they should have actually said, if it's not built in 12 months,

Speaker:

then we've got to relook at the price.

Speaker:

Yeah, well, even within 12 months, some of the pricing of, of of wooden frames, for

Speaker:

example, went up really quickly, so, just some of them got caught out like that,

Speaker:

so, anyway still on boomers, so, I think I mentioned, oh, I can't remember if we

Speaker:

mentioned it last week, or last time, but so we had the rise of the interest rates

Speaker:

on Melbourne Cup Tuesday, and, anyway.

Speaker:

What we had was one of the banks, the Commonwealth Bank, looked at its credit

Speaker:

card and debit card transactions from 7 million customers and looked at

Speaker:

the spending patterns based on age.

Speaker:

So that's interesting.

Speaker:

The Commonwealth Bank knows the age of its card holders and can then

Speaker:

look at the spending patterns and remember what we were complaining For

Speaker:

the umpteenth time, of what a blunt instrument interest rates were, because

Speaker:

you stupid consumers out there are spending too much on, on discretionary

Speaker:

items, forcing the prices up, thereby increasing inflation without regard to

Speaker:

the fact that a lot of the components of inflation were things beyond people's

Speaker:

control, like filling up the cars, yeah, and also interest rates themselves.

Speaker:

add to the inflation rate.

Speaker:

And anyway, um, got here a chart, which you guys may not have seen because it

Speaker:

wasn't in the notes, but essentially showing different age groups as it moves

Speaker:

from left to right, it increases in age.

Speaker:

And It's got discretionary spending and essential spending

Speaker:

and total spending and guess what?

Speaker:

As people have been getting older, the old boomers, they're the ones

Speaker:

spending more money on discretionary and essential spending and it's

Speaker:

the young people who have not.

Speaker:

So that sort of 18 to 39 year age group are the people who have not been.

Speaker:

Spending Money, whereas it's the Boomer Class and the Gen X, who

Speaker:

have the no surprise there, but just interesting that those statistics are

Speaker:

available from credit card information.

Speaker:

So just adds to the intergenerational conflict that we've got

Speaker:

going on in this country.

Speaker:

Tweenie.

Speaker:

Between all those, so, essentially younger people forced to spend more on essentials.

Speaker:

It's the older people who are spending money on non essentials.

Speaker:

And guess what?

Speaker:

Raising interest rates probably helps them because they've got money in the

Speaker:

bank, increases their interest rates.

Speaker:

It's totally misguided policy.

Speaker:

Thanks again, Reserve Bank.

Speaker:

I, I have not heard any whispers.

Speaker:

Somebody at some stage will talk about the government taking control

Speaker:

of interest rates and taking it away from the Reserve Bank.

Speaker:

At some point, somebody has to talk about it.

Speaker:

Greg Sheridan in The Australian, he's got another problem with young people.

Speaker:

You're not having enough kids.

Speaker:

Not having enough babies.

Speaker:

He says we need babies more than we do migrants.

Speaker:

Every individual has a right to make their own decision about having children,

Speaker:

but these choices are being increasingly made in the face of coercive, who's

Speaker:

doing, what are you doing there, Joe?

Speaker:

Unwrapping the chocolate.

Speaker:

Every individual has a right to make their own decision about having children,

Speaker:

but these choices are being increasingly made in the face of coercive, feminist

Speaker:

and green ideology that depicts children as enemies of self fulfillment.

Speaker:

What a load of shit.

Speaker:

And guess what?

Speaker:

Greg Sheridan, speaking shit like that, will be invited on to Q& A next week.

Speaker:

He'll be on the drum, he'll be on whatever ABC panel show needs

Speaker:

a talking head, despite the crap that comes out of his mouth.

Speaker:

Mum, you know...

Speaker:

Family values, the modern, it's just breaking up.

Speaker:

Women should be barefoot and pregnant back in the kitchen.

Speaker:

Come on.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Gonna blame that coercive feminist and green ideology.

Speaker:

That's it.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Just back to the indefinite detention.

Speaker:

Good chocolate there, Joe.

Speaker:

So...

Speaker:

I Was trying to figure out what is going on with this indefinite detention

Speaker:

and, ah, maybe I didn't copy it.

Speaker:

It seems to be that because it was mandatory and there wasn't any

Speaker:

consideration of, um, circumstances that, um, there was no real administrative

Speaker:

decision making being made.

Speaker:

And it was almost a judicial power being exercised by executive government.

Speaker:

And our High Court has decided that there is a separation of powers, that

Speaker:

the judiciary looks after judicial matters, and the government looks after

Speaker:

administrative matters, and therefore the way that this had been framed was

Speaker:

a breach of the separation of powers.

Speaker:

Won't know for sure until the decision...

Speaker:

Reasons are published, because this is a really unusual situation with

Speaker:

this detention, where the High Court basically heard the arguments, and

Speaker:

then said Right, everyone come back in 20 minutes, and here's our decision,

Speaker:

and we'll give you the reasons later.

Speaker:

And that was a highly unusual approach to it, so...

Speaker:

Why'd they do it like that?

Speaker:

I think that they saw the urgency of getting people out of detention.

Speaker:

They knew what their decision was.

Speaker:

And they didn't want people held in detention any longer than

Speaker:

necessary while they rode up there.

Speaker:

Detailed reasons.

Speaker:

But detailed reasons only take a week for them to put down on paper, wouldn't they?

Speaker:

Oh, Scott, no.

Speaker:

Really?

Speaker:

No, not at all.

Speaker:

These often take months to get right.

Speaker:

So they knew what their decision was going to be, and so they

Speaker:

announced that and said, we'll give you the full reasons later.

Speaker:

But that appears to be kind of the argument.

Speaker:

So we've made our mind up, we need to rationalise it afterwards.

Speaker:

No, I'm okay with this, where the court says, we're really confident

Speaker:

we've got this right, but the actual writing of the decision is

Speaker:

complicated and will take time.

Speaker:

And, because you've got to cite lots of authorities and whatnot.

Speaker:

And so I'm okay with that part of it.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So that was that was the indefinite detention.

Speaker:

Sort of people.

Speaker:

that have been held in detention are a stateless Rohingya, unauthorised maritime

Speaker:

arrival, sentenced to five years jail for aggravated sexual assault of a victim

Speaker:

under the age of 16, who had been in immigration detention for five years.

Speaker:

peOple smuggler, um, a man convicted in 1999 of the murder of

Speaker:

his wife, sentenced to 22 years.

Speaker:

With a minimum of 18?

Speaker:

I mean, murder of his wife sentenced to 22 years back in 1999.

Speaker:

Like, we let murderers out into the community.

Speaker:

Eventually.

Speaker:

That's normal.

Speaker:

Convicted sex offender, currently on Child Protection Register.

Speaker:

afTer assaulting a 12 year old girl in 2012.

Speaker:

Again, ugly, awful stuff.

Speaker:

My understanding is these are people who would normally be expelled.

Speaker:

But because they're stateless, they can't be.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Because under international law, if they're in your country and they are

Speaker:

stateless, you have to accept them.

Speaker:

Yes, indeed, yep, um, quite a few people smuggling, rape, false imprisonment

Speaker:

trafficking of a controlled drug, meth, um, supplying of prohibitive drugs, fair

Speaker:

number of drug runners it looks like in here I thought I saw at one point there

Speaker:

was a lot of connections to motorcycle gangs, but I'm not so sure about that,

Speaker:

but anyway, that's the sort of people who,

Speaker:

who are now being released into the community with leg bracelets and

Speaker:

reporting conditions and let's face it, that's what goes on all the time.

Speaker:

And I've got no problem with them having to wear ankle bracelets

Speaker:

and they've got reporting and everything else that goes with it.

Speaker:

It's one of those things.

Speaker:

They're the same as Australian citizens, if it's not happening to an

Speaker:

Australian citizen who's been guilty of the same crimes, it shouldn't

Speaker:

be happening to these people.

Speaker:

It seems like there's an additional layer of punishment just because

Speaker:

they were born in the wrong place.

Speaker:

Yeah, that's a good point, but I think to myself, you know, I'll have

Speaker:

to go away and think about that.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

We've already mentioned David McBride, not much more to say about him

Speaker:

except he's pretty guilty it seems.

Speaker:

How much time is he going to do?

Speaker:

I don't know.

Speaker:

Don't know.

Speaker:

Poor bugger.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Optus CEO quit after the Optus network failed.

Speaker:

I found this part interesting.

Speaker:

She was being questioned in the Senate hearing and she said, She

Speaker:

previously carried a spare Vodafone sim in case of an Optus outage, but

Speaker:

now also carries a spare Telstra sim.

Speaker:

That doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

Speaker:

I think you'd be an idiot not to.

Speaker:

As the CEO of Optus?

Speaker:

It's not I have so little faith, it's when the network goes down, you

Speaker:

need to be there to make decisions.

Speaker:

And you need a guaranteed, as a business I wouldn't trust

Speaker:

any single network provider.

Speaker:

If I was running my own business I wouldn't be saying...

Speaker:

There's Telstra, they have the best network, or there's Optus, they

Speaker:

have the best network, I'm 100%.

Speaker:

If I want resiliency, I want to make sure that I have a backup plan that is

Speaker:

completely separate from the other ones.

Speaker:

So Joe, every CEO in Australia, every major political leader, anybody with

Speaker:

an important job should have a spare SIM card on a different network?

Speaker:

If you need to be contactable in a crisis, yes.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

If you're the chief of the fire services or something, or something like that.

Speaker:

That you should have an alternate method.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

And, and more, and more and more as the systems are digitized.

Speaker:

What, what scares me is the infrastructure now is switched.

Speaker:

Every phone call in Australia is switched, either in Melbourne or in Sydney.

Speaker:

And if you have a regional outage that disconnects you from Melbourne and

Speaker:

Sydney, even if your infrastructure is still up and running, your calls

Speaker:

cannot be switched because they're switched in Melbourne and Sydney.

Speaker:

Look, if I was the CEO, I would be saying to my personal secretary, You

Speaker:

make sure you've got a spare sim, because it's just a bad look if I do.

Speaker:

Yeah, I think you're probably, you're probably right there.

Speaker:

There probably was a fairly bad look that she actually admitted

Speaker:

that she had the other sims.

Speaker:

But I honestly think it was quite sensible to have a, a all purpose plan B.

Speaker:

When I, when I worked in a telephone exchange years ago.

Speaker:

We had an out of area line that actually ran from Guernsey into Jersey.

Speaker:

Because when your telephone exchange blows up, you need to be able to

Speaker:

call the manufacturer for help.

Speaker:

Yes, yeah.

Speaker:

Watley in the chat room says all the drug dealers I know have multiple sims.

Speaker:

Don't blame them.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

I've actually got two sims sitting...

Speaker:

Two Sims on my phone right now.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Lots of men conducting affairs also have two Sims as well.

Speaker:

Well, that's true.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

While that goes on, ah, there's a phone out there that you can have two

Speaker:

sim cards in, swap between them on one phone, don't need, don't need two phones.

Speaker:

All of the, all of the iPhones recently support electronic sims, and you

Speaker:

can have up to eight sims loaded you can only have two active at a time.

Speaker:

Right, okay.

Speaker:

Well, there you go.

Speaker:

So anyway, that was Optus CEO, she's gone, and Tuvalu.

Speaker:

I have a little soft spot for Tuvalu because when I was

Speaker:

backpacking in New Zealand...

Speaker:

I met, can you guys hear me okay?

Speaker:

Yeah, we can hear you, go on.

Speaker:

I met some Peace Corps workers who were working in Tuvalu.

Speaker:

And so anyway, always sort of aware of the country.

Speaker:

So, we've made an offer, Australia, to Tuvalu, allowing residents

Speaker:

facing displacement from climate change to resettle in Australia.

Speaker:

But we've attached conditions to that.

Speaker:

And we'll have veto power over Tuvalu's security arrangements

Speaker:

with any other country.

Speaker:

So Tuvalu is bound to Australia, uh, for not just defence, but must seek

Speaker:

Australia's mutual agreement on any of Tuvalu's security arrangements,

Speaker:

covering defence, policing, border enforcement, cyber security.

Speaker:

and critical infrastructure.

Speaker:

So, although not directly stated, this is clearly aimed at China.

Speaker:

Well, this is the sort of bullshit thing that...

Speaker:

Morrison would have done.

Speaker:

Yeah, here's some money, but hand over your sovereignty to us.

Speaker:

Such a bully boy tactic.

Speaker:

It is now, particularly with something like climate change that, let's face it,

Speaker:

Australia's largely responsible for the fossil fuels industry and that sort of

Speaker:

thing, so we are the major cause of it.

Speaker:

It's honestly believed that it sounds okay that we're opening up

Speaker:

our borders and that sort of stuff to allow these people to move over here.

Speaker:

I have no problem with that at all.

Speaker:

It's just that, you know, if you're then going to put, attach the strings

Speaker:

to it the way they have, you know, that's fucking criminal actually.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Couldn't we have just said, here's some money, here's assistance, here's a deal.

Speaker:

Bring your people over if your island gets flooded.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah, by the way, if you get approached by things, just let us know.

Speaker:

Talk to us beforehand.

Speaker:

We'd like to talk if the Chinese come and want to...

Speaker:

Do some deal with you, just talk to us first.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

Just imposing conditions.

Speaker:

It's one of those things.

Speaker:

I don't believe bully boy tactics.

Speaker:

It's one of those things.

Speaker:

It's just that again, the government clearly can't ever

Speaker:

have a conversation with anyone.

Speaker:

You know, they actually should have had that conversation with them saying,

Speaker:

look, if China comes to you first.

Speaker:

That's no problem at all, we just don't want you to make it public

Speaker:

until you've come and spoken to us.

Speaker:

That's the thing so that sort of deal was let me see it's a copy of conditions the

Speaker:

Americans apply to the Marshall Islands, Palau and other, and the Federated States

Speaker:

of Micronesia, giving Washington authority over their defense issues in return for U.

Speaker:

S.

Speaker:

government services.

Speaker:

And the right to live in the U.

Speaker:

S., so we've just taken a page out of the U.

Speaker:

S.

Speaker:

playbook there.

Speaker:

Meanwhile, of course, China provides infrastructure.

Speaker:

Doesn't attach any deals like that, but they're the bad guys, apparently.

Speaker:

Gender pay gap.

Speaker:

Have you guys heard about this?

Speaker:

I guess we're all kind of aware that it's happening where there is a gender pay gap.

Speaker:

Yeah, there's a Jonathan Pye chat about it.

Speaker:

The skit he did.

Speaker:

Have you not seen the Jonathan Pye skit?

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

Ah, okay.

Speaker:

Talking about the fact that it isn't that women are being paid differently from

Speaker:

men, it's that over a lifetime historical things, uh, basically past injustices

Speaker:

are still showing up in today's.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Pay outcomes.

Speaker:

So women fall pregnant, stop working for a few years and just don't catch up, was it?

Speaker:

So basically people who are CEOs now were juniors 20 or 30 years ago and so

Speaker:

the decisions of 20, 30 years ago impact the number of women in senior management

Speaker:

and because of that when you take A gender as a whole compared to another

Speaker:

gender as a whole, there are more men in higher paying jobs, which means that

Speaker:

as a whole, men earn more than women.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

I think what they're finding though, is that people doing the same job,

Speaker:

men are getting paid more than women.

Speaker:

Okay, that was supposed to have stopped.

Speaker:

For the same job.

Speaker:

So what's going to happen in 2024 is...

Speaker:

Every company with more than a hundred employees it's going to be

Speaker:

published by the government's workplace gender equality agency, what the

Speaker:

pay rates are at different levels.

Speaker:

So, companies are now scrambling to make sure that they don't look bad in that

Speaker:

women in senior management positions.

Speaker:

have to be paid the same as men in the same senior management position.

Speaker:

And so when this happened in the UK, the gap got smaller and some big name

Speaker:

companies were embarrassed by the revelation that they pay women less.

Speaker:

So, so yeah, that's going to come out in 2024.

Speaker:

My daughter is involved in HR and she tells me that companies, the ones that

Speaker:

she's involved with, I certainly got an eye on that and conscious of what it

Speaker:

will look like if, if there is an obvious gap for people doing the same role and

Speaker:

the only difference is their gender, so.

Speaker:

Yeah, I mean, there was a lot of discussion about that and then

Speaker:

there was the whole how do you put a value on a presenter's worth?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Who, who is, who is the draw card of the morning show?

Speaker:

And so, yeah, the, the relative amounts that those presenters get

Speaker:

paid, and quite often there's a lot of discussion around that.

Speaker:

Hmm.

Speaker:

Hmm.

Speaker:

Anyway, that's going to come out in 2024.

Speaker:

So, that will be interesting.

Speaker:

UK, Joe, their Supreme Court ruled.

Speaker:

So, the British had an arrangement where basically boat people would

Speaker:

be sent to Rwanda of all places.

Speaker:

And the UK courts said, Rwanda's a dangerous place.

Speaker:

You can't do it.

Speaker:

And, fair enough, so the UK Parliament is having to reassess.

Speaker:

They've also talked about shipping people off to Ascension Island, kind

Speaker:

of like we have done for, um, Manus, uh, they also have a floating Hulk.

Speaker:

Was a...

Speaker:

Ah, that's that boat that they've converted into, isn't it?

Speaker:

Yes, and apparently they've refitted it now and they're trying to get

Speaker:

asylum seekers back on it again.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Is the latest I heard.

Speaker:

Mm hmm.

Speaker:

Because the fire inspector came down and said, Yep, doesn't pass

Speaker:

any of the fire safety regs, you can't have people on board.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So just interesting in both countries, Australia and the UK, the court system

Speaker:

has basically said to the government, in Australia, your detention arrangement.

Speaker:

is unlawful, and in the UK, your extradition

Speaker:

arrangement, also unlawful, so.

Speaker:

But believe me, the UK government is looking at Australia as a leader in

Speaker:

this, and they want to emulate Australia.

Speaker:

It's one of those things, I find it really bizarre that you've got,

Speaker:

you know, in their British accent saying, you've got to stop the boats.

Speaker:

It's exactly what we've been saying over here for years, but you know, it's...

Speaker:

I'm not actually saying it's a good policy or anything like that,

Speaker:

I'm just saying that we've been saying it over here for years, and

Speaker:

now it's been copied by the polls.

Speaker:

Indeed, they definitely have copied from us, no doubt about it.

Speaker:

Argentina has elected a madman, they've got their own Donald Trump, um, possibly

Speaker:

the more They're on Bolsonaro's.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So, this guy.

Speaker:

Xavier Millet, um, he is a right wing libertarian nutcase so, very eccentric

Speaker:

he was once the frontman of a Rolling Stones cover band, that's okay, he

Speaker:

currently owns five cloned dogs, each named after right wing economists.

Speaker:

That's not okay.

Speaker:

He's warned leftists, sons of bitches be afraid.

Speaker:

And so he's anti woke, anti globalist, anti abortion, anti

Speaker:

climate change, anti central banking system, and anti socialism.

Speaker:

And he is pro guns, pro family, pro education, pro US dollar, and pro Trump.

Speaker:

He's promised to move Argentina away from the peso.

Speaker:

to using the US dollar as its currency.

Speaker:

Now, no other major economy has shared currency with the United States.

Speaker:

I cannot imagine how that could possibly work, that they would

Speaker:

adopt the US currency as their own.

Speaker:

Not a country as large as Argentina.

Speaker:

Any country.

Speaker:

You know, I know they, I know that the US dollar was the currency of East Timor for

Speaker:

a little while until they got themselves up on their feet and that sort of stuff.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

But it wasn't ever a long term solution, it was only ever going

Speaker:

to be a stopgap measure when they first became independent.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

It's, it's, it's impossible to imagine.

Speaker:

It's like they, you listen to these Bitcoin bros saying that it's a great

Speaker:

idea that El Salvador has adopted.

Speaker:

Bitcoin as its national currency or whatever, but people don't

Speaker:

understand how money is generated.

Speaker:

It's generated by private banks giving loans to people and they

Speaker:

don't need the central bank.

Speaker:

So you walk into a bank, I could walk into a bank tomorrow and say I've got

Speaker:

this 2 million house, want a mortgage against it, give me a million dollars.

Speaker:

And The bank will just look at the assets that it can secure against the loan.

Speaker:

And your income to see whether you've got the capacity to meet the repayments.

Speaker:

And poof, out of thin air, generates a ledger account and

Speaker:

provides a million dollars to me.

Speaker:

Well, hang on a second, because the economist that came on did say, but

Speaker:

the flip side of that is the government creates debts and tells you what.

Speaker:

format, it will accept those debts paid him.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So the government taxes you, and if the government taxes you in US dollars,

Speaker:

you have to pay them in US dollars.

Speaker:

Yes, but my point is, just in general business of operating an

Speaker:

economy, the Argentinian banks are not authorized by the U.

Speaker:

S.

Speaker:

to issue U.

Speaker:

S.

Speaker:

dollar loans.

Speaker:

So it's impossible for them to issue the normal sorts of loans that are

Speaker:

issued by banks every day of the week because it's not the local currency.

Speaker:

The central government can't authorize them to issue U.

Speaker:

S.

Speaker:

government dollars.

Speaker:

The U.

Speaker:

S.

Speaker:

government isn't going to authorize Argentinian banks to do it.

Speaker:

So the kind of basic...

Speaker:

Banking function can't work in that situation.

Speaker:

And what was the thing that you just said, Joe?

Speaker:

It was what were you saying about...

Speaker:

So the government basically implements taxes to take money out of the economy.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

To cool it down.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

And those taxes are paid in a format.

Speaker:

And that's how they force a national currency is by saying,

Speaker:

you have to pay us in X currency.

Speaker:

Yes, correct.

Speaker:

But at the end of the day, you just become a vassal to the US.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

How are these, how are ordinary Argentinians going to generate

Speaker:

US dollars to pay tax to the government in US dollars?

Speaker:

Just it makes no sense at all.

Speaker:

They're heading for a complete disaster, and this guy...

Speaker:

It's alright, they'll just invade the Falklands and everything will be fine.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So, he's been popular with the 16 to 35 year old age group, and he's a

Speaker:

Trumpian type character who appeals because he's seen to be outside of

Speaker:

the, the standard political sort of parties and fighting against

Speaker:

the system, rebellious sort of guy.

Speaker:

He often appears on stage at rallies.

Speaker:

With a chainsaw.

Speaker:

Pies up a chainsaw.

Speaker:

Pies it up.

Speaker:

You can see the smoke coming out of it.

Speaker:

It's one of those things...

Speaker:

Vowing to slash public spending.

Speaker:

Yeah, no, he wants to cut up by 50 percent or something ridiculous like that.

Speaker:

He wants to reduce the number of government departments from 18 down to 8.

Speaker:

You know, he's just got a slash and burn mentality, which is absolutely

Speaker:

ridiculous in this day and age.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And I can't imagine him lasting any more than a term.

Speaker:

Because if he actually does what he says he's going to do, then the

Speaker:

public are going to turn around and give him the middle finger.

Speaker:

He couldn't last a full term if he does what he says he's going to do.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

Just couldn't happen.

Speaker:

yEah.

Speaker:

So anyway, poor old Argentina.

Speaker:

That's where they're headed for.

Speaker:

It's one of those things, I can understand the Argentinians

Speaker:

being pissed off with Peronism.

Speaker:

I can understand that.

Speaker:

Because Pyrrhonism has caused a hell of a lot of problems, but it's also, on the

Speaker:

other side of the coin, it has actually also helped in curtailing poverty.

Speaker:

It hasn't eliminated poverty, but it has helped.

Speaker:

You know, it's one of those things, I just think that they've got to have a long

Speaker:

hard look at themselves, and I think that the middle of the road bloke, who was the

Speaker:

main guy that was up against this idiot, would have been a far better choice.

Speaker:

Yeah, I'm not exactly sure.

Speaker:

He was the economy minister and that sort of stuff in the current regime, so

Speaker:

it's understandable why people would have thought to themselves, well, you know, our

Speaker:

economy is in free fall because of you, so we're not going to go with you, you know.

Speaker:

My suspicion is that just unfortunately Argentina's a very corrupt society.

Speaker:

Oh, it is.

Speaker:

Controlled by...

Speaker:

Oligarch families who have their own interest at heart and encourage

Speaker:

the government to get IMF loans so that US dollars come in so

Speaker:

that they can cash out and...

Speaker:

Then take their dollars offshore and bugger the rest of the people and

Speaker:

it's be something along those lines Unfortunately, I think for Argentina,

Speaker:

but yeah Plenty of news will come out of Argentina over the next couple of

Speaker:

years if that guy lasts and implements half of the ideas that he's been Well,

Speaker:

he doesn't have, he doesn't have the he doesn't have the legislature or

Speaker:

anything like that under control because he's only got 38 out of the however

Speaker:

many hundred seats in the lower house.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

Well, watch out for the military to get involved then.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

So, you know, it's one of the things, the only, the only thing you could

Speaker:

actually rely on him doing and that sort of stuff is actually tapping

Speaker:

the military and that sort of stuff saying you've got to back me up here.

Speaker:

So you couldn't end up with a, because they've been down Dictatorship Road before

Speaker:

and all that sort of stuff, they could end up sliding back into it very easily.

Speaker:

And then I think you're right, Joe, then you've got to be worried

Speaker:

about the Falkland Islands again.

Speaker:

Just quickly on Gaza, Jordan Peterson, he's able to sum

Speaker:

up what's happening in Gaza.

Speaker:

He was interviewed by Piers Morgan.

Speaker:

He confidently stated that, quote, this is a last ditch attempt by the Iranian

Speaker:

mullahs to use the Islam against Jews story to prop up their own dismal reign.

Speaker:

So that's Jordan Peterson blaming Iran.

Speaker:

For the Gaza disaster.

Speaker:

I've got no doubt that Iran's got something to do with it

Speaker:

But I don't think either is as heavily involved as he makes out.

Speaker:

Even the Israel, as I said, Iran's had nothing to do with this.

Speaker:

So.

Speaker:

Well, it's one of the things because Hezbollah hasn't

Speaker:

moved or anything like that.

Speaker:

That's another, that's another proxy for Iran.

Speaker:

So, you know.

Speaker:

Apparently there's a lot of gas offshore, off Gaza.

Speaker:

So one theory is If they, Israelis, control Gaza, then they'll be able to

Speaker:

control 450 billion worth of offshore gas.

Speaker:

Hmm.

Speaker:

Elon

Speaker:

Musk on Twitter, or X, basically if you do things like use the word

Speaker:

decolonization and from the river to the sea and similar euphemisms.

Speaker:

He's decided that that implies genocide of Jews and your account will be closed.

Speaker:

So, so much for the free speech that Elon Musk was saying he would bring in.

Speaker:

And finally, a little bit about China, uh, Xi was in San Francisco, um, everyone

Speaker:

was fawning over him, American CEOs.

Speaker:

Apple, Blackrock, Mastercard, Qualcomm, Pfizer, FedEx.

Speaker:

They're all one.

Speaker:

It's a billion customers.

Speaker:

Why wouldn't you?

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

So, the American multinational corporations and their CEOs, um,

Speaker:

were fawning over him, uh, cheering everything that he had to say and this

Speaker:

idea of trying to sort of isolate China.

Speaker:

It just isn't going to work.

Speaker:

It is too late just on the chip, briefly America can't stop China's rise.

Speaker:

And so America's trying to slow China's economic rise, and the Biden

Speaker:

administration has not reversed the trade tariffs that Trump imposed, and

Speaker:

it's tried to increase pressure on China by banning the export of chips

Speaker:

and semiconductor equipment and selected software, and it's persuading allies like

Speaker:

the Netherlands and China to follow suit.

Speaker:

So it's trying to isolate China in that regard, and so it's prohibited American

Speaker:

investments in China involving sensitive technologies, and the big question is

Speaker:

whether America can suc can succeed.

Speaker:

The answer is probably not.

Speaker:

It's too late.

Speaker:

Closing the barn door after the horses bolted.

Speaker:

And throughout history, uh, there's been efforts to curtail

Speaker:

China's technological rise.

Speaker:

In 1993, the Clinton administration tried to restrict China's

Speaker:

access to satellite technology.

Speaker:

That was in 1993, Clinton administration.

Speaker:

Today, China has 541 satellites in space and has a competitor to Starlink.

Speaker:

Same thing happened with GPS.

Speaker:

America restricted China's access to geospatial data system in 1999.

Speaker:

China simply built its own parallel system and in some measures it's

Speaker:

better than the American based system.

Speaker:

It's got 45 satellites compared to 31.

Speaker:

And seemingly much more powerful and the other thing is that they haven't

Speaker:

factored in China's capacity to retaliate.

Speaker:

So the China's July ban on the gallium and germanium exports was merely an

Speaker:

opening shot across the bow to remind America of China's dominance in the

Speaker:

rare earths and critical metal space.

Speaker:

Has a near monopoly in the processing of Magnesium, Bismuth, Tungsten,

Speaker:

Graphite, Silicon, Vanadium, Rulurispar, Tellurium, Indium,

Speaker:

Antimony, Barite, Zinc, Tin, I didn't mention it, but probably Unobtanium,

Speaker:

I reckon is also on the list, Joe.

Speaker:

I reckon.

Speaker:

China also dominates midstream processing for materials essential to

Speaker:

most of America's current and future technological aspirations, such as

Speaker:

lithium, cobalt, nickel and copper.

Speaker:

America China controls a lot of these, um, rare minerals, rare earths.

Speaker:

It also controls a lot of the processing of the ones that maybe aren't so rare.

Speaker:

And it'd be really tricky for Western countries to develop the

Speaker:

capacity to process those minerals.

Speaker:

Because guess what?

Speaker:

It's really hard to get approvals, environmentally,

Speaker:

to start processing this shit.

Speaker:

Because it's pretty ugly when you start processing it, so.

Speaker:

A whole bunch of reasons why the idea of America being able to curtail China

Speaker:

is it's just not going to happen.

Speaker:

There's a quick summary.

Speaker:

Oh look, and just briefly to finish off, Ukraine.

Speaker:

The Wall Street Journal acknowledges that the narratives it's been pushing

Speaker:

for months Of a successful Ukrainian counter offensive, uh, magical thinking,

Speaker:

and there's a headline in the Wall Street Journal, it's time to end

Speaker:

magical thinking about Russia's defeat.

Speaker:

Putin has withstood the West's best efforts to reverse his invasion of

Speaker:

Ukraine, and his hold on power is firm.

Speaker:

The U.

Speaker:

S.

Speaker:

and its allies need a new strategy, containment.

Speaker:

What's your favorite YouTuber, Perrin, saying, Joe?

Speaker:

Is he still, are you guys still bullish about Ukraine's ability to force

Speaker:

Russia back in any significant way?

Speaker:

I, I think the Putin has this idea that all he has to do is wait the West out

Speaker:

and it looks like the West is gonna get bored and so all he has to do is Carry on.

Speaker:

Putin doesn't want peace.

Speaker:

He's said his terms for peace are the acceptance of Ukraine, of the four

Speaker:

O blasts that he doesn't even have complete control of, and also the

Speaker:

complete demilitarization of the Ukraine.

Speaker:

So those are his terms for peace.

Speaker:

I hadn't heard that.

Speaker:

I heard his terms were, give me the territory I've already got, uh, change

Speaker:

your constitution so you never join NATO, and, and there was, I thought

Speaker:

one other one, but I couldn't remember.

Speaker:

That's what I thought his terms were.

Speaker:

But anyway.

Speaker:

Are you, Scott, are you, are you still bullish about Ukraine's chances of

Speaker:

pushing back here, or are we giving up?

Speaker:

I think that Ukraine is probably on the last legs now because they

Speaker:

have tried, but it hasn't worked.

Speaker:

So I think it is time to actually sit down and talk to the bastard.

Speaker:

But I don't believe that you can trust anything that comes out of his

Speaker:

mouth, you know, it's, I know you've got a, you're looking at the world

Speaker:

through rose colored glasses here, Trevor, but I honestly Yes, you are.

Speaker:

Because this, this prick has lied before.

Speaker:

Realistic.

Speaker:

Yeah, I mean, all Glasses.

Speaker:

Hang on a minute.

Speaker:

I'm not saying you're not going to lie.

Speaker:

Sorry, sorry, what was that Joe?

Speaker:

No, Joe's gone, shut up again.

Speaker:

It's one of those things, I just think to myself that you can't trust

Speaker:

him because he has walked away from every agreement and that sort of stuff

Speaker:

that was on the table before this.

Speaker:

Well, you also can't trust the Ukrainians, because they, they also...

Speaker:

Yeah, okay.

Speaker:

They walked away from, they walked away from, from the Minsk agreement, which

Speaker:

is okay, because you know, it's just one of those things, like, you know...

Speaker:

They have no intention of...

Speaker:

No, no, no.

Speaker:

We, we, we can have peace in our time.

Speaker:

All he wants is a little Lebensraum, and then Putin will leave them alone.

Speaker:

Yeah, it's one of those things, I just think to myself that you can't actually

Speaker:

trust anything that comes out of his mouth, because he's a, he's a lying prick.

Speaker:

Yeah, well, that's true.

Speaker:

You know, it's one of those things, it's just, I never said you can

Speaker:

trust him, but I'm just saying you have to be realistic about it.

Speaker:

Yeah, and the, the only realistic solution for this is for the Yanks to get

Speaker:

involved and actually, is to actually go in toe to toe with the Russians, which

Speaker:

would then result in nuclear, nuclear weapons being tossed across borders

Speaker:

and that would just be a disaster.

Speaker:

So I think to myself, you know, I hope the guy actually does have a, life

Speaker:

threatening illness, and I hope that he does die sooner rather than later.

Speaker:

But the risk is a further right.

Speaker:

I mean, apparently the next election he may well be up against somebody

Speaker:

who is even further right than him, who wants to go all out on the war.

Speaker:

Which would be an absolute disaster if that actually happened.

Speaker:

It's one of those things, I suppose if you, I suppose if you've got someone

Speaker:

that's even further right and that sort of stuff, then you're going

Speaker:

to be able to, that will then break the nexus between them and China.

Speaker:

Which means Russia would then be on their own and that sort of stuff.

Speaker:

So then after that, because they're on their own, if they don't even have

Speaker:

the, if they don't even China backing them up, then they would fall away

Speaker:

by a hell of a lot faster, faster, but it's just, it's a hell of a mess.

Speaker:

I do believe that.

Speaker:

Ukraine did actually put up a reasonable fight and that sort of stuff.

Speaker:

They did actually fight, they did actually try and push back, but the

Speaker:

pushback apparently is failing right now.

Speaker:

So, I think to myself that they've actually got to talk to the bastard.

Speaker:

But, we'll have to see where his demands are, because I think to myself that...

Speaker:

If they actually do actually try and negotiate and that type of

Speaker:

thing, then that will be perceived by Putin as weakness on their part.

Speaker:

So he will actually try and push for the maximum of a settlement, which will mean

Speaker:

that Ukraine's gotta kiss goodbye to you.

Speaker:

Is has gotta kiss goodbye to crummy and they've also got a kiss.

Speaker:

Goodbye the DSK.

Speaker:

I think so.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

But there we are.

Speaker:

Well, anyway, I'm very happy that it didn't actually work because the whole

Speaker:

thing was supposed to be over in two days.

Speaker:

18 months later, it's still going on.

Speaker:

Well, I think Pete's got what he wanted.

Speaker:

Ah, no.

Speaker:

He wanted all of Ukraine.

Speaker:

He did, he did.

Speaker:

He wanted all of Ukraine.

Speaker:

You know, he did want, he did want all of Ukraine.

Speaker:

So

Speaker:

he didn't he, yeah, he did.

Speaker:

Did he?

Speaker:

He did.

Speaker:

Did he?

Speaker:

He did.

Speaker:

Yeah, he did.

Speaker:

There's.

Speaker:

There's certainly comments that he's made in the past that suggests that

Speaker:

Ukraine is part of Russia and that it was a mistake letting it go in the 90s.

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

Which is one of those things, I just think to myself, all those former

Speaker:

Soviet republics have probably...

Speaker:

I think a lot of them are shitting themselves.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

You know, that's why the three Baltic states have all joined NATO.

Speaker:

And...

Speaker:

I think if Ukraine hadn't gone in a different way, it would

Speaker:

have ended up another Belarus.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Which is basically a vassal state to Russia.

Speaker:

Precisely.

Speaker:

All right.

Speaker:

Well, we've run around the world.

Speaker:

There we go.

Speaker:

Australia, Argentina, Tuvalu, UK, Gaza, China, Ukraine, covered it all.

Speaker:

Solved all the problems of the world in a bit over an hour.

Speaker:

That's what you get, dear listener, on this podcast.

Speaker:

So, ah, John Severs, Trevor, his first move was on Kiev, of

Speaker:

course he wanted all of Ukraine.

Speaker:

Well, if you want to draw the troops away from the Donbass, you would draw

Speaker:

some troops No, he actually tried to take, he tried to actually take

Speaker:

Ukraine's capital very early on.

Speaker:

He had a whole thing, then he went in there.

Speaker:

Just because you fanked in a direction doesn't mean you necessarily want it.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

True?

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

How many times?

Speaker:

You know, it's not true.

Speaker:

It's not true, Trevor.

Speaker:

He was actually Chinese.

Speaker:

Was the Chinese one in the Art of War?

Speaker:

Yeah, the Art of War, that sort of thing.

Speaker:

Yeah, that's true.

Speaker:

You'd say, oh, well, we don't want all their troops over here in the Donbass.

Speaker:

Let's, let's send a few up to Kiev to make them worry about that.

Speaker:

So they'll have to withdraw some troops back there.

Speaker:

So it's not going to be so bad over here.

Speaker:

Like that's just.

Speaker:

Just because his first move was on Kiev doesn't mean he wanted to take it, John.

Speaker:

That's not how it works, necessarily.

Speaker:

Here we go.

Speaker:

I think Alright!

Speaker:

I think that the troops that he wasted in Kiev and that sort of stuff would

Speaker:

have been very pissed off with that.

Speaker:

Well, I don't think he's worried about whether his troops are pissed off or not.

Speaker:

No, exactly, because he's sending them all to a slaughterhouse.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Because he's a prick.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Ah, John says I'm way off the mark.

Speaker:

Well, at least I'm right!

Speaker:

There we go.

Speaker:

You guys battle it out in the chat room.

Speaker:

Okay we're done and dusted.

Speaker:

That's another episode.

Speaker:

We'll be back next week.

Speaker:

See what happens.

Speaker:

We'll talk to you then.

Speaker:

Bye for now.

Speaker:

And it's a good night from me.

Speaker:

And Joe's dead.

Speaker:

So anyway, good night everyone.

Chapters

Video

More from YouTube