I think there is benefit in the notion of immigrants being required to live in provincial areas of Australia for, say, 5 years, as a condition of their journey to citizenship. What has to come with it is major infrastructure programs to develop the provinces at the same time. This would work. Take, for example, Tasmania, a big island with hardly anyone on it, and those who are there are giants, have two heads, and with a skill set that can only cut down trees...this would be a grand place to re-develop and make actually sustainable with migration and big money for infrastructure. This would work. A multi-cultural Tasmania. Give it ten years with a big focus on social and structural development, and they'd have a higher living standard and more diversity than anyone or anywhere else in the country. They may even choose to secede...and that, all in all, would be a good thing for Tasmanians.

Nauru: The concern I have with the Australian Government, and with particular luminaries like Scott Morrison and Peter, the bald guy, Dutton, is that they are proud of their achievement in locking up genuine refugees on remote off shore islands around Australia because this deliberate cruelty is a solution to the problem. We pay these Ministers a lot of money to be fairly bright and to work things out, generally, without cruelty as the best way forward for the country, and yet they remain proud of their policy of cruelty rather than having another notion about how to do things properly, legally, and compassionately. These are not bright nor hard working nor hard thinking politicians. These are cruel and racist men. These are little men and they make us a little and cruel people. The refugees, going crazy for years on these remote islands, deserve normal lives, as do we. The weak link in the paradigm is our government of little and proud racist men. We deserve better governance.

From my palliative care end of life days over 30 years of noticing: the folks who had the most pleasant deaths were: Hare Krishna folk Catholic Alcoholic folk, usually men Moslems. and then the rest... Those who had the most horrible painful deaths were Evangelical Christians Mahayana Buddhists Vegans and then the rest... Interestingly, Hare Krishna and Vegans have the same diet, so I'd suggest that the meaning of life, at the end of life, in terms of rank human life suffering, has more to do with something other than diet.

Tibetan Liberation Front: What did the Chinese ever do for us? "Well, roads, bridges, trains, houses, jobs, education, a future for the kids, heat in winter, scholarships to world universities, peace, food, a future for non-religious kids, they stop the kids from setting themselves on fire, and we are not serfs anymore, and not slaves to a theocratic dynasty that locks up boys with celibate holy men instead of getting an education."

I know swearing is harsh, and I often don't like it at all, but at the same time, it can be meaningful or very funny...context and timing are most critical. Swearing and a comedic theme can go well together. Comedy is funny because it breaks some social law in some way. A man slips on a banana whereas he should have just been walking...pretty much all comedy is like that...something that shouldn't happen...happens. So I think pretty well all comedy comes about as some sort of insult to what is normal or acceptable or appropriate, whatever 'appropriate' means. I taught my children as best i could that swearing was for a few reasons: Either to indicate significant pain, shock, indignation or betrayal. Swearing in these contexts was a very good thing to do. Or, swearing was a way to improve comedy delivery. The Australian vernacular is rich with possibilities in this manner. The traditional saying 'every man and his dog were there' still, to me, is far more entertaining and meaningful when one says 'Every cunt and his dog were there'.It means the same thing, yet is just more fun and colourful to say. We should teach our children well. Imagine, if when reading the bible, instead of Pilate dismissing his wife's concern about having a threatening dream of Jesus the night before, instead of just dismissing her concerns, he had said "look, Cheryl, I acknowledge that you've had a bad dream, but, I just got home...just let me relax a bit. I received a bad scroll from Rome, the city is running out of wheat, and I've been dealing with the Jews all day...I've had a cunt of a day."

I'm not opposed to Donald Trump. If he can improve the lot of poor and working class Americans, then he will be a good President of that country. Obama, Bush, etc didn't do that because their focus was about the world with America as policeman. I agree with Trump that the world doesn't need a policeman, that the world is far better off without America as a Policeman or an influence. But America does need someone who delivers jobs to people in America. So far, he is doing that. That's his job. Americans voted for Trump, so his job is to meet their needs. It hasn't got anything to do with the World Order, international financial stability, NATO, or anything else. He has his elected term, see how he goes in that hard ground

Interestingly, the one fellow in China who foresaw the Western World Crash of 2008 in 2003, and helped China to avoid it, and thus jumped China 20 years ahead of all expectations, is now their Minister for Propaganda. He makes Coca Cola, the BBC, Google and Facebook look very amateur indeed...simply because they are real amateurs in the real world and don't really know what they are doing. The world has changed, and they missed it.