• 544 Posts
  • 459 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: June 11th, 2023
  • zero_gravitas@aussie.zonetoAustralia@aussie.zone•The communist Albanese government is introducing a new superannuation taxEnglish
    9·
    21 days ago

    I assume they’re referring to the fact that moniker of ‘the lucky country’ was originally intended as a perjorative:

    from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lucky_Country

    The title has become a nickname for Australia[1] and is generally used favourably, although the origin of the phrase was negative in the context of the book.

    Horne’s intent in writing the book was to portray Australia’s climb to power and wealth based almost entirely on luck rather than the strength of its political or economic system, which Horne believed was “second rate”. In addition to political and economic weaknesses, he also lamented on the lack of innovation and ambition, as well as a philistinism in the absence of art, among the Australian population, viewed by Horne as being complacent and indifferent to intellectual matters. He also commented on matters relating to Australian puritanism, as well as conservatism, particularly in relation to censorship and politics.

  • zero_gravitas@aussie.zoneOPtoAustralian Politics@aussie.zone•Brisbane hotel workers walk off the job to protest over Zionist-booked eventEnglish
    5·
    28 days ago

    Both have been used as alternative names for Brisbane, I couldn’t tell you if one is better than the other, seems like it’s disputed:

    Part of the Brisbane conurbation is located on traditional indigenous land known also as Meanjin, Meaanjin, Maganjin or Magandjin amongst other spellings.[32] There is a difference of opinion between local traditional owners over the spelling, provenance and pronunciation of indigenous names for Brisbane.[33] Tom Petrie in 1901 stated that the name Meeannjin referred to the area that Brisbane CBD now straddles. Some sources state that the name means ‘place shaped as a spike’ or ‘the spearhead’ referencing the shape of the Brisbane River along the area of the Brisbane CBD.[34][35][36][37] A contemporary Turrbal organisation has also suggested it means ‘the place of the blue water lilies’.[38] Local Elder Gaja Kerry Charlton posits that Meanjin is based on a European understanding of ‘spike’, and that the phonetically similar Yagara name Magandjin — after the native tulipwood trees (magan) at Gardens Point — is a more accurate and appropriate Aboriginal name for Brisbane.[39]

    From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brisbane#Toponymy

  • zero_gravitas@aussie.zonetoAustralia@aussie.zone•my kid is movin to AUEnglish
    2·
    1 month ago

    The 7% difference in insolation between perihelion and ahelion (a figure I’ve seen mentioned in multiple places) seems like it would be significant for sunburn and skin cancer, at least at the population level.

    I found an ABC article that doesn’t specifically say the 7% figure, but mentions perihelion as a factor in 10% higher UV in Australia. It downplays the role that extra 10% plays in our melanoma rates, though, and I suppose that’s fair, I don’t think anyone’s getting caught out by burning 10% faster, because they would have gone inside 10% sooner if they had known, haha

    Together, Professor Whiteman says, these factors mean Australia’s UV is “probably about 10 per cent higher on average” than the equivalent latitude in the Northern Hemisphere.

    “That would mean for people living in Brisbane it is higher than for people living in Miami in the US, and for people in Melbourne, it’s higher than for people living in Athens, Greece.”

    While a 10 per cent increase in UV is significant, and might account for that sting in our summer sun, reasons for Australia’s high melanoma rates are more lifestyle-related, he says.

    source: https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2025-02-04/sun-summer-uv-sunburn-skin-cancer-australia-ozone-layer/104870806

  • zero_gravitas@aussie.zonetoAustralian News@aussie.zone•Australians are choosing foods that contribute to leading causes of disease. Why?English
    9·
    1 month ago

    Can you imagine if we let companies poor waste into a river and taxed you if you swam in it?

    I get your point, but we can regulate against dumping waste into a river without anyone except the polluters cracking the shits about it.

    What would the equivalent look like for junk food? Regulation where they set a maximum sugar level for every category of product? That could maybe work, but it’d be a big and contested undertaking, and I’m guessing some portion of the voting population would crack the shits about not being able to get exactly what they used to get, and how the limits in place are arbitrary and unfair in some way.

    The UK tax on sugar content in soft drinks did result in manufacturers reformulating drinks to have less sugar (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11156274/), so that’s an example where a tax reduced the ‘dumping waste into the river’.

    Or are you just suggesting banning advertising of junk food? I agree that seems totally viable and should be pursued.

    Personally, I think the first priority should be fixing the Health Star Rating system. It was ruined by the liberals making it a relative rating within each category of product, not an absolute rating that actually helps people make healthier choices overall (e.g. it might encourage people to buy a healthier variety of biscuits, but it doesn’t encourage them to not buy biscuits at all). They should also make it mandatory.

    I’m surprised this article doesn’t mention the Health Star Rating, actually. The first step for consumers making good choices is to give consumers good information. I get the article is trying to highlight economic and geographic factors, but still.