Highlights of the latest fortnightly Essential Research poll, which is lacking the really interesting stuff (the monthly leadership ratings and quarterly dump of voting intention), but covers a fair bit of ground on the budget:
• Respondents were asked whether the budget would be good or bad for various groups and interests, results for which appear to be heavily influenced by general attitudes towards the party bringing down the budget. In this cases, the budget was reckoned to be most beneficial to “people who are well off” (51% good, 8% bad) and big businesses (49% and 7%), but scored net negative ratings for people on lower incomes (30% and 33%) and “you personally” (22% and 25%). However, the budget rated more strongly across the board than last year’s, with net ratings 23% higher for the economy overall, 15% higher for families, 12% higher for younger Australians and 11% higher for average working people.
• The budget has apparently impressed respondents as being good for women, particularly compared with last year’s. Thirty-four per cent rated that it put women’s interests ahead of men’s versus 19% for vice-versa and 47% who thought it balanced, compared with respective figures last year of 14%, 31% and 54%. It would also appear easy to persuade respondents that budgets put the interests of young people ahead of old: 32% thought so this year compared with 28% for vice-versa and 40% for balanced, albeit that this is quite a lot narrower than last year’s split of 45% to 21% with 34% for balanced. As usual with a Coalition budget, many more respondents felt it put the interests of businesses ahead of employees than vice-versa (49% versus 13% with 38% for balanced, compared with 14%, 42% and 45% for last year).
• A regular question on governments’ handling of COVID-19 gave the federal government what I believe to be its weakest good rating to date of 58%, down four on last month, with the poor rating up a point to 18%. For the state governments, good ratings are down five in New South Wales to 68%, up five for Victoria to 63% and down four for Queensland to 68%.
• As did last week’s Resolve Strategic poll, and no doubt most other polls that have ever been conducted on the subject, this one finds strong opposition to an early election: 61% agreed an election this year would “just be opportunism for the Prime Minister”, compared with 39% for the alternative proposition that an early election “will be good for Australia, because a lot has changed since the last election”.
The poll was conducted Wednesday to Sunday from a sample of 1100.
For those with an open mind, I suggest you Google something like ‘shouting and showing anger’ in Chinese culture.
Our Own Red Ted
+10^n from me, where n is a very large number.
The Spanish ‘flu did not originate in Spain, one in a long line of naming pandemics after the place where they were first diagnosed, and whose origins are still unclear. Also WHO guidelines require precise naming – so we can actually understand from the name what we are dealing with scientifically. A geographical location adds nothing to understanding the science.
I am just surprised that Steve Bannon and his subsequent followers (whether they realise this is what they are doing or not) have not gone back in time and blamed the Spanish ‘flu (H1N1) on the Bolsheviks, or whoever was the most popular enemy of the time.
The origin of the H1N1 pandemic is still not clear – probably Texas, maybe Flanders. See Pale Rider by Laura Spinney for a great discussion of the show thing.
The best thing about Spinney’s book? It was published in 2017 – and so totally untainted by the present argy-bargy.
https://www.penguin.com.au/books/pale-rider-9781784702403
March 2020
The genomic features described here may explain in part the infectiousness and transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 in humans. Although the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here. However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses in nature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
Has anything changed considering this article is based on looking at virus genome
‘DisplayName says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:17 pm
boerwar
we DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THE DATA THAT MATTERS.
The article in question is a scientific paper. That means it presents a testable hypothesis. My understanding is that it does so without relying on data from the comrades. You claim that it can only be tested using data from the comrades. That is, you imply the authors have made a mistake.’
———————————————————–
Your understanding of what is in the paper is superior to mine. It has not been published. I have not read it.
boerwarsays:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:15 pm
What abuse?
Once again you push the tabloid media version of the story, discounting articles written by people in the room which paint a much less sensational picture.
Politics is no longer attracting enough high quality women and men who have real life experience .
They are increasingly from inside the Club – ex staffers, party apparatchiks, union or business operatives and so on.
Their focus is on one thing – winning, whatever it takes. Vision, long term thinking, intelligent public policy that is not subject to poll driven conclusions.
Morrison is a classic example, as was Rudd and Abbott.
Our best PM in the past 50 years, Keating, left school at 15, and yes did learn his craft in the system. But he stood out with his brain, his heart, his focus and his grasp of the big things. He took the true believers with him by persuasive argument. Unlike Turnbull who was smart but politically weak.
I can’t see anyone stepping up at a seminal time in world history. It will just be more of the same poll driven leaders. And the nation suffers.
boerwar says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:19 pm
The Chinese scientists also acknowledged they had discovered that 92 people were hospitalized in Wuhan as early as October 2019 with symptoms such as fever and coughing. The Chinese experts said they had found no trace of Covid-19 in those people, but the tests were incomplete. The W.H.O. team members said more research was needed.
WHO is trying to find some sort of gotchya moment.
‘Sceptic says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:22 pm
March 2020
The genomic features described here may explain in part the infectiousness and transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 in humans. Although the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here. However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses in nature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.’
——————————–
But not impossible. They seem to have focused on a false binary: deliberate genetic manipulation/not deliberate genetic manipulation. A third scenario, which IS plausible, is that the pandemic virus mutated naturally in the lab and leaked from there.
boerwar @ #1944 Saturday, May 29th, 2021 – 5:13 pm
Wow. Cue Twilight Zone music …
1. If it wasn’t the lab in Wuhan, it could have been another Chinese lab, so there!
2. Don’t know what happened to 2. Censored by Xi I guess, so there!
3. You can’t prove it didn’t happen, so there!
4. If it is Chinese, it must have involved a cover up, so there!
Honestly, this blog – and a few particular posters – are degenerating faster than I would have believed possible 🙁
boerwar
Then how can you claim that it requires data from the comrades to be tested? Are you just making things up?
boerwar @ #1953 Saturday, May 29th, 2021 – 5:21 pm
The US accused China of hiding the extent of the initial outbreak and criticised the terms of the visit, which restricted the freedom of the WHO team to travel and interview witnesses, including community members, on health grounds.
The investigators told the New York Times that disagreements, including over access to patient records, were so tense that they sometimes erupted into shouting matches.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-56054468
Outside Left
Alas, poor Ned is a bit old and arthritic now.
This is Ned (the photo-bombing dog, not the pig):
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/neighbourhood-pig-finds-his-hog-heaven-20130714-2py4h.html
China Is Losing Its Power to Rein In Commodity-Price Surges
China’s efforts to rein in surging commodities prices are likely to be in vain as it’s lost the ability to boss the market around, according to two of Wall Street’s biggest firms.
The speed of the rebound in demand in advanced economies, particularly the U.S., means China is no longer the buyer dictating pricing, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. analysts led by Jeff Currie, the bank’s global head of commodities research, said in a note.
That view was echoed by his equivalent at Citigroup Inc., Ed Morse, who said in a Bloomberg Television interview Friday that despite China’s efforts to curb price gains, the real supply-demand balance prevails.
The largest buyer of many commodities, China has been trying to temper the rally due to fears over inflation. Its actions have had some success, with local iron ore prices down more than 20% since May 12. But other raw materials have been more difficult to manage. The Bloomberg Commodity Spot Index is only down around 1% over the same period.
The price dip after warnings from Beijing about speculation is a “clear buying opportunity,” as raw materials such as copper and soybeans remain on an upward path on tight supply, Goldman said.
There’s “mounting evidence that commodities are no longer China-centric,” Goldman said. The main reason for the U.S.’s greater power in the market is Washington’s fiscal stimulus, but there are also structural factors — China no longer benefits as much from low-cost labor or from its previous indifference to environmental concerns — that make this a paradigm shift, they said.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-28/goldman-says-china-has-lost-the-ability-to-boss-commodity-prices?srnd=premium-asia
‘DisplayName says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:26 pm
boerwar
It has not been published. I have not read it.
Then how can you claim that it requires data from the comrades to be tested? Are you just making things up?’
———————————————
If you want making things up your first port of call would be the comrades. Enjoy.
dave says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:39 pm
boerwar @ #1953 Saturday, May 29th, 2021 – 5:21 pm
US Accuses China, Since Donald Trump.
He said they only received a summary.
China has not responded to the allegation but has previously insisted it was transparent with the WHO.
The US has urged China to make available data from the earliest stages of the outbreak, saying it has “deep concerns” about the WHO report.
Last week, the WHO team concluded it was “extremely unlikely” that the coronavirus leaked from a lab in the city of Wuhan, dismissing a controversial theory that emerged last year.
—————-
Be more upfront Dave.
‘Zerlo says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:25 pm
boerwar says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:19 pm
The Chinese scientists also acknowledged they had discovered that 92 people were hospitalized in Wuhan as early as October 2019 with symptoms such as fever and coughing. The Chinese experts said they had found no trace of Covid-19 in those people, but the tests were incomplete. ‘
—————————————————-
20 months on, and the tests are incomplete? How convenient for the comrades.
dave
That looks like what happens at the top of a cycle. It is hard to believe that it would hold for a full business cycle.
boer
Except, of course, that the virus is far less likely to have leaked from a lab regardless.
Labs have all sorts of measures to avoid leakage. They have to.
The conditions at the Wuhan lab are well documented and well known to scientists internationally, who have insisted from the earliest of times that leakage from the lab was not feasible.
boerwar
Why are you following their example?
Zerlo says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:25 pm
…..
WHO is trying to find some sort of gotchya moment.
…’
———————————–
Maaate… have you forgotten the criminal delay with which WHO announced that there actually WAS a pandemic?
D & M
That’s a lot of pig!
zoomster @ #1968 Saturday, May 29th, 2021 – 5:55 pm
Ah, but it may have been from another Chinese lab!
The point of a good conspiracy theory is that it can never be refuted. The promulgators of it simply shift the ground whenever they are discovered to be talking through their backsides.
We know it was the Chinese, because they are untrustworthy. It’s as simple as that.
BW – saw an article recently about major resource companies refraining during the current cycle from going over the top with new projects etc – so its having impact as well.
If only we had crystal balls etc
‘DisplayName says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:55 pm
boerwar
If you want making things up your first port of call would be the comrades. Enjoy. ‘
———————————
Remind me. What was I supposed to have made up? That the comrades are hiding critical data? I assume you would agree with that.
That certitudes in the absence of hidden data are silly? I assume that you would agree with that.
That an attack would be made on the AUTHORS of the paper BEFORE the paper was published? I assume you would agree with that. After all it happened as predicted. The attacks started within minutes! Efficient work by the fellow travellers.
That one OUGHT to give a pinch for the contents of a paper before it was published? I assume that you would agree with NOT doing so.
Some people have already satisfied themselves that that paper is totally incorrect. Their problem is that they can’t find it to read it. I assume you would agree that that is plain silly.
But who knows these days?
William used to have an absolute ban on 911 conspiracy theories. I wonder if he would consider a similar ban on Covid-19 conspiracy theories, before this place becomes any more of a cesspit 🙁
‘dave says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:59 pm
BW – saw an article recently about major resource companies refraining during the current cycle from going over the top with new projects etc – so its having impact as well.
If only we had crystal balls etc’
————————-
Yep. The reason I was cagey was because China has had a matter of national (and sensible) economic policy an objective of developing multiple sources for its commodity imports. I assume that this would be most stressed at peak global cycles. But as soon as the heat is off the game of playing off sources would commence and commodity prices would plummet.
I am reminded that the Club of Rome, in a misplaced fit of malthusianistic environmentalism, confidently predicted that raw material prices would increase with scarcity. Instead, stuff over the past decade has been very cheap.
boerwar
It’s all laid out in the discussion above (and on earlier pages). I’m not rehashing it, but I will take your silence on what was discussed as an admission that you’ve been making stuff up. If you disagree, then simply point to anything I said in the earlier discussion that was/is incorrect.
boerwar @ #1891 Saturday, May 29th, 2021 – 5:25 pm
I may be the most ignorant and un-highly educated person around here this afternoon, so rain down mockery on me at will, BUT, I would have thought that a laboratory would be one of the last places you would find a virus mutating ‘naturally’ and then escaping from the lab or being leaked from the lab. Laboratories are, or should be, the most regulated places you can find when it comes to viruses. In fact, I would have thought that mutations were deliberately created, as opposed to naturally occurring.
On the other hand, if a mutation spontaneously occurred, then it would have been noted and studied and reported, I would have thought. Not simply allowed to run around the lab and leak out undetected. Thence to wreak havoc upon the world.
‘zoomster says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 5:55 pm
boer
Except, of course, that the virus is far less likely to have leaked from a lab regardless.’
—————————————–
I would hope so. But China’s labs have done some outrageous things. So who really knows? I do rather feel like I am beating my head against a brick wall but, once again, I refer to the fact that the comrades are hiding the evidence
This link to something uncontroversial might dent your confidence about the balance between possibilities and probabilities:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-swinefever-vaccines-insight-idUSKBN29R00X
‘DisplayName says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 6:05 pm
boerwar
It’s all laid out in the discussion above (and on earlier pages). I’m not rehashing it, but I will take your silence on what was discussed as an admission that you’ve been making stuff up’
—————————————
FMD. You will not tell me what I was supposed to have made up but you WILL condemn me for making it up. I suggest you shift to China. The comrades would appreciate your style. They are dab hands at making things up.
Dear boer
Just because it is possible that something might happen doesn’t mean it did.
You’re getting very boring, and repetition is making you sound sillier than you are.
boerwar was there, in a discussion with me, when I said all the things I did, and they said all the things they did, and is now claiming not to know what was being discussed.
Is boerwar multiple people? Maybe they had a shift change?
If that’s the case I advise the new person behind the keyboard that all they have to do is read back through the discussion to catch up and point out which parts, of what I discussed with the previous boerwar, are incorrect.
‘zoomster says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 6:10 pm
Dear boer
Just because it is possible that something might happen doesn’t mean it did.’
——————————————————-
Why are you repeating what I have been saying as if it were new? BTW, for completeness, you left out the bit about the way to sort our your conundrum is for the comrades to release the evidence that they are hiding. The evidence they had a shouting match with the WHO Team about.
Display Name
Remind me. What was I supposed to have made up? That the comrades are hiding critical data? I assume you would agree with that.
That certitudes in the absence of hidden data are silly? I assume that you would agree with that.
That an attack would be made on the AUTHORS of the paper BEFORE the paper was published? I assume you would agree with that. After all it happened as predicted. The attacks started within minutes! Efficient work by the fellow travellers.
That one OUGHT to give a pinch for the contents of a paper before it was published? I assume that you would agree with NOT doing so.
Some people have already satisfied themselves that that paper is totally incorrect. Their problem is that they can’t find it to read it. I assume you would agree that that is plain silly.
Just as “forn-ee-kay-shon leads to dancing” (as Brother Jed is wont to say – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brother_Jed) so too theft of paper clips is unexculpatorable* evidence of prior serious felonies
*Word!
For fusion devotees:
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202105/1224755.shtml
boer
I don’t have a conundrum.
I am getting exceedingly bored with you posting the same arguments day in day out on an endless loop.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to do, but consider your point made and move on.
Either people agree with you or they don’t, but by now they know what you think without you having to repeat it.
Ch10 news have a story tomorrow night on sexual harassment etc in federal politics. Unfortunately its on the other side this time.
A few thoughts on the Virus:
Regarding Covid, I only know what I read in the media (including PB). The theory Covid crossed over from wildlife to humans (possibly via domestic animals) in Southern China seems very credible. After all, it’s happened many times before in the same general area and elsewhere. A very high population density, people commonly living close to domestic animals while also commonly supplementing their diets with wildlife – coupled with many rural villages lacking modern sanitation and establishments like “wet markets” – maybe it was an outbreak waiting to happen.
Anyway, a novel, highly contagious virus gets into a big city like Wuhan and then – well stable door and all that.
Theories that the Virus started outside China, for example Italy? Well, there doesn’t seem to be much supporting evidence. A Chinese origin looks most plausible.
Might the virus have been engineered? Well, the big city were the Virus broke out happened to host a major virology lab. Coincidence? Probably, given that the people who know about this stuff said that the virus’ genetics looked very much like a product of natural evolution / mutation. Further, many (but not all) of those pushing the ‘engineered virus’ hypothesis seemed to have an agenda to push. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
More credible are claims that the Chinese authorities mishandled the early response to the Virus. Of course at first no one would have known what was going on. However, the realisation that this was something new and very dangerous would have quickly dawned on the experts. Did they stuff up the early response? Probably – if so, they certainly weren’t the last to do so. Did they try to minimise the danger to the community? Ditto. Did they try to cover it up? Ditto.
Now some apparently credible sources are reviving the ‘engineered’ hypothesis. What to make of it? Is it too early to say? In fact, might that be unprovable? I wouldn’t know.
Oh well,
‘However, Lin cautioned that as the technology is still in the experimental stage, it still need at least 30 years for the technology to come out of the lab. “It’s more like a future technology that’s critical for China’s green development push.”‘
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202105/1224755.shtml
boerwarsays:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 6:07 pm
How is this remotely relevant?
There is no suggestion that the virus or anything else escaped from a lab.
Someone outside has illegally produced a “vaccine” and distributed it.
Here is another version of the Sørensen, Dalgliesh & Susrud paper:
– https://www.minervanett.no/files/2020/07/13/TheEvidenceNoNaturalEvol.pdf
This one is from July 2020. An interesting paragraph is:
My understanding is that:
– RNA vectored and virus vectored have proven immunogenic, and that
– If ADE were a problem, it would have shown up by now
If this is correct, it suggests there is something wrong in the analysis that led to their assertions regarding immunogenicity and ADE, and since it seems to be that this analysis also leads to the conclusion that SARS-COV-2 is not of natural origin, this further conclusion is also called into question.
The authors had an interest (which they declared) in suggesting that RNA vectored and virus vectored would not work, namely that they had a competing approach which they were seeking to get funded. They were probably wrong.
S777
1. Agree that allowing billions of interactions between live wild animals (and wild animal meats) and people in wet markets was a massive and known risk factor. In 2020 a ‘temporary’ halt on this was announced. I am not sure whether that was policed or whether it is still in place.
2. Stable door. Agree.
3. Theories about the virus starting in, say, Italy, came from China. nuff said, IMO.
4. The genomic evidence for it being engineered seems highly unlikely. However, this does not invalidate the possibility that the virus mutated naturally inside the confines of a China lab. Some strange things have happened in those labs.
5. Mishandling? Agree. Cover up of pandemic management cock up? Agree. Hiding of critical data? Agree.
6. Both superpowers to manipulating messaging to avoid or allocate responsibility? Agree.
‘Barney in Bira says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 6:23 pm
….
There is no suggestion that the virus or anything else escaped from a lab.’
———————-
Oh there has been the odd suggestion that a virus, either engineered or naturally mutated did escape from a lab.
As for your evidence, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. We simply do not know what happened.
boerwar @ #1993 Saturday, May 29th, 2021 – 6:27 pm
Christ. It just gets worse.
We know the Chinese are untrustworthy and primitive. Therefore …
Boerwar did you even read the article?
Anyway swim time.
This blog seems to be all about China these days.
Cheerio to all our Chinese-Australian friends reading along.
EGT
Thank you. That seems to a non-scientist such as myself a sensible analysis. Not that I would know!
If I read you aright, you have come up with an analysis that generates a probability statement that is closer to the range of ‘not impossible but unlikely’ than it is to ‘possible and likely’. I assume your confidence limits are somewhat speculative.
‘Barney in Bira says:
Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 6:33 pm
Boerwar did you even read the article?
Anyway swim time.’
Did you? If you did, I congratulate you. It has yet to be published.
boerwar @ #1999 Saturday, May 29th, 2021 – 6:35 pm
It was quoted in the article.