I'm not sure any of those examples support the idea that Australia is a
'nanny state'.

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 11:26, David Lyon
<[email protected]>wrote:

> Yes, Australia is definitely a Nanny state...
>
> So many examples - particularly in technology.
>
> High Speed Trains - we have 200kmh capable XPT trains. Not
> allowed to run them at their designed speed. Only run at 80-90kmh
>
> Uranium. Allowed to dig it up. Not allowed to use it in a pressure
> cooker or use it in any commercial lab.
>
> Solar Power - allowed to research it. Not allowed to commercialise
> it.
>
> Military - allowed to give 'Freedom' to outlying Islands (Timor) but
> does not allow Australians to go there and economically develop
> it. After giving 'freedom' other Governments.. like China.. Indonesia
> move in and setup commercial outposts where we did the clearing.
>
> Technology - a lot of Australians in Tech are bullied and told to
> get on a plane and leave the country if they have an idea and want
> to pursue it...
>
> Last technology example...
>
> Try find any of the great Australian Technology developed by Australians
> in an Australian Museum in Canberra or Sydney - it's not there.
>
> Nanny says No to recognising things like the Spectrum Analysers,
> Ear Implants, Combine Harverster, Puppy Linux, Solar Boats,
> Black Box Flight Recorders, Suntek Solar Cells or anything else done
> by innovative Australians...
>
> None of that gets into Australian Museums...
>
> 2011/6/29 david <[email protected]>
>
> >
> >
> > Marghanita da Cruz wrote:
> >
> >>  From time to time, SLUG, gets into philosophical debates, in relation
> to
> >> Internet Filtering and Free/Open Source Software.
> >>
> >> I found this parliamentary briefing interesting and thought others may
> >> too.
> >> Note its focus is tobacco and gambling - so the principles may or may
> not
> >> apply.
> >>
> >>   JUNE 16, 2011
> >>>
> >>> The 'nanny state' and freedom of choice
> >>>
> >>> In recent times, a number of Australian Government policy initiatives
> >>> have been criticised as 'nanny state' or 'paternalist' policies.
> >>>
> >> <http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/**parlInfo/search/display/**
> >> display.w3p;query=Id%3A%**22library%2Fprspub%2F875642%22<
> http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22library%2Fprspub%2F875642%22
> >
> >> **>
> >>
> >
> >
> > What is "nanny" and what is "justifiable" is utterly a POV issue.
> >
> > <example>
> > Some years ago in NSW, children of Jehovah's Witnesses were denied blood
> > transfusions by their parents because of religious beliefs. The state
> > introduced legislation and stepped in to make such children wards of the
> > state if their lives were at risk.
> >
> > What right has the state to deny to a child eternity in the presence of
> the
> > Lord for the sake of a few years of earthly life?
> > </example>
> >
> > Mostly whoever is in charge tries to impose their belief system and make
> it
> > the current paradigm - whether it's religious, commercial, political or
> > philosophical. I can't say I can see much logic going on, unless it's a
> kind
> > of stumbling, long-term Darwinian logic.
> >
> > --
> > SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
> > Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/**mailinglists.html<
> http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html>
> >
> --
> SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
> Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
>
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Reply via email to