Even though I read some reviews on the film Avatar about its Gaia worshiping, anti-human, anti-marine, anti-business (read anti-US) themes, and still went to see the 3D affects.
The film was in 3D, I was expecting a little more use of the theatre i.e. the use of 3D images which project far out from the screen, however I was a little disappointed.
On the plot, this was a US vs Red Indian guilt trip redone in 2100.
I know it is a movie so it has to play along with the designated ending, but I was waiting for the space launched missiles or some kind of standoff weapon ala artillery or airplane, you know like most wars since 0AD (artillery) or 1916 (airplane). The aim of any commander of note is to cause the most causalities on your enemy for the least number on losses. So this aim as lead to technology which increases the distance between you and your enemy whilst routinely increasing how lethal your weapon is...
I am sorry, the one tree would have been hammered by a space launched kinetic warhead and ditto the holy tree.
The natives had nothing to gain from the Skywalkers? What about stories about a galaxy far far away... or better yet taking them, letting them travel in space.
The happy ending would have been just end of the beginning. Whoops the natives just destroyed the helicopters and big helicopter and space plane.... here comes those ballistic missiles we didn't use before.
You know the different story could have used the same new creatures and had them fighting an tyrant of their own kind or what about invading Predators or Aliens (who are already the "bad" guys). It didn't need the anti-US, anti-business BS at all.
Have Fun
Tuesday, January 05, 2010
Saturday, August 08, 2009
Resizing oversized Oracle datafiles
I am always interested in new techniques or software if that software can increase my productivity. This post is writing using Windows Live Writer.
Things to do
- Test numbered lists
- Test bulleted lists
- Test displaying code
- This is the bulleted list.
- Yeh boring eh?
- Thought so…
- moving right along
So you made this far without clicking away. Here is some SQL code which reports the current usage of a datafile versus the allocated size and then generates some SQL using our old friend Dynamic SQL for each datafile.
-- Builds on dbf_hwm script
set lines 140
set pages 300
set verify off
column file_name format a50 word_wrapped
column smallest format 999,990 heading "Smallest|Size|Poss."
column currsize format 999,990 heading "Current|Size"
column savings format 999,990 heading "Poss.|Savings"
break on report
compute sum of savings on report
column value new_val blksize
select value from v$parameter where name = 'db_block_size'
/
select file_name,
ceil( (nvl(hwm,1)*&&blksize)/1024/1024 ) smallest,
ceil( blocks*&&blksize/1024/1024) currsize,
ceil( blocks*&&blksize/1024/1024) -
ceil( (nvl(hwm,1)*&&blksize)/1024/1024 ) savings
from dba_data_files a,
( select file_id, max(block_id+blocks-1) hwm
from dba_extents
group by file_id ) b
where a.file_id = b.file_id(+)
order by 1
/
column cmd format a100 word_wrapped
select 'alter database datafile '''||file_name||''' resize ' ||
ceil( (nvl(hwm,1)*&&blksize)/1024/1024 ) || 'm;' cmd
from dba_data_files a,
( select file_id, max(block_id+blocks-1) hwm
from dba_extents
group by file_id ) b
where a.file_id = b.file_id(+)
and ceil( blocks*&&blksize/1024/1024) -
ceil( (nvl(hwm,1)*&&blksize)/1024/1024 ) > 0
order by 1
/
Monday, October 20, 2008
GFC part 2
I am so sick and tired of the rubbish and scaremongering from people who (on paper) should know better.
It is a breath of fresh air to read something which actually nails the real cause of the problem and
what the problem is (solvency vs liquidity)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122428279231046053.html
It is like people complaining about shares going down and their super (like 401k) being down 40% this year after 4 years of more of 20% gains!
Year 1: $100,000
Year 4: $207,000
Year 5 $124,000
It is a breath of fresh air to read something which actually nails the real cause of the problem and
what the problem is (solvency vs liquidity)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122428279231046053.html
It is like people complaining about shares going down and their super (like 401k) being down 40% this year after 4 years of more of 20% gains!
Year 1: $100,000
Year 4: $207,000
Year 5 $124,000
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Zero interest rates?!?
Ahh the Global Financial Crisis otherwise known as Global Fried Capitalism or GFC.
Blame it on capitalism and use it as an opportunity for another experiment with socialism.
Doesn't Russia's 75 year bloody detour into hell tell you something, what about North Korea....
No the enlightened, elected few and their many unelected advisors believe they can do better to "manage" the economy.
With a fundamentally socialist organization at the core of each "free market" economy, I am talking a reserve bank, it is not capitalism, never was. It is what is called a mixed economy.
What the reserve bank does is set its target rate, which is normally what banks can borrow money from it.
It defends this rate by either buy or selling bonds. It is based on the idea of a natural rate of interest.
Here is the BS that is peddled by reserve banks and economists the world over. They set their interest rates in line with the natural rate of interest, which is in fact indeterminable (unknownable) at the time they set their rate.
Set it too low and the reserve bank is said to be running an "easy" money policy...
Set it too high and the reserve bank is said to be running a tight money policy.
So reserve banks the world over have been running a easy money policy, pretty much from 9/11/2001. Eventually the easy money, at one time confused as excess savings finds it way to the most profitable game in town and then beyond, causing inflation to rise.
The reserve banks begin to raise interest rates, the media reports, "Reserve banks has a tightening bias" and suddenly things which only work when money is close to free (to banks) are no longer profitable, whoops we need to blame, executive greed, extreme capitalism, mean street, the masters of the universe.
I actually want those idiots to go to the wall and go bankrupt. That is the best thing which could happen to them and their unproductive use of money. Shuffling/merging/bundling crap loans with good and calling them Triple A assets, is like wrapping a dogshit in a bun and calling it a hotdog. Both are going to cause violence reactions.
We have a solvency crisis (not a liquidity crisis), the only way banks are going to lend to each other, rather settle accounts with each other (noone trusts the solvency of the other bank) is when the Government owns 51% of the bank and forces the banks to lend and settle.
Simple as that.
The bankers are doing, at the moment, what makes good bankers, that is, being cautious and prudent.
The Governments of the world want them to go back to be incautious and reckless.
No doubt the music will begin again when reserves banks reach that magical point again where it is easy, close to free money and all the unproductive businesses (and profits) can start again.
Then we have this bloke saying zero rate interest is going to happen.
http://business.smh.com.au/business/zero-interest-rate-a-possibility-20081016-524u.html
Noone asks the Japanese how their little experience with zero interest rate went... whoops a 15 year period in the doldrums. No thanks I would rather have money mean something.
Here is the point.
The reserve banks are to blame, they are the root cause, and provided the incentives for all the unproductive use of capital. Trying to control/manage and thereby corrupting the price signal that money provides through time (I am talking the interest rate) they have corrupted the whole structure of the economy.
That people who are fundamentally opposed to free markets are using Wall Street and Capitalism as the scapegoat is nothing new.
Mostly they are control-freaks who hate the idea that things just work out without requiring government policy or intervention. Otherwise they are peddling a social agenda which takes from the productive and gives to the people who will vote them back into office.
If the local Australian government really wanted to fix things and use their surplus properly, they should give everyone back their money their paid in taxes rather than a select group.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24494843-5013946,00.html
The worse advice I have even seen was from Wayne Swan and Lindsay Tanner (who should know better).
Go and spend the payment!!! don't save it, spend it! FFS why not helicopter everyone $1000 dollars so we can all spend it! It will make us all richer won't it.... but wait, don't stop with $1000, what about $10,000 or even $100,000. How about everyone wins lotto courtesy of the government. That seems to be working in Zimbabwe and worked in the Wiemar Republic, and John Law's Mississippi Bubble as well didn't it?
They should bring it forward to have the payments arrive on the first Monday in November (before the first Tuesday ala Melbourne Cup) it will have the same effect.
The words of the late Kerry Packer come to mind...
"if anybody in this country doesn't minimise their tax, they want their heads read".
"the Government wasn't spending it so well that we should be donating extra".
Nice to see my tax dollars at work allowing people to blow it on the pokies, drink and piss it against the wall or spend it on retail goods.... I can do that as well, without having to support the ATO and government bureaucracy along the way. But wait, the politicians don't give a toss either, they are living off the tax money as well.
Have Fun (on my hard earned tax dollars)
Blame it on capitalism and use it as an opportunity for another experiment with socialism.
Doesn't Russia's 75 year bloody detour into hell tell you something, what about North Korea....
No the enlightened, elected few and their many unelected advisors believe they can do better to "manage" the economy.
With a fundamentally socialist organization at the core of each "free market" economy, I am talking a reserve bank, it is not capitalism, never was. It is what is called a mixed economy.
What the reserve bank does is set its target rate, which is normally what banks can borrow money from it.
It defends this rate by either buy or selling bonds. It is based on the idea of a natural rate of interest.
Here is the BS that is peddled by reserve banks and economists the world over. They set their interest rates in line with the natural rate of interest, which is in fact indeterminable (unknownable) at the time they set their rate.
Set it too low and the reserve bank is said to be running an "easy" money policy...
Set it too high and the reserve bank is said to be running a tight money policy.
So reserve banks the world over have been running a easy money policy, pretty much from 9/11/2001. Eventually the easy money, at one time confused as excess savings finds it way to the most profitable game in town and then beyond, causing inflation to rise.
The reserve banks begin to raise interest rates, the media reports, "Reserve banks has a tightening bias" and suddenly things which only work when money is close to free (to banks) are no longer profitable, whoops we need to blame, executive greed, extreme capitalism, mean street, the masters of the universe.
I actually want those idiots to go to the wall and go bankrupt. That is the best thing which could happen to them and their unproductive use of money. Shuffling/merging/bundling crap loans with good and calling them Triple A assets, is like wrapping a dogshit in a bun and calling it a hotdog. Both are going to cause violence reactions.
We have a solvency crisis (not a liquidity crisis), the only way banks are going to lend to each other, rather settle accounts with each other (noone trusts the solvency of the other bank) is when the Government owns 51% of the bank and forces the banks to lend and settle.
Simple as that.
The bankers are doing, at the moment, what makes good bankers, that is, being cautious and prudent.
The Governments of the world want them to go back to be incautious and reckless.
No doubt the music will begin again when reserves banks reach that magical point again where it is easy, close to free money and all the unproductive businesses (and profits) can start again.
Then we have this bloke saying zero rate interest is going to happen.
http://business.smh.com.au/business/zero-interest-rate-a-possibility-20081016-524u.html
Noone asks the Japanese how their little experience with zero interest rate went... whoops a 15 year period in the doldrums. No thanks I would rather have money mean something.
Here is the point.
The reserve banks are to blame, they are the root cause, and provided the incentives for all the unproductive use of capital. Trying to control/manage and thereby corrupting the price signal that money provides through time (I am talking the interest rate) they have corrupted the whole structure of the economy.
That people who are fundamentally opposed to free markets are using Wall Street and Capitalism as the scapegoat is nothing new.
Mostly they are control-freaks who hate the idea that things just work out without requiring government policy or intervention. Otherwise they are peddling a social agenda which takes from the productive and gives to the people who will vote them back into office.
If the local Australian government really wanted to fix things and use their surplus properly, they should give everyone back their money their paid in taxes rather than a select group.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24494843-5013946,00.html
The worse advice I have even seen was from Wayne Swan and Lindsay Tanner (who should know better).
Go and spend the payment!!! don't save it, spend it! FFS why not helicopter everyone $1000 dollars so we can all spend it! It will make us all richer won't it.... but wait, don't stop with $1000, what about $10,000 or even $100,000. How about everyone wins lotto courtesy of the government. That seems to be working in Zimbabwe and worked in the Wiemar Republic, and John Law's Mississippi Bubble as well didn't it?
They should bring it forward to have the payments arrive on the first Monday in November (before the first Tuesday ala Melbourne Cup) it will have the same effect.
The words of the late Kerry Packer come to mind...
"if anybody in this country doesn't minimise their tax, they want their heads read".
"the Government wasn't spending it so well that we should be donating extra".
Nice to see my tax dollars at work allowing people to blow it on the pokies, drink and piss it against the wall or spend it on retail goods.... I can do that as well, without having to support the ATO and government bureaucracy along the way. But wait, the politicians don't give a toss either, they are living off the tax money as well.
Have Fun (on my hard earned tax dollars)
Sunday, June 01, 2008
More pain for working families
Unless you read the financial section or watch some decent finance programs you may not have seen the continuing saga which will lead to higher natural gas prices in Australia. Especially in the main consumption areas of the Australian Eastern Seaboard (Brisbane down to Melbourne).
Basically the local price for natural gas is completely disconnected (at least for most Eastern states) from the global price for natural gas by the tune of roughly 250-350%.
There are companies both in Australia and overseas trying to cash in on that difference.
One such company is Origin Energy, they hold a large amount of natural gas reserves (recently updated). Last week they rejected in offer from BG (British Gas) to be taken over. What BG and others are looking at is creating a LNG train and export facility in Queensland.
So why would this increase the price of natural gas in Australia?
In setting up a new demand source (exporting natural gas as LNG to China, US, Japan etc) whilst the supply remains relatively fixed means the price must increase. Export demand will mean that gas producers will export into that market in preference to supplying locally until the market price locally is almost the same as they can receive selling overseas.
Look at the numbers for Origin Energy.
It has Proven, Probable and Possible (3P) reserves of 10,222 Petajoules (PJ).
Australian natural gas prices are quoted in dollars per GigaJoules around $3.80 per GJ (see Govt. research paper)
1 PJ is 1 million GJ.
So 10,222 PJ is 10,222,000,000 GJ
So Origin has $38.8 billion dollars of natural gas and a market value (capitalisation) of $13.7 Billion.
Here is the reason for this article.
One Gigajoule is approximately equal to one thousand cubic Feet (Mcf).
The Henry Hub futures price in the US is around $12.50 per Mcf. That is a 328.95% difference in price compared to the local Australian natural gas price.
So if Origin were to export all that gas. It would mean those gas reserves are worth $127.7 Billion.
Now if the local market has discounted this new reserve information in, has it discounted in the price those reserves are worth at world prices or Australian prices?
Is it worth $14.60 or $48.08?
See what I mean about more pain in the pipeline for retail consumers who rely gas for heating or cooking. How would a 328% increase in your bill feel like?
Have Fun
Paul
Australian Government research paper of Natural Gas
LNG Conversation tables
ABC Inside Business Origin CEO interview
GJ per Mcf 1.000
EastAus per GigaJ (GJ) $3.80
EastAus in McF $3.80
US Henry Hub McF $12.50
Difference 328.95%
Basically the local price for natural gas is completely disconnected (at least for most Eastern states) from the global price for natural gas by the tune of roughly 250-350%.
There are companies both in Australia and overseas trying to cash in on that difference.
One such company is Origin Energy, they hold a large amount of natural gas reserves (recently updated). Last week they rejected in offer from BG (British Gas) to be taken over. What BG and others are looking at is creating a LNG train and export facility in Queensland.
So why would this increase the price of natural gas in Australia?
In setting up a new demand source (exporting natural gas as LNG to China, US, Japan etc) whilst the supply remains relatively fixed means the price must increase. Export demand will mean that gas producers will export into that market in preference to supplying locally until the market price locally is almost the same as they can receive selling overseas.
Look at the numbers for Origin Energy.
It has Proven, Probable and Possible (3P) reserves of 10,222 Petajoules (PJ).
Australian natural gas prices are quoted in dollars per GigaJoules around $3.80 per GJ (see Govt. research paper)
1 PJ is 1 million GJ.
So 10,222 PJ is 10,222,000,000 GJ
So Origin has $38.8 billion dollars of natural gas and a market value (capitalisation) of $13.7 Billion.
Here is the reason for this article.
One Gigajoule is approximately equal to one thousand cubic Feet (Mcf).
The Henry Hub futures price in the US is around $12.50 per Mcf. That is a 328.95% difference in price compared to the local Australian natural gas price.
So if Origin were to export all that gas. It would mean those gas reserves are worth $127.7 Billion.
Now if the local market has discounted this new reserve information in, has it discounted in the price those reserves are worth at world prices or Australian prices?
Is it worth $14.60 or $48.08?
See what I mean about more pain in the pipeline for retail consumers who rely gas for heating or cooking. How would a 328% increase in your bill feel like?
Have Fun
Paul
Australian Government research paper of Natural Gas
LNG Conversation tables
ABC Inside Business Origin CEO interview
GJ per Mcf 1.000
EastAus per GigaJ (GJ) $3.80
EastAus in McF $3.80
US Henry Hub McF $12.50
Difference 328.95%
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Why Earth Hour is wrong
A percentage of people in Sydney 2% last year will turn off their lights for one hour.
The generators still run, even these people's fridges, hot water heaters, electronic devices still
run.
It is a bunch of people trying to feel good about themselves. They are supporting a idea which is trying to make the rest of us feel bad about ourselves and our current way of life.
Their underlining argument taken to the logical conclusion would be for noone to use electricity, no lights anywhere, not just in Australia but the entire globe. They would deny this but this mentality is anti-modern life, and for most people this means anti-human.
They want people to go back to the pre-modern times without electricity and without light (after dark).
Turn your lights off and go back to the stone age.
OR
Leave you lights on and enjoy your weekend.
I keep writing these rants as I believe in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness!
Paul
The generators still run, even these people's fridges, hot water heaters, electronic devices still
run.
It is a bunch of people trying to feel good about themselves. They are supporting a idea which is trying to make the rest of us feel bad about ourselves and our current way of life.
Their underlining argument taken to the logical conclusion would be for noone to use electricity, no lights anywhere, not just in Australia but the entire globe. They would deny this but this mentality is anti-modern life, and for most people this means anti-human.
They want people to go back to the pre-modern times without electricity and without light (after dark).
Turn your lights off and go back to the stone age.
OR
Leave you lights on and enjoy your weekend.
I keep writing these rants as I believe in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness!
- Life: The sanctity of human life, no-one has the right to demand human sacrifice of any kind, physical, mental or economical.
- Liberty: Freedom from the use of arbitrary force.
- Pursuit of Happiness: Be happy as long as you don't violate the first two rules.
Paul
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Housing affordability
Big issue in Australia, especially in large cities is the lack of housing affordability, and rents which are increasing rapidly.
Tonight the SBS insight program skimmed over the issue.
All interested parties are lobbying hard for the Government to step in and "make a difference".
The new PM ol' mate Kev says that is it the number one problem (amongst other number one problems) affecting working families.
By now you should known that I think getting the Government involved is a sure way to make it worse. We even have a classic recent example.
The First Home Owners Grant (FHOG) introduced, had the opposite effect. Damn law of unintended consequences...
Instead of improving the ability for first homeowners all it did was put a fire under the existing demand, $1 Billion per year, leveraged by the banks to 95% (with mortgage insurance) of course and you have $20 Billion dollars looking for a home in property.
But wait, in an unconstrained market, tonnes of entrepreneurs (and investors) would jump in and provide supply for all that extra demand... right?
Like MySpace and Facebook caused a huge increase in the number of social networking sites on the internet.
Housing has some characteristics (not an exhaustive list)
What should and eventually will happen in Sydney and Melbourne is what has already happened overseas. New York is a good example. Everyone wants to live close to work, densities increase and we have apartment blocks and skyscrapers where people demand to live!
At the moment we have everyone wanting to live with a enjoyable traveling distance of their place of work. Most work is concentrated in CBDs, so you can draw a radiating circles around it in terms of travel times and map reasonably accurately where free standing houses are a waste of space and need to be replaced by higher density housing.
You can join the mortgage treadmill or make your asset work for you and get the normal tax deductions of an income producing asset. Living elsewhere for the first 7-10 years of the mortgage is the best thing you can do. Mortgage interest is dead money as well.
The most interesting tidbit I got from the Insight problem was the Federal minister mentioning reviewing fair rental rates. This sounds like rent controls in disguise (similar to the NRMA and ACCC petrol price witch hunt).
Ask New Yorkers what rent controls have done to parts of New York City!
Guess what happens to supply if you limit or legislate the return on investment?
Have Fun
Paul
Tonight the SBS insight program skimmed over the issue.
All interested parties are lobbying hard for the Government to step in and "make a difference".
The new PM ol' mate Kev says that is it the number one problem (amongst other number one problems) affecting working families.
By now you should known that I think getting the Government involved is a sure way to make it worse. We even have a classic recent example.
The First Home Owners Grant (FHOG) introduced, had the opposite effect. Damn law of unintended consequences...
Instead of improving the ability for first homeowners all it did was put a fire under the existing demand, $1 Billion per year, leveraged by the banks to 95% (with mortgage insurance) of course and you have $20 Billion dollars looking for a home in property.
But wait, in an unconstrained market, tonnes of entrepreneurs (and investors) would jump in and provide supply for all that extra demand... right?
Like MySpace and Facebook caused a huge increase in the number of social networking sites on the internet.
Housing has some characteristics (not an exhaustive list)
- It is a long term durable asset.
- Supply is illiquid due to a couple of reasons (see below)
- It is reasonably expensive to build new or replace existing with higher density.
- Zoning laws and associated regulations. Mostly local government related.
- It takes time to build houses and units.
- New land releases are slow and in outlying areas.
- Noone wants to live 2-4 hours commute from their job.
- Existing homeowners: They are the ones wanting heritage listing, facade orders, height and density regulations. Anything which reduces supply when demand is the same or strong will increase the value of their primary asset (their house).
- State Labor Parties: Political donations from big property developers help ease the pain of working in State politics versus the glory of Federal.
- State Governments: Increasing house and land prices equals more stamp duty and more land tax!!
- Local Councils: Increased house and land prices equals more rates. I am sure the power of controlling development goes to the head of some people as well.
What should and eventually will happen in Sydney and Melbourne is what has already happened overseas. New York is a good example. Everyone wants to live close to work, densities increase and we have apartment blocks and skyscrapers where people demand to live!
At the moment we have everyone wanting to live with a enjoyable traveling distance of their place of work. Most work is concentrated in CBDs, so you can draw a radiating circles around it in terms of travel times and map reasonably accurately where free standing houses are a waste of space and need to be replaced by higher density housing.
You can join the mortgage treadmill or make your asset work for you and get the normal tax deductions of an income producing asset. Living elsewhere for the first 7-10 years of the mortgage is the best thing you can do. Mortgage interest is dead money as well.
The most interesting tidbit I got from the Insight problem was the Federal minister mentioning reviewing fair rental rates. This sounds like rent controls in disguise (similar to the NRMA and ACCC petrol price witch hunt).
Ask New Yorkers what rent controls have done to parts of New York City!
Guess what happens to supply if you limit or legislate the return on investment?
Have Fun
Paul
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Abolish Capital Gains
I was reading a interesting article on Institutional Economics regarding capital gains on residental and investment property
Why not abolish capital gains tax completely on all assets. It is a tax on investment.
We increase our capital stock and maybe productivity will increase as well eh?
That would kill the stagnant productivity and lack of infrastructure problems with one stone.
Of course this will never happen, similar to having a flat income tax rather than progressive. People like the idea that rich people get taxed more, and pollies pander to popular feeling.
I have always hated the idea that as I build up a business, at some point the Government is waiting in the wings (if I sell any portion) to take their cut. On the understanding of course that I am currently, presently and until I sell any portion not already being taxed so that the Government can provide the necessary public infrastructure to enable my business to grow.
You could argue if my business are almost completely of an online nature, that somehow the Government is still providing my business with "soft" infrastructure in the form of education.
When in doubt refer to the tax office reports (I noticed they are dragging the chain on releasing new statistics).
The summary, Capital Gains Tax (CGT) made the government $7 billion in 2004-2005. That
is 7% of Personal income tax. 17.% % of Company tax and about the same for GST.
What would $7.9 billion mean in terms of new investment?
In 2004-2005 $79 Billion was spent on new assets, so the CGT was 10% of that. It is not likely all the money would have gone into new assets. That would depend on the companies Return on Assets (ROA). So either it would held as cash, invested or given back as dividends.
Capital gains tax
http://www.ato.gov.au/corporate/content.asp?doc=/content/81183.htm&page=36&H36
OVERVIEW
For the 2004–05 income year:
* net capital gains totalled $25.7 billion, and were reported by 974,284 taxable individuals, 18,657 taxable companies and 75,075 taxable funds
* CGT payable on the net capital gains of taxable individuals, companies and funds was estimated to be $7.0 billion
* 461,713 taxable individuals, companies and funds declared $56.4 billion in total current year capital gains on their CGT schedules. Around 62.3% or $35.1 billion of these total capital gains were sourced from shares.
Personal income tax
http://www.ato.gov.au/corporate/content.asp?doc=/content/81183.htm&page=31&H31
OVERVIEW
For the 2004–05 income year:
* 11.2 million individuals lodged income tax returns
* individuals had total income of $447.5 billion, taxable income of $423.7 billion and net tax payable of $103.6 billion
* individuals claimed $23.8 billion in total deductions, including $11.9 billion in work-related expenses
* 7.7 million individuals were entitled to tax offsets and credits totalling $13.6 billion
* 73.0% of tax returns or 8.2 million were submitted by tax agents, and 11.6% or 1.3 million were submitted using e-tax.
Company tax
http://www.ato.gov.au/corporate/content.asp?doc=/content/81183.htm&page=32&H32
OVERVIEW
For the 2004–05 income year:
* 707,455 companies lodged returns, a 3.4% increase from 2003–04
* companies reported total income of $1,638.8 billion, a 7.3% increase from 2003–04
* total company expenses were $1,486.8 billion, a 5.8% increase from 2003–04
* companies were liable for $40.5 billion in net tax, a 16.2% increase from 2003–04.
For the 2005–06 financial year:
* petroleum resource rent tax totalled $2.0 billion.
GST
http://www.ato.gov.au/corporate/content.asp?doc=/content/81183.htm&page=39&H39
OVERVIEW
For the 2005–06 financial year:
* total net GST liabilities (including Customs collections) increased by 5.3% to $37.3 billion, up from $35.5 billion in 2004–05
* wine equalisation tax liabilities (including Customs collections) decreased by less than 0.5% from the previous year to $663.0 million
* luxury car tax liabilities (including Customs collections) increased by 7.3% to $322.4 million.
Why not abolish capital gains tax completely on all assets. It is a tax on investment.
We increase our capital stock and maybe productivity will increase as well eh?
That would kill the stagnant productivity and lack of infrastructure problems with one stone.
Of course this will never happen, similar to having a flat income tax rather than progressive. People like the idea that rich people get taxed more, and pollies pander to popular feeling.
I have always hated the idea that as I build up a business, at some point the Government is waiting in the wings (if I sell any portion) to take their cut. On the understanding of course that I am currently, presently and until I sell any portion not already being taxed so that the Government can provide the necessary public infrastructure to enable my business to grow.
You could argue if my business are almost completely of an online nature, that somehow the Government is still providing my business with "soft" infrastructure in the form of education.
When in doubt refer to the tax office reports (I noticed they are dragging the chain on releasing new statistics).
The summary, Capital Gains Tax (CGT) made the government $7 billion in 2004-2005. That
is 7% of Personal income tax. 17.% % of Company tax and about the same for GST.
What would $7.9 billion mean in terms of new investment?
In 2004-2005 $79 Billion was spent on new assets, so the CGT was 10% of that. It is not likely all the money would have gone into new assets. That would depend on the companies Return on Assets (ROA). So either it would held as cash, invested or given back as dividends.
Capital gains tax
http://www.ato.gov.au/corporate/content.asp?doc=/content/81183.htm&page=36&H36
OVERVIEW
For the 2004–05 income year:
* net capital gains totalled $25.7 billion, and were reported by 974,284 taxable individuals, 18,657 taxable companies and 75,075 taxable funds
* CGT payable on the net capital gains of taxable individuals, companies and funds was estimated to be $7.0 billion
* 461,713 taxable individuals, companies and funds declared $56.4 billion in total current year capital gains on their CGT schedules. Around 62.3% or $35.1 billion of these total capital gains were sourced from shares.
Personal income tax
http://www.ato.gov.au/corporate/content.asp?doc=/content/81183.htm&page=31&H31
OVERVIEW
For the 2004–05 income year:
* 11.2 million individuals lodged income tax returns
* individuals had total income of $447.5 billion, taxable income of $423.7 billion and net tax payable of $103.6 billion
* individuals claimed $23.8 billion in total deductions, including $11.9 billion in work-related expenses
* 7.7 million individuals were entitled to tax offsets and credits totalling $13.6 billion
* 73.0% of tax returns or 8.2 million were submitted by tax agents, and 11.6% or 1.3 million were submitted using e-tax.
Company tax
http://www.ato.gov.au/corporate/content.asp?doc=/content/81183.htm&page=32&H32
OVERVIEW
For the 2004–05 income year:
* 707,455 companies lodged returns, a 3.4% increase from 2003–04
* companies reported total income of $1,638.8 billion, a 7.3% increase from 2003–04
* total company expenses were $1,486.8 billion, a 5.8% increase from 2003–04
* companies were liable for $40.5 billion in net tax, a 16.2% increase from 2003–04.
For the 2005–06 financial year:
* petroleum resource rent tax totalled $2.0 billion.
GST
http://www.ato.gov.au/corporate/content.asp?doc=/content/81183.htm&page=39&H39
OVERVIEW
For the 2005–06 financial year:
* total net GST liabilities (including Customs collections) increased by 5.3% to $37.3 billion, up from $35.5 billion in 2004–05
* wine equalisation tax liabilities (including Customs collections) decreased by less than 0.5% from the previous year to $663.0 million
* luxury car tax liabilities (including Customs collections) increased by 7.3% to $322.4 million.
Monday, March 10, 2008
ooohhh white flight from NSW public schools
Sydney Morning Herald front page lead with the digg bait heading "White flight leaves system segregated by race"
I am not going to even link to it. Google will find it for you.
It is a nasty little article, the aim to increase funding for public schools within NSW, re-remove parent's choice of schools and of course label all those white Anglo-Australians as racist.
Those parents are discriminating bastards! Parents are noting and observing the differences between schools. They are distinguishing accurately that one school is different from another. Of course they are discriminating. One school is crap and the other less crap or maybe even good!
The NSW government allocates (when I last looked at the NSW Education 2002 budget) around $6,500 per kid at primary and $8,500 for secondary. If parents want to spend their own after-tax money on sending their kids somewhere else it is their choice.
Of course there is always an "enlightened" elite who wish to make the choices for everyone.
Unfortunately they can't just rule outright, so have to raise thought balloons, shape opinion, guide policy makers, lobby politicans, setup Non-Government Organizations (NGO), institutes and think tanks etc etc.
Have Fun
Paul
I am not going to even link to it. Google will find it for you.
It is a nasty little article, the aim to increase funding for public schools within NSW, re-remove parent's choice of schools and of course label all those white Anglo-Australians as racist.
Those parents are discriminating bastards! Parents are noting and observing the differences between schools. They are distinguishing accurately that one school is different from another. Of course they are discriminating. One school is crap and the other less crap or maybe even good!
The NSW government allocates (when I last looked at the NSW Education 2002 budget) around $6,500 per kid at primary and $8,500 for secondary. If parents want to spend their own after-tax money on sending their kids somewhere else it is their choice.
Of course there is always an "enlightened" elite who wish to make the choices for everyone.
Unfortunately they can't just rule outright, so have to raise thought balloons, shape opinion, guide policy makers, lobby politicans, setup Non-Government Organizations (NGO), institutes and think tanks etc etc.
Have Fun
Paul
Monday, January 14, 2008
Baby bonus is for everyone
When the baby bonus was introduced into Australia there were are large number of naysayers as is expected.
People tend to forget the treasurer at the time (Peter Costello) introduced the bonus as a way to increase the fertility rate, so that the demographic nightmares which will engulf Japan, Europe and China can be lessened or reversed in Australia.
To put it simply. The Government introduced the baby bonus as an investment (in their eyes), the return being that there will be a similar number of taxpayers as there are now to cope with aging population demographic.
So the government GIVES NOW, knowing it will TAKE and TAKE TAXES in the future from these recent newborns.
Now we get the funny and sad bit.
Most major newspapers rang stories on how the RICH suburbs are also claiming the baby bonus. So the Government should means test the baby bonus. This will stop middle-class welfare apparently. Blah blah welcome to Marxist class warfare garbage peddled as an opinion piece.
Wrong, bad idea. Go read the previous paragraph. This is about the next generation of taxpayers remember.
Now go and read the ATO tax reports by postcode for NSW.
The average Kirribilli taxpayer pays an average net tax of $37,000.00!!
Compare this with Liverpool, NSW, which apparently has the most claims for the baby bonus.
The average Liverpool taxpayer pays an average net tax of $8,891.00. That is 4.6 times less than the average Kirribilli taxpayer.
A little arithmetic and little data gathering from public available sources on the net and we find that if anything, the government should be encouraging those $100K income per year "rich" bastards in Kirribilli to have more babies, especially given those children are likely to pay 4.5 times more tax!
Over their working life of 40 years.
Average Kirribilli Taxpayer will pay $1,480,000 in tax.
Average Liverpool Taxpayer will pay $355,640 in tax.
Now you see why the government is not going to scrap this policy (nor means test it) anytime soon.
Cynically the Return on Investment (ROI) for the government is massive. Outlay $5000 dollars now and get a 7112% ROI on the kid in Liverpool, and 29,600% ROI on the kid in Kirribilli!
I thought the idea of paying only on the 2nd child would have merit. However potentially it is worth more (to the government) to continue the 1st child payment and increase the 2nd child payment by 50% and third (the so-called "child for your country") maybe 150%-200%.
If I had time, you could work out in financial terms what the average taxpayer is worth to the government based on those numbers.
People tend to forget the treasurer at the time (Peter Costello) introduced the bonus as a way to increase the fertility rate, so that the demographic nightmares which will engulf Japan, Europe and China can be lessened or reversed in Australia.
To put it simply. The Government introduced the baby bonus as an investment (in their eyes), the return being that there will be a similar number of taxpayers as there are now to cope with aging population demographic.
So the government GIVES NOW, knowing it will TAKE and TAKE TAXES in the future from these recent newborns.
Now we get the funny and sad bit.
Most major newspapers rang stories on how the RICH suburbs are also claiming the baby bonus. So the Government should means test the baby bonus. This will stop middle-class welfare apparently. Blah blah welcome to Marxist class warfare garbage peddled as an opinion piece.
Wrong, bad idea. Go read the previous paragraph. This is about the next generation of taxpayers remember.
Now go and read the ATO tax reports by postcode for NSW.
The average Kirribilli taxpayer pays an average net tax of $37,000.00!!
Compare this with Liverpool, NSW, which apparently has the most claims for the baby bonus.
The average Liverpool taxpayer pays an average net tax of $8,891.00. That is 4.6 times less than the average Kirribilli taxpayer.
A little arithmetic and little data gathering from public available sources on the net and we find that if anything, the government should be encouraging those $100K income per year "rich" bastards in Kirribilli to have more babies, especially given those children are likely to pay 4.5 times more tax!
Over their working life of 40 years.
Average Kirribilli Taxpayer will pay $1,480,000 in tax.
Average Liverpool Taxpayer will pay $355,640 in tax.
Now you see why the government is not going to scrap this policy (nor means test it) anytime soon.
Cynically the Return on Investment (ROI) for the government is massive. Outlay $5000 dollars now and get a 7112% ROI on the kid in Liverpool, and 29,600% ROI on the kid in Kirribilli!
I thought the idea of paying only on the 2nd child would have merit. However potentially it is worth more (to the government) to continue the 1st child payment and increase the 2nd child payment by 50% and third (the so-called "child for your country") maybe 150%-200%.
If I had time, you could work out in financial terms what the average taxpayer is worth to the government based on those numbers.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
US Fed blinks
For all the spin that the US Federal Reserve Bank (the Fed) Governor Dr. Bernanke was different to Mr Greenspan, when push comes to shove they both blinked.
Providing liquidity for banks borrowing from the Fed was not enough apparently to stave off further spikes in overnight/fed funds/interest rate which banks would lend money to each other and borrow from the Federal Reserve. For a reasonable explanation of the process read this article
from the weekend Sydney Morning Herald.
Unfortunately the missing or unstated part of this process of short term lending is the fact that the Fed and the Australian Reserve Bank assets keep ballooning over time.
When any central bank comes out with a interest rate statement, they need to defend that interest rate by injecting credit into the system or withdrawing from the system, depending on the supply or demand for that credit.
The other fun part of this week was the only slight mention of the slight unwinding of the Yen carry trade. Basically the Japanese Central bank has been throwing credit at anyone who wants it and Japanese investors have looked for overseas yielding assets in preference for holding Japanese assets yielding 0.25%-0.50%.
If you are a bank you would be stupid to source your credit from anywhere but Japan. Say you borrow $1 Billion USD equivalent from a Japanese Bank, you can turn around and buy USD denominated assets or even better NZ and AUS denominated assets. Pay interest on %0.5 and collect interest on %6.5-8.5%. So earn a tidy 6-8% p.a. on the borrowed money.
So why does US non-performing high risk loans cause the carry trade to get hammered. Potentially the purchasers of these CDO was mostly the yen carry trade money!
Why, the potential to make a little more margin on the yield pay! Making an extra $10 million for every extra 1% yield per $1 billion borrowed.
Now if this is correct you should see the USD appreciate against the YEN as investors borrow in Yen, sell the Yen and buy USD to buy US dollar assets. Similarly for AUD and NZD assets. The longer term trend reflecting where the investors doing the carry trade believe the highest yield margins exists.
A little interesting thing to come out of this was the media and interviewed analysts saying their was a "flight to quality" meaning a flight to government bonds. If the investors saw this as a longer term issue, they would be buying bonds across the board.
Not so. Look at this table, the short-term bond yields have dropped (as investors demand them and therefore increase the price) more than 70 basis points (0.7%) in a week. So the stampede is/was into short term bonds... wait until the Fed blinks and cut rates like every other time, and let the credit binge continue as before, now the early bond investors can sell their bonds and pocket the tidy 110 Basis point profit, and jump back into the sold down high yield assets.
It will be interesting to see how short term bonds go now. I would expect selling pressure to be intense.
Given nothing has changed in AUS and NZ. There will be money chasing yield again, possibly flowing out of US as they just cut the margin on the yield play from 0.5%.
Tomorrow will be a big up day for both NZ and AUD (and their respective bonds and markets).
Last thing, the CDOs have let bank and non-bank lenders to get loans off their books, by bundling the loans as yielding assets. So plenty of hedge and other fund managers have bought these "assets", possibly in the hedge funds case using borrowed money (from banks). So whilst the banks no longer have the risk of default from the borrowers eg. mortgage borrowers, the larger banks now have the risk of default from the hedge funds.
The idea that there is excessive savings (something the Fed governor wrote about some time ago) is spin at best, a plain lie at worst. It is not excessive savings, it is hot money in the form of credit sloshing around global markets looking not for alpha or beta but whatever asset can yield the most margin.
Not one politician in Australia mentioned that the 11.3% drop in a little over a week was good for Australian exporters, but then really, only people fixated on exports and trade deficits (bad of course) worry about a $AUD 12 Billion annual trade deficit when the GDP is $AUD 922 Billion! That 12 billion is 1.3% of the total GDP. Big woot!
If you use the 2004-2005 Company tax statistics, Australia has a AUD 1.4 to 1.6 Trillion (1000 Billion) economy backed by $AUD 4.4 Trillion in Assets!!
That AUD 12 Billion becomes 0.075% of that sized economy.
What the media and lobby groups play/prey on is that 12 Billion dollars is an extremely large
amount of money for 99% of the population, forgetting the fact that even AUD 1.6 trillion split evenly over the 707,455 companies who were taxed that is only AUD 2.2 million per company.
Of course nothing human is an even split or even a Gaussian bell curve, it is power law curves everywhere.
For all the press about capacity constraints, this has only come about as external demands for products from Australia has caused an capacity used within Australia to be bid away to external uses rather than internal uses.
Have Fun
Paul
Providing liquidity for banks borrowing from the Fed was not enough apparently to stave off further spikes in overnight/fed funds/interest rate which banks would lend money to each other and borrow from the Federal Reserve. For a reasonable explanation of the process read this article
from the weekend Sydney Morning Herald.
Unfortunately the missing or unstated part of this process of short term lending is the fact that the Fed and the Australian Reserve Bank assets keep ballooning over time.
When any central bank comes out with a interest rate statement, they need to defend that interest rate by injecting credit into the system or withdrawing from the system, depending on the supply or demand for that credit.
The other fun part of this week was the only slight mention of the slight unwinding of the Yen carry trade. Basically the Japanese Central bank has been throwing credit at anyone who wants it and Japanese investors have looked for overseas yielding assets in preference for holding Japanese assets yielding 0.25%-0.50%.
If you are a bank you would be stupid to source your credit from anywhere but Japan. Say you borrow $1 Billion USD equivalent from a Japanese Bank, you can turn around and buy USD denominated assets or even better NZ and AUS denominated assets. Pay interest on %0.5 and collect interest on %6.5-8.5%. So earn a tidy 6-8% p.a. on the borrowed money.
So why does US non-performing high risk loans cause the carry trade to get hammered. Potentially the purchasers of these CDO was mostly the yen carry trade money!
Why, the potential to make a little more margin on the yield pay! Making an extra $10 million for every extra 1% yield per $1 billion borrowed.
Now if this is correct you should see the USD appreciate against the YEN as investors borrow in Yen, sell the Yen and buy USD to buy US dollar assets. Similarly for AUD and NZD assets. The longer term trend reflecting where the investors doing the carry trade believe the highest yield margins exists.
A little interesting thing to come out of this was the media and interviewed analysts saying their was a "flight to quality" meaning a flight to government bonds. If the investors saw this as a longer term issue, they would be buying bonds across the board.
Not so. Look at this table, the short-term bond yields have dropped (as investors demand them and therefore increase the price) more than 70 basis points (0.7%) in a week. So the stampede is/was into short term bonds... wait until the Fed blinks and cut rates like every other time, and let the credit binge continue as before, now the early bond investors can sell their bonds and pocket the tidy 110 Basis point profit, and jump back into the sold down high yield assets.
It will be interesting to see how short term bonds go now. I would expect selling pressure to be intense.
Given nothing has changed in AUS and NZ. There will be money chasing yield again, possibly flowing out of US as they just cut the margin on the yield play from 0.5%.
Tomorrow will be a big up day for both NZ and AUD (and their respective bonds and markets).
Last thing, the CDOs have let bank and non-bank lenders to get loans off their books, by bundling the loans as yielding assets. So plenty of hedge and other fund managers have bought these "assets", possibly in the hedge funds case using borrowed money (from banks). So whilst the banks no longer have the risk of default from the borrowers eg. mortgage borrowers, the larger banks now have the risk of default from the hedge funds.
The idea that there is excessive savings (something the Fed governor wrote about some time ago) is spin at best, a plain lie at worst. It is not excessive savings, it is hot money in the form of credit sloshing around global markets looking not for alpha or beta but whatever asset can yield the most margin.
Not one politician in Australia mentioned that the 11.3% drop in a little over a week was good for Australian exporters, but then really, only people fixated on exports and trade deficits (bad of course) worry about a $AUD 12 Billion annual trade deficit when the GDP is $AUD 922 Billion! That 12 billion is 1.3% of the total GDP. Big woot!
If you use the 2004-2005 Company tax statistics, Australia has a AUD 1.4 to 1.6 Trillion (1000 Billion) economy backed by $AUD 4.4 Trillion in Assets!!
That AUD 12 Billion becomes 0.075% of that sized economy.
What the media and lobby groups play/prey on is that 12 Billion dollars is an extremely large
amount of money for 99% of the population, forgetting the fact that even AUD 1.6 trillion split evenly over the 707,455 companies who were taxed that is only AUD 2.2 million per company.
Of course nothing human is an even split or even a Gaussian bell curve, it is power law curves everywhere.
For all the press about capacity constraints, this has only come about as external demands for products from Australia has caused an capacity used within Australia to be bid away to external uses rather than internal uses.
Have Fun
Paul
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Consumption fallacy
Not much technical stuff here, just my opinion, searchable, indexable, and hopefully readable until the sun burns out.
I don't know how many times I have read articles which maintain the fallacy that
Rather than using goods or barter, in modern economies that requires the use of money, which is the means of exchange i.e. two parties, one labeled the consumer are exchanging goods or services.
Read that again. Two parties are exchanging goods or services in any transaction.
Without the use of force, all transactions or trades (exchanges) are normally mutually beneficial to both parties, and vice versa, the exchange would NOT occur if this was not true.
So production always proceeds consumption. I provide DBA services, and receive money which I use to consume pizza. Money acts the tool to save me bartering fractional DBA services to the pizza man. Similarly money acts as a tool for the pizza man when he uses it buying salami.
Look at it from a different perspective.
Would you rather be the person who produces and sells 10 widgets for $1 each versus the person who produces and sells 10 million widgets for $1 each.
Who has the better purchasing power?
Who has the better consuming power?
Who is the most productive?
Green alternative answer: Who is the most corporately responsible, ethical and carbon neutral?
The only way a party can consume without producing is to
Wondering why dictatorships, socialist and communist societies suck? here's why
Welcome to lowest common denominator, why produce more or better when the products of your effort and skill are distributed without your consultation.
Before I don the flame retardant suit made from 100% asbestos, not being able to produce is a valid reason to be dependent on others. The easiest example of that is children.
So why have children? what service do children provide?
I can think of a couple of reasons:
Have Fun
Paul
I don't know how many times I have read articles which maintain the fallacy that
- The consumer and consumption are the largest part of any modern economy.
- That most people in a developed society/economy exist to consume.
- Without continued consumption the economy is going to crash and burn.
Rather than using goods or barter, in modern economies that requires the use of money, which is the means of exchange i.e. two parties, one labeled the consumer are exchanging goods or services.
Read that again. Two parties are exchanging goods or services in any transaction.
Without the use of force, all transactions or trades (exchanges) are normally mutually beneficial to both parties, and vice versa, the exchange would NOT occur if this was not true.
So production always proceeds consumption. I provide DBA services, and receive money which I use to consume pizza. Money acts the tool to save me bartering fractional DBA services to the pizza man. Similarly money acts as a tool for the pizza man when he uses it buying salami.
Look at it from a different perspective.
Would you rather be the person who produces and sells 10 widgets for $1 each versus the person who produces and sells 10 million widgets for $1 each.
Who has the better purchasing power?
Who has the better consuming power?
Who is the most productive?
Green alternative answer: Who is the most corporately responsible, ethical and carbon neutral?
The only way a party can consume without producing is to
- Use counterfeit money.
- Broadly... live dependent on others. That includes the Government. Taxes are one form of an exchange using force i.e. pay tax or go to jail.
Wondering why dictatorships, socialist and communist societies suck? here's why
Welcome to lowest common denominator, why produce more or better when the products of your effort and skill are distributed without your consultation.
Before I don the flame retardant suit made from 100% asbestos, not being able to produce is a valid reason to be dependent on others. The easiest example of that is children.
So why have children? what service do children provide?
I can think of a couple of reasons:
- Old age care, you are looking after them now and they will look after you then. This is in the face of the fact of government pensions and old age care. But again it takes more than 80 years to change deep ingrained cultural heritage.
- You get to go to the toy shop and buy whatever toy you like!
- Play lego again.
- Experience the joys and sorrow of parenthood, so you can bore your children in your old age with their childhood memories (see point 1).
Have Fun
Paul
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
What I am up to
I have started a bunch of topic specific blogs on two main subject areas.
Installing database software on Amazon EC2 at dbadojo.com
and
Virtual Machine Datamines at vmdatamine.com
The funny thing was I had owned the domains for both for a while and noticed that I could use blogger as the host, whilst have the domain something which didn't include a free blogger site, which apparently is bad form in the blogging world (and analytic world).
Google Analytics is on them all, and unlike this poor old blog with it many pearls of wisdom, insightful comments, they were an immediate hit. Who cares about economics and climate change skeptics eh?
Other news:
Pythian Australia has grown to two DBAs and we now also have two Australian based clients.
Onto the real meat of this blog: My opinion
I saw some interesting comments from NSW Minister Costa on climate change, by God I agree with the man!
Yes, I am a heretic, global warming is caused by the sun.
Solar activity is way up and other planets polar icecaps are melting and some want us to think that our technology and lifestyle is causing this problem.
Scare tactics are not fun, especially when you gain to profit from them, not only in dollars but other benefits like fame (Australian of the Year) and the old rumor of a run by Al Gore for the most powerful man on the planet (US president).
My rejection by the way doesn't stop me disliking pollution and land degradation. That is a different issue. It is mainly based on a rejecting pseudo science, cherry picking climates periods and rubbery analysis (pick the data to fit the theory), an Assault on Reason in all regards.
Al Gore's book is a perfect example of hijacking words and presenting ideas which in fact Defy Reason, spit in the face of Reason, trample reason into the ground as the herd of scientific consensus replaces scientific experiment. Perfect Orwellian.
Even time I think of the scare campaigners I think of the witches of MacBeth standing over their cauldron. Promising Macbeth the throne, not revealing the evil which is required to get there.
So we will have our romantic promised land, our garden of eden, and mother "Gaia" earth will be free (of humans and their dread technology of course).
Have a read of this article from a fellow skeptic at CoyoteBlog
Have Fun
Paul
Installing database software on Amazon EC2 at dbadojo.com
and
Virtual Machine Datamines at vmdatamine.com
The funny thing was I had owned the domains for both for a while and noticed that I could use blogger as the host, whilst have the domain something which didn't include a free blogger site, which apparently is bad form in the blogging world (and analytic world).
Google Analytics is on them all, and unlike this poor old blog with it many pearls of wisdom, insightful comments, they were an immediate hit. Who cares about economics and climate change skeptics eh?
Other news:
Pythian Australia has grown to two DBAs and we now also have two Australian based clients.
Onto the real meat of this blog: My opinion
I saw some interesting comments from NSW Minister Costa on climate change, by God I agree with the man!
Yes, I am a heretic, global warming is caused by the sun.
Solar activity is way up and other planets polar icecaps are melting and some want us to think that our technology and lifestyle is causing this problem.
Scare tactics are not fun, especially when you gain to profit from them, not only in dollars but other benefits like fame (Australian of the Year) and the old rumor of a run by Al Gore for the most powerful man on the planet (US president).
My rejection by the way doesn't stop me disliking pollution and land degradation. That is a different issue. It is mainly based on a rejecting pseudo science, cherry picking climates periods and rubbery analysis (pick the data to fit the theory), an Assault on Reason in all regards.
Al Gore's book is a perfect example of hijacking words and presenting ideas which in fact Defy Reason, spit in the face of Reason, trample reason into the ground as the herd of scientific consensus replaces scientific experiment. Perfect Orwellian.
Even time I think of the scare campaigners I think of the witches of MacBeth standing over their cauldron. Promising Macbeth the throne, not revealing the evil which is required to get there.
So we will have our romantic promised land, our garden of eden, and mother "Gaia" earth will be free (of humans and their dread technology of course).
Have a read of this article from a fellow skeptic at CoyoteBlog
Have Fun
Paul
Monday, May 28, 2007
Continuous improvement
Toyota are famous for continuous improvement and lean manufacturing. The process never ending. Thanks to Spooky action for the link.
Writing a short blog about this article is useful in a couple of ways
Sad isn't it, that I feel some form of cultural bias exists against self improvement, even enjoying your job, let alone the drudgery of domestic chores like mowing the lawn, or knowing how long your morning routine takes to get you from bed to office.
I joked when I started work with Paul Vallee and his mates at Pythian that I would have paging reduced to a minimum, that a role which started out as a tough role for one person to handle would end up being a minor issue. Ironically in fact that the only issues which will remain will be the most serious emergencies or disasters. I should have taken a bet on that. I now have days where I do not receive a single page. This is bliss as there is nothing worse than a page to break your concentration and focus.
If you feel like skipping the article here are the 4 processes which the author identified within Toyota each feeding of each other
Paul
Writing a short blog about this article is useful in a couple of ways
- It means I have this link saved on an external server. So when I reread this stuff in the future I can go and reread that article, revisit the sites which are linked.
- Reinforces the article just read, writing (or typing in this case) and expresses some part of my opinion or view or take on the subject.
Sad isn't it, that I feel some form of cultural bias exists against self improvement, even enjoying your job, let alone the drudgery of domestic chores like mowing the lawn, or knowing how long your morning routine takes to get you from bed to office.
I joked when I started work with Paul Vallee and his mates at Pythian that I would have paging reduced to a minimum, that a role which started out as a tough role for one person to handle would end up being a minor issue. Ironically in fact that the only issues which will remain will be the most serious emergencies or disasters. I should have taken a bet on that. I now have days where I do not receive a single page. This is bliss as there is nothing worse than a page to break your concentration and focus.
If you feel like skipping the article here are the 4 processes which the author identified within Toyota each feeding of each other
- Making cars
- Making cars better
- Teaching everyone how to make cars better
- Making the process of making cars, making cars better, and teaching how to make cars better, better.
Paul
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
10,000 hours to expertise or why senior DBAs normally have 6 years experience
Watching this video presentation by Malcolm Gladwell at New Yorker 2012 conference.
Interesting. As a contractor you normally work on a 220 day working year.
220 x 8 hours = 1760 hours per year.
If you use the 10,000 hours to expertise that is 5.68 years. This is interesting given that most jobs roles advertised as "Senior DBAs" want at least 5 more like 6 years.
Now I would argue that no DBA does studied DBA work for 8 hours, 220 days per year, unless you are working at places like Pythian, which provide more exposure to DBA work, should mean you are going to become an expert sooner.
The other way to get exposure to different work is to change jobs every couple of years. Normally when the job gets boring as you have been proactive and solved all the hard (and easy) problems.
I was listening to another version of this loosely based on the idea of compounding interest. Essentially if you spend some amount of extra time your area of focus compared to another in your field for example:
if you spend 1 hour extra per week per year, your calculation looks like this:
(220 x 8) + (52 x 1) = 1812 hours per year, reaching expertise in 5.5 years.
if you spend 2 hours extra per week per year, your calculation looks like this:
(220 x 8) + (52 x 2) = 1864 hours per year, reaching expertise in 5.3 years.
This might not seem like much, but as you become better at your focus, your training should remain challenging, pushing the envelope. So the expert level you are handling more complex problems and solutions quicker and more easily.
This raises some interesting questions,
Are you stubborn?
Have Fun
Paul
p.s. this means that I have a long way to go as a writer, given my blog production is one article per month.
Interesting. As a contractor you normally work on a 220 day working year.
220 x 8 hours = 1760 hours per year.
If you use the 10,000 hours to expertise that is 5.68 years. This is interesting given that most jobs roles advertised as "Senior DBAs" want at least 5 more like 6 years.
Now I would argue that no DBA does studied DBA work for 8 hours, 220 days per year, unless you are working at places like Pythian, which provide more exposure to DBA work, should mean you are going to become an expert sooner.
The other way to get exposure to different work is to change jobs every couple of years. Normally when the job gets boring as you have been proactive and solved all the hard (and easy) problems.
I was listening to another version of this loosely based on the idea of compounding interest. Essentially if you spend some amount of extra time your area of focus compared to another in your field for example:
if you spend 1 hour extra per week per year, your calculation looks like this:
(220 x 8) + (52 x 1) = 1812 hours per year, reaching expertise in 5.5 years.
if you spend 2 hours extra per week per year, your calculation looks like this:
(220 x 8) + (52 x 2) = 1864 hours per year, reaching expertise in 5.3 years.
This might not seem like much, but as you become better at your focus, your training should remain challenging, pushing the envelope. So the expert level you are handling more complex problems and solutions quicker and more easily.
This raises some interesting questions,
- Is the burnout, churn in senior DBAs leaving to become landscape designers related to the Alexander factor "no more worlds to conquer"?
- Do some people realize what it takes to be an expert and jump between roles because they won't invest the time for whatever reason?
- Once you reach the level of being an expert, in most occupations that means you are normally very well paid, in the top x% of salaries for the profession. Are you there yet?
Are you stubborn?
Have Fun
Paul
p.s. this means that I have a long way to go as a writer, given my blog production is one article per month.
Friday, May 11, 2007
Australian postcode T-shirts
Here is a mate's website which sells T-shirts with Australian postcodes, equivalent to zipcodes in North America.
I had a chat to him on gtalk and told him he should extend it to include a image of google maps mashup.
Go and have a look http://shop.qpzm.com.au/
Have Fun
I had a chat to him on gtalk and told him he should extend it to include a image of google maps mashup.
Go and have a look http://shop.qpzm.com.au/
Have Fun
Thursday, May 03, 2007
MySQL summary posts
I have Frank's blog on my RSS feed.
Here are a couple of posts discussing some recent presentations at the MySQL conference.
Google and MySQL
Innodb performance optimization
If you are looking for the MySQL conference presentation materials they can be found here
Unfortunately given the push for sparse presentations (in terms of words). Having the audio and
any screendumps/movies would help as well. There is nothing worse than listening to a podcast or audio from a presentation when the speaker is constantly referring to slides or something on the screen which you can't see.
But I guess you can't have everything, before you tell me I should have gone, I live 17 hours by plane away and my kids hate me leaving for any length of time as they wonder if I am ever coming back (remember the passing of time is different for young kids) .
I am still learning MySQL, probably faster as I come from a database background.
The mantra of recording what HAD happened rang true, sometimes being more important than what IS happening. Measuring everything and having a historical record to use to reconstruct is something clearly missing currently from MySQL and until recently SQLserver.
Have Fun
Paul
Here are a couple of posts discussing some recent presentations at the MySQL conference.
Google and MySQL
Innodb performance optimization
If you are looking for the MySQL conference presentation materials they can be found here
Unfortunately given the push for sparse presentations (in terms of words). Having the audio and
any screendumps/movies would help as well. There is nothing worse than listening to a podcast or audio from a presentation when the speaker is constantly referring to slides or something on the screen which you can't see.
But I guess you can't have everything, before you tell me I should have gone, I live 17 hours by plane away and my kids hate me leaving for any length of time as they wonder if I am ever coming back (remember the passing of time is different for young kids) .
I am still learning MySQL, probably faster as I come from a database background.
The mantra of recording what HAD happened rang true, sometimes being more important than what IS happening. Measuring everything and having a historical record to use to reconstruct is something clearly missing currently from MySQL and until recently SQLserver.
Have Fun
Paul
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Earth hour < Green vote
Hat-tip to Institutional Economics blog for this link to a discussion about Earth hour and its insignificance.
Lets jump straight the conclusion the irrelevance of 2% in the normal variance is actually less than the Greens vote in the recent NSW state election.
The Greens got 8.15% for the legislative Council (equivalent to the senate), slightly less than the informal vote. The informal vote is actually a good indication of the number of people protest against having to vote, as it is compulsory to vote in Australian elections.
So does this means that people who vote for Green candidates actually are not really green at all?
Am I going to mine the data from the recent election, get a total primary vote for Green votes in Sydney?
no, I don't have to time and the data is not available in a nice format.
Here is the SQL I would run if I could...
select party,count(*)
from election_results_2007
where area = 'Sydney'
group by party order by 2;
Have Fun
Lets jump straight the conclusion the irrelevance of 2% in the normal variance is actually less than the Greens vote in the recent NSW state election.
The Greens got 8.15% for the legislative Council (equivalent to the senate), slightly less than the informal vote. The informal vote is actually a good indication of the number of people protest against having to vote, as it is compulsory to vote in Australian elections.
So does this means that people who vote for Green candidates actually are not really green at all?
Am I going to mine the data from the recent election, get a total primary vote for Green votes in Sydney?
no, I don't have to time and the data is not available in a nice format.
Here is the SQL I would run if I could...
select party,count(*)
from election_results_2007
where area = 'Sydney'
group by party order by 2;
Have Fun
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Gapminder the founder speaks
Many thanks to my mate James for the link.
I wrote an article about this great tool gapminder a while ago and this video is of gapminder's founder of sorts. He is talking about how the publicly funded data from UN sources shows a different picture to the one which is normally portrayed through the media.
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/66
Like I mentioned recently I want all countries to have low mortality rates and high per capita, more minds freed of poverty and subsistence and allowed to think, create and build.
As a database geek the ability to see trends in action in the data is awesome. The eye is one of the most developed senses, static pictures and graphs are nice, movement is better.
Think, evolution made the human and most predator's eyes very good at seeing and tracking movement. Having the data displayed in this manner plays to those deep strengths.
I have to think more about how we can move past the current use of database performance snapshots, and more into real time or snapshots shown over time.
Can you imagine watching the execution time of a specific sql over time against the growth of data. You would see any potentially scaling issues literally blasting off like rockets from the other sql which scales proportionally.
Have Fun
Like it? want to comment? blog it.
I wrote an article about this great tool gapminder a while ago and this video is of gapminder's founder of sorts. He is talking about how the publicly funded data from UN sources shows a different picture to the one which is normally portrayed through the media.
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/66
Like I mentioned recently I want all countries to have low mortality rates and high per capita, more minds freed of poverty and subsistence and allowed to think, create and build.
As a database geek the ability to see trends in action in the data is awesome. The eye is one of the most developed senses, static pictures and graphs are nice, movement is better.
Think, evolution made the human and most predator's eyes very good at seeing and tracking movement. Having the data displayed in this manner plays to those deep strengths.
I have to think more about how we can move past the current use of database performance snapshots, and more into real time or snapshots shown over time.
Can you imagine watching the execution time of a specific sql over time against the growth of data. You would see any potentially scaling issues literally blasting off like rockets from the other sql which scales proportionally.
Have Fun
Like it? want to comment? blog it.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Climate Change = Fear campaign
I am going to out myself, yes am I a heretic amongst my heretic leanings...
In NSW, Sydney, we have been bombarded by the need to follow the crowd, peer pressure etc etc and turn off your lights for one hour on Saturday 7.30pm. Not your fridge, heater, air-conditioners, laundry dryers, just your lights. Maybe they will take a satellite picture and send around the energy saver enforcers so that all conform to the new religion.
Here is a article to read about consensus.
I am frankly over the Fear and Doubt campaign being run to propel what was global cooling, then global warming, now climate change. I have no problem with the world warming up, my problem is the root cause.
My objections as a 15 second elevator pitch.
They push this massive guilt trip (like most other religions and cults) that humans have committed the original sin, in their utopia perspective, of being industrialized and technological rather than remaining in harmony with nature as a pure animal.
Now the underlining reason why I am passionate about technology and freedom to think and develop new technologies.
Technology will set you free and make you live longer.
Less than 100 years ago before wide spread availability of antibiotics, I would have been dead at 2 years old, one of the countless infants who died before reaching the age of 6. I asked my colleagues at a past workplace and 4 out of 5 would also have been dead.
I live because of human technological progress. As a parent now I can't imagine the extreme grief at losing any of your children to random colds or flus. You have got to be joking if I want to regulate and reduce living standards to conform to some deluded Utopian version.
A local TV channel run a hour long program about climate change. As soon as I saw the fake headlines I knew that was going to crap. 8 metre storm surges on the Gold Coast, ho hum. As I do on occasion I interacted with the TV and told it/them that sentence completely crap and switched channels.
Such fate d'compli, do your best old chap to reduce emissions and we might save the planet. (Yes I happened to see that last 10 secs of the show).
Nevermind that is the sun which is causing most of the warming due to increased solar activity and CO2 is not a major greenhouse gas (water and methane are). I even saw some experts actually talking about having to limit population growth again.
Who makes the decision who lives or dies or has children, you or I or some faceless person in the Department of Family Services and Planning?
Anyone bothered to read about about the demographic nightmare which is going to happen to China because of their one child policy.
The method being used by the people who are benefiting both material and otherwise is the classic crowd control/conformity. The scare tactic, with of course the guilty or scapegoat.
Look at big business, look how long and crooked their noses are, behind closed doors they secretly plot to rule over all that is good and just in the world.
Look at the inequality of the world. Why should anyone live better than the lowest common denominator.
We have a solution, we have a romantic vision of a green paradise, a garden of eden utopia where humans are no higher than other beast, we are all animals. Rid to world of business, technology, (and humans) and let Gaiga rule again.
Now a better show was WestWing, damn I can't believe I never watched this show until now.
Have Fun, live long.
BTW, if you want to comment, blog this post and link to it.
- Who cares about a foreign trade deficit when the domestic economy is much much larger.
- Who cares about foreign debt as it is about 10% of total domestic assets.
- The claim that the Western economies are hollowed out of manufacturing, when it remains much larger than retail, second only to financial based companies.
- Your job as a DBA is to make business tasks run as smoothly and efficiently as possible. Businesses will only care about block internals and x$ tables if it helps that process.
In NSW, Sydney, we have been bombarded by the need to follow the crowd, peer pressure etc etc and turn off your lights for one hour on Saturday 7.30pm. Not your fridge, heater, air-conditioners, laundry dryers, just your lights. Maybe they will take a satellite picture and send around the energy saver enforcers so that all conform to the new religion.
Here is a article to read about consensus.
I am frankly over the Fear and Doubt campaign being run to propel what was global cooling, then global warming, now climate change. I have no problem with the world warming up, my problem is the root cause.
My objections as a 15 second elevator pitch.
- The sun is the biggest source of heat energy.
- Water is the biggest greenhouse gas.
- I reject that human related activity has any impact of the current increase in temperatures given the many such occurrences in the past.
They push this massive guilt trip (like most other religions and cults) that humans have committed the original sin, in their utopia perspective, of being industrialized and technological rather than remaining in harmony with nature as a pure animal.
Now the underlining reason why I am passionate about technology and freedom to think and develop new technologies.
Technology will set you free and make you live longer.
Less than 100 years ago before wide spread availability of antibiotics, I would have been dead at 2 years old, one of the countless infants who died before reaching the age of 6. I asked my colleagues at a past workplace and 4 out of 5 would also have been dead.
I live because of human technological progress. As a parent now I can't imagine the extreme grief at losing any of your children to random colds or flus. You have got to be joking if I want to regulate and reduce living standards to conform to some deluded Utopian version.
A local TV channel run a hour long program about climate change. As soon as I saw the fake headlines I knew that was going to crap. 8 metre storm surges on the Gold Coast, ho hum. As I do on occasion I interacted with the TV and told it/them that sentence completely crap and switched channels.
Such fate d'compli, do your best old chap to reduce emissions and we might save the planet. (Yes I happened to see that last 10 secs of the show).
Nevermind that is the sun which is causing most of the warming due to increased solar activity and CO2 is not a major greenhouse gas (water and methane are). I even saw some experts actually talking about having to limit population growth again.
Who makes the decision who lives or dies or has children, you or I or some faceless person in the Department of Family Services and Planning?
Anyone bothered to read about about the demographic nightmare which is going to happen to China because of their one child policy.
The method being used by the people who are benefiting both material and otherwise is the classic crowd control/conformity. The scare tactic, with of course the guilty or scapegoat.
Look at big business, look how long and crooked their noses are, behind closed doors they secretly plot to rule over all that is good and just in the world.
Look at the inequality of the world. Why should anyone live better than the lowest common denominator.
We have a solution, we have a romantic vision of a green paradise, a garden of eden utopia where humans are no higher than other beast, we are all animals. Rid to world of business, technology, (and humans) and let Gaiga rule again.
Now a better show was WestWing, damn I can't believe I never watched this show until now.
Have Fun, live long.
BTW, if you want to comment, blog this post and link to it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)