Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Recent Posts
21
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
Last post by kruddler -
Quote from: Thryleon – on
Quote from: DJC – on
The Australian Government follows the definition set out in the International Convention to Suppress the Slave Trade and Slavery of 1926, that is 'the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised'.  Almost all nations follow the 1926 convention.

There are slavery-like offences, such as forced labour, debt bondage and human trafficking but none involve ownership and, therefore, aren’t slavery.

It’s fine to take an academic perspective and argue that indentured labour is slavery but, legally, it’s not.
Ah I see, we argued an out on a different definition of slavery to argue we never had slavery even though the evidence runs contrary to that.

So we can argue semantics, you are right, and I am wrong, we never participated in slavery despite the evidence showing otherwise.  Is that it?

To paraphrase Billy Shakespear
"What’s in a name? That which we call a slave, by any other word would taste as bitter."
22
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
Last post by kruddler -
Quote from: LP – on
Too often figures get quoted that are for the latest all singing and dancing passive heat design(airtight), double glazed, insulated floor, wall and ceiling dwelling, but that is not even 1% of the Australian market. In my area there are only two completed homes like that out of about 10,000, with a couple more planned, and they cost about 3x a typical build, not really viable is it? At the normal rate of replacement, it will take approximately 50 years to convert 80% of the dwellings. Ironically, in one of those homes, after all the trouble getting the design, approvals and build right, the people love having the windows open which effectively defeats the concept!

You start making a valid point then throw this nonsense out there which is BS.

Australia doesn't build 'airtight' houses. We build a lot better quality houses than we used to, with far less gaps than previously, but far from air tight.

All new houses being built today are a minimum of 7-star. That is the standard and you can't get a house stamped without that requirement ticked off.
You can get 8-star with a bit of extra coin. How you reach those star levels doesn't matter. Each 'good' thing you do gets you a portion of a star, you add them all up.
The most popular things to do nowadays is with double glazed, insulated wall and ceiling (and floor if you choose) with passive heating/cooling considerations (eaves, north facing etc).
That is standard....and go to any new estate and thats all you see.
There is also water tanks, suburb wide recycled water, solar panels, etc etc.

I'll tell you what, those same houses cost less than a build if you go with your local small builder too.

Further to all that is the goverment schemes to help fund the replcements of older inefficient heating/cooling systems as well. All in a bid to make houses more energy efficient.

27
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
Last post by Thryleon -
Quote from: DJC – on
The Australian Government follows the definition set out in the International Convention to Suppress the Slave Trade and Slavery of 1926, that is 'the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised'.  Almost all nations follow the 1926 convention.

There are slavery-like offences, such as forced labour, debt bondage and human trafficking but none involve ownership and, therefore, aren’t slavery.

It’s fine to take an academic perspective and argue that indentured labour is slavery but, legally, it’s not.
Ah I see, we argued an out on a different definition of slavery to argue we never had slavery even though the evidence runs contrary to that.

So we can argue semantics, you are right, and I am wrong, we never participated in slavery despite the evidence showing otherwise.  Is that it?

30
Blah-Blah Bar / Re: General Discussions
Last post by PaulP -
Quote from: DJC – on
The Australian Government follows the definition set out in the International Convention to Suppress the Slave Trade and Slavery of 1926, that is 'the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised'.  Almost all nations follow the 1926 convention.

There are slavery-like offences, such as forced labour, debt bondage and human trafficking but none involve ownership and, therefore, aren’t slavery.

It’s fine to take an academic perspective and argue that indentured labour is slavery but, legally, it’s not.

You could probably argue that there is "slavery" and there is "slavery-like", but I would have to agree.