Patent Mess May Stifle Australian Software 231
gtoomey writes "Australian Open Source lawyer Brendan Scott is claiming the USA/Australia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) will damage all Australian software development.
An article in the Sydney Morning Herald says that developers have probably built products which 'infringe' on U.S. software patents, while the FTA is forcing Australia to adopt DCMA laws."
Australia? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Australia? (Score:5, Interesting)
One can see that the Closed Source MegaCorps have realised that unless they get all lawmakers, not just those in the US, on thier side OSS will march on with out missing a beat. This could be the thin edge of the wedge, as it were.
Soko
Re:Australia? (Score:2)
Isnt that irony? "China" The land of the free.. (from copyright and patents)
"/Dread"
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Australia? (Score:2)
Will New Zealand also jump on this particular bandwagon? Seems our largest trading partners are into it, so are we next? Or have our politicians already done it?
Will New Zealand follow? (Score:5, Interesting)
It has already been raised by America as being a part of any free trade agreement (which supposedly New Zealand wants) and the only reason we don't have a free trade agreement now is our less than 100% support on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq - the ongoing nuclear-ship ban also hasn't helped.
Of course New Zealand is most likely to give that bargaining chip away before negotiating any free-trade agreement. Our copyright and patent laws are alredy being revised to bring them more into line with a DMCA type approach. American forces in particular are bringing their weight to bear to re-outlaw parallel importing. And we're mostly likely to bring our commercial laws (including copyright, and DMCA type provisions) into line with Australia. Whenever that happens (eg food regulations) it is always new Zealand that changes to match Australia.
Pretty much our only hope is a general anti-American sentiment by our leftish government. Two problems with that:
a) we won't have a leftish government forever
b) a leftish government is more likely to trade away copyright provisions (no votes there) in exchange (or compensation) for being able to slightly bad-mouth America in the political arena
So we're doomed. But lobby anyway.
Re:Will New Zealand follow? (Score:3, Insightful)
What bugs me is that I'm likely to vote for a National-ish goverment based on other non-software issues, despite knowing they'll sell out to the US on exactly these kinds of issues. And it wouldn't surprise me at all if the Labour-ish parties did as well, except they'd try to do it more quietly.
I really hate politics, it's always about which party's policies (and politicians) you dislike the least.
Re:Will New Zealand follow? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Will New Zealand follow? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Will New Zealand follow? (Score:3, Insightful)
The real problem is that it's irrational anti-American sentiment. They don't dislike America for any specific reason; they dislike America because disliking America is what they do.
If they had a rational agenda against - for example - foolish patent laws and the DMCA, then I might support them, but they don't. (Same with the left here in Australia, and in Europe, and in America itself.)
But yes, wherever else your p
Re:Will New Zealand follow? (Score:5, Insightful)
Strongly dissagree there. The reason our current government is "anti-American" (it isn't really) is because of issues like Iraq, envronmental issues, human rights etc.
Unfortuantly copyright law etc. isn't one of the reasons. But there deffinitly are good reasons.
Our current prime minister was a protester of the Vietnam war. I think that says alot.
Re:Will New Zealand follow? (Score:2)
Our current prime minister was a protester of the Vietnam war. I think that says alot.
Exactly.
Re:Will New Zealand follow? (Score:2)
that is not quite correct. Outside of America, our government throws their weight around and far more than the average citizen realizes.
Good example, is Iraq. I know the American who was tapped to get Bagdad Airport going and keep it open. Before he left, several government ppl came in and told him that he was to give special c
Re:Will New Zealand follow? (Score:2)
It doesn't matter anyway. They don't have to play by the rules [findbcwood.com], only YOU do.
Re:Australia? (Score:2, Informative)
In addition successive governments in NZ have not shown a desire to effectively become a close partner with USA at all costs, unlike Aus. Examples of this stance are the long standing Nuclear Free Status which effectively locks out US warship visits and more recently NZs non commitment to the US aggression in Iraq (although we d
Re:Australia? (Score:3, Interesting)
Because, as has been demonstrated, the UN always does a bang-up job [economist.com]...
Re:Australia? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Australia? (Score:5, Informative)
Currently, the opposition (Mark Latham and the Labor Government) are proposing their own amendments to cater for this issue which would undoubtedly affect developers in Australia and cripple the industry and the economy to a big extent. John Howard, the current Prime Minister of Australia (if you didn't know), says that he is ready to "have a look" at any proposals of amendments to this current dilemma because the national interests of Australia are far more important than any short-term political advantage when it comes to the US-Aus FTA.
There is a reason why the US Senate passed the FTA first. The advantages towards one country seem to significantly outweigh the advantages the other country will receive. At this stage anyway.
Re:Australia? (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem, at it's heart, I think, is the incongruence of technology and law. On the one hand, lawmakers don't understand technology well enough to write good laws, and on the other hand technology is such a broad topic and a fast moving target that even if there were a bunch of technologically savvy people in position to write technology laws, the way the system exists today by the time a law was written, passed and enacted the lawmakers would be 6 months behind on what needs to be done.
I think one of the major factors to this is that people both in and out of industry don't really understand how blazingly fast technology moves. While 10 years might be reasonable for a phsical invention, having ANYTHING locked up in patents in software is going to stifle innovation horribly.
I'm all for companies who invent new and great things in the world of software to be able to make money on it, they put in the work and they deserve it. But the reality is that software patents really don't seem to necessary. If I invent some super great algorithm and software based around it, and really do keep it a secret untill it's released in my product, by the time my competitors are able to churn out a competing product I already have mindshare and better damn well already be working on the next version of my software.
Of course the corperations won't be happy without a patent, and in some sence it's even justifiable to say that they are right to want some insurance that nobody else can rip off their idea, but if the lawmakers are going to get paid off to allow software patents, I think it should be for a maximum of 1 year. This gives them a head start as a reward for their work, but still allows innovation.
This all of course doesn't address the problem with junk patents, but at least it would go some way to minimizing the damage. I'd much rather we only have to wait for 1 year to be able to have applications which use double click or radio buttons than 10 years.
Re:Australia? (Score:2)
Re:Australia? (Score:2)
Re:Australia? (Score:2)
So far most of the debate in parliment has centered around the price of pharmaceuticals and the local content on australian television.
No it won't (Score:5, Funny)
For me personally, you can catch me at Elisabeth St intersection washing windscreens for the MS, Sun and Apple developers as they head of to work.
Re:No it won't (Score:2)
At least europe is resisting a *little* bit.
Re:No it won't (Score:2)
And don't think for a second these companies will not use their patents. They exist to make money. That is all.
Re:No it won't (Score:2)
Company X is a small Australian company that has developed a product X. Company Y is a big multinational that produced a product Y that is similar to product X. Company Y holds a US patent for product Y that is broad enough to cover product X.
Company X attempts to cover its ass by patenting product X in Australia. Company Y steps in and says "we have held patents on that product in
Obvious solution (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Obvious solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You can build patent-infringing software but .. (Score:2)
Run a mail order firm and let the US postal service do the infringing ;).
You can then pat yourself in the back for helping americans in fighting the rule of their oppressive government, and be thankfull that you're living in China, the land of the free developers ;).
Re:Obvious solution (Score:3, Funny)
DCMA laws? (Score:4, Funny)
Bandwidth (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Bandwidth (Score:2)
Re:Bandwidth (Score:2)
PLD.
Re:Bandwidth (Score:2)
Re:Bandwidth (Score:4, Informative)
Check around the ISP's, sounds like your pricing's stuck a few years behind. Might I suggest whirlpool [whirlpool.net.au] , if you haven't already seen it? Anywhere that Tel$tra's got a DSLAM, you can also get any other ISP in australia that sells ADSL.
I'm in Mount Isa, and I get 512/128 from Internode [on.net] at $59/mo. That's with 12GB download (capped at 40kb/s after that), a pile of quota-exempt mirrors (mmmm... gentoo rsync
Re:Bandwidth (Score:2)
PLD.
Re:Bandwidth (Score:2)
Have a browse through the forums at whirlpool... they're a pretty reliable indicator of ISP goodnes. I've pulled 30GB or so on internode's flatrate plan before... and I've heard of people getting 60GB on it without too much hassle.
But yeah, ISO's can sure suck up the old bandwidth a bit. Beat's the hell out of my first ISP experience with a 2400 baud modem and AUSPAC
Re:Bandwidth (Score:2)
*looks around nervously for wife*
I'll take a look around - I could really do with 1500/256 (or 512 upload), as each time I put out a new release of my software it means another ~200Mb of uploads; rather painful even at 128K.
PLD
Re:Bandwidth (Score:2)
Re:Bandwidth (Score:5, Interesting)
Theres a big push in Australia to get ISP's to peer at peering exchanges like PIPE and WAIX in the capital cities. Most ISP's here (bar the "Big 4" except in one case) are connected to them, and some even offer quota free content for anything that goes through a peering exchange.
Broadband speeds are rediculous here too. Telstra's ADSL wholesale network is limited to 1500/256k with the lowest being 256/64 (and everybody who upgrades from that to 512/128 says that 256/64 isn't broadband). Companies like Optus (and it's XYZed subsidiary), RequestDSL/PowerTel, iiNet (residential deployments, unlike the others), Internode (one DSLAM for a town which didn't have any. Tester said that once things got past 4000k downstream, speed didn't really increase.) and a few others around the country have been rolling out DSLAM's to overcome this limitation.
There are only two major HFC networks, and they are in the captial cities (Optus, Telstra. Both have had an agreement not to lay any coax since 1997. Telstra will eventually replace HFC with FTTH, keep in mind that Telstra, unlike Optus doesn't use HFC for telephony). And some smaller regional deployments, like NCable and TransACT (who rolled out a VDSL network around Canberra using Fibre To The Curb, so every house is within 300m of a DSLAM. Why don't you US slobs think about that before saying 'only useful within 300m of an exchange').
I still remember blowing out my 100mb bandwidth quota years ago on 56k. Didn't get reconnected until my parents got the point of me dialing STD to Melbourne to take advantage of the "free" ISP's that were around at the time.
Re:Bandwidth (Score:3, Funny)
I grind my teeth every time I read that.
I'm starting to understand what my highschool english teacher was worried about.
Re:MCI will peer if you are actually a _peer_ (Score:2)
Not recently, but costs have plummeted since the Southern Cross Cable came online. And retail bandwidth charges have hardly moved.
But it's certainly true that international phone calls are quite a bit cheaper than long distance calls within Australia. At least one company tried routing their Australian traffic via L.A. before Telstra put a stop to it.
Of the big 4, Telstra are evil and Optus are incompetent. AAPT seem to be mostly reasonable. I haven't dealt
Re:MCI will peer if you are actually a _peer_ (Score:2)
Singtel Optus did it in WAIX, and everybody flushed 15GB a day (or month? It was a big number) to Sigapore. They cut it because they were paying the huge transit bill (how hard is it to just not advertise those networks to a IX at all?).
It's not that the Big ISP's shouldn't peer with smaller ones that should really be paying transit costs, But that the "Big 4
Re:Bandwidth (Score:2)
Most ISPs in Australia are thieves. Some, I suppose, are morons who are allowing upstream thieves to rip them off.
I pay $120 per month for a 1.5Mbit ADSL with unlimited downloads. That's ridiculously expensive, and it's the best deal available in Australia.
Telstra/BigPond has something they call "unlimited", but after 10GB of downloads in a month they cut your speed to 64k. Or as an option, you can pay $150 for 1.5Mbit including the firs
Re:Bandwidth (Score:2)
Re:Bandwidth (Score:2)
Re:Bandwidth (Score:2)
You haven't done any work in regional australia, have you?
Not having a go at you buddy, but when you get away from the major capital centers ADSL is still a tricky animal to get a hold of.
Help fix this problem (Score:5, Informative)
One of the best tactics is to send letters to newspapers. The FTA is a hot topic in the news right now, so there's a good chance that letters relating to it will be accepted. You can send letters to the editor at the following addresses:
The Australian [news.com.au]
Sydney Morning Herald [mailto]
The Age [mailto]
You can also let your feeling be known to the shadow minister for the Arts, Sport and Information Technology (Senator Kate Lundy). Her contact details are here [katelundy.com.au]. Be sure to mention that this issue will affect your vote.
The Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts have so far brushed off [dcita.gov.au] any suggestion that Australia's software industry will be harmed by the FTA, and really do not seem to understand the issues. However, you can contact them here [mailto], and the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts here [mailto]. Once again, be sure to mention that this will affect your vote.
You can also find out which electorate [aec.gov.au] you are in, if you don't already know, and send your local federal MP a message about how disappointed you are over the FTA's impact on the IT industry.
Re:Help fix this problem (Score:2)
Living in a pro-liberal area is not such a bad thing. Buy yourself some spray paint and graffiti the whole damned place. And don't just stop at the FTA. There's plently to pick on:
- truth overboard
- weapons of mass deception
- 'strengthening' medicare
- public funding of private schools
- kyoto protocol
Have a look on http://www.howardlies.com [howardlies.com] which
This has me worried in a major way (Score:5, Interesting)
Given the spate of trivial patents that are granted, it's somewhat inevitable that any piece of software more complex than perhaps "Hello world" is bount to infringe on something, somewhere.
I'm seriously considering moving my operations base overseas. NewZealand would be nice but it's a tad too close, especially since I've heard that there's plans for greater unification between Au and NZ.
I've contacted my state and local representitives about this matter, strangely all of them see to forsee it as something which "will" happen as apposed to something that the people of Australia even have the slightest choice in. Seems to me that "democratic" governments are far from being such anymore.
PLD.
Re:This has me worried in a major way (Score:2)
Are there any countries with NO patent or copyright laws in place, and minimal trade with the US?
If the American companies want to lock down their major trading partners (their competitors, IOW) maybe us geeks should bugger off to some third world country and get creative. We'd need to work on infrastructure, but a small goverment might be open to that if it heralds an IT revolution for their country. Living would (presumably) be cheap, and it makes me wonder what we'd be capable
Re:This has me worried in a major way (Score:4, Interesting)
Brazil is another option - they seem to be interested in moving ahead independently.
PLD.
Re:This has me worried in a major way (Score:2)
My other thought was Ghana, because I know they're keen on the IT thing. But yeah, Brasil sounds like the way to go.
Re:This has me worried in a major way (Score:4, Funny)
We could work non-stop.
Re:This has me worried in a major way (Score:2)
Re:This has me worried in a major way (Score:2)
Plenty of small island nations out there with lots of potential. And we'd be worshipped as techno-GODS by lots of nubile young ladies.
Tell you what, I'll gladly go over and do a bit of
Re:This has me worried in a major way (Score:2)
This is not the right question. Copyright laws and (when used properly) patent laws are a Good Thing. However, the question here is not that they have no patent or copyright laws, but that the US has no jurisdiction over the laws they do have.
Germany sounds good to me, TBH. Sure, they're in Europe and Europe *heart* America (seriously, I don't know why) but overall they seem to have this technology thing su
Germany is not a good idea either (Score:2, Informative)
As a European (Dutch) i keep asking myse
Re:This has me worried in a major way (Score:2)
We already have DMCA style provisions (Score:4, Informative)
Australian copyright law is already completely anal. We don't have a concept of fair-use like the US copyright system. We're not legally allowed to tape shows off the TV.
Re:We already have DMCA style provisions (Score:4, Interesting)
Unless the broadcast features the Queen of England, unless I'm mistaken.
Australia - Stupid Laws 'R Us
Re:We already have DMCA style provisions (Score:5, Funny)
That's "US".
Just set up chop in Shanghai (Score:3, Insightful)
But the FTA is shortlived any way, the super uber great depression will happen after GWB gets re-elected, and then the US$ will freefall as everyone dumps it.
Re:Just set up chop in Shanghai (Score:2)
Who needs 'em? (Score:4, Interesting)
Just in case too many countries ever get a bit tired of the US trying to make them their bitches.
Offtopic: Won't happen but (Score:5, Interesting)
Whether governments and economic systems would survive is another matter, as the stock markets would collapse, held up as they are by the belief that the US overseas debt will eventually be repaid. Some countries are likely to hold off anarchy better than others, and the core EU states might take over the US role eventually.
As for the US, I guess the long term prospects might actually be beneficial. OK, there would need to be restrictions on oil use. The Bush family would lose influence without the Sa'udis to back them up, but other oil companies would gain power. The Government might have to put down a number of armed uprisings. The economy would go into depression until manufacturing could be restarted, but, let's face it, stuff is changed much too frequently and the skills are there to keep exisitng equipment going, just like the Cubans have to. People might even get healthier as a result of eating less. But there would be a huge one-off benefit from the writing off of US debt to the rest of the world. And the US would be militarily powerful enough to ensure no-one tried to collect on that debt.
I guess the biggest problem would arise if the trade cessation was not associated with an end to military interventionism. If the military intervention stopped as well, the US would benefit financially from bringing the soldiers home. And the likes of Osama Bin Laden would no longer have a USP. OK, Osama, you got what you wanted. Now see how your countrymen, especially the rich ones who just lost their incomes, like it.
Pity about Israel, Lebanon, Iraq and Syria, but eventually the fallout will decay, and at least no-one will be fighting over who owns the Jerusalem Crater.
Re:Offtopic: Won't happen but (Score:2)
None of those people deserve your pity. Sorry to be blunt but these people have turned the birthplace of three religions into rotting cesspool of hate, violence, murder, torture, theft and just plain old evil. They all belong in hell.
Re:Offtopic: Won't happen but (Score:2)
Re:Who needs 'em? (Score:2)
Re:Who needs 'em? (Score:2)
In pure economic terms the US is a net importer on most goods.
The problems are more of a military nature. The US would be placed in a similar position to Imperial Japan, there would also be the risk of a second US civil war.
Remember Smoot-Hawley (Score:2)
Hmm... Samba... (Score:5, Interesting)
Hmm...
Why do this (Score:4, Insightful)
For some reason I have yet to see it done correctly (well, I know the reason - short term monetary gains - in the long run this hurts everyone involved). In each instance that another countries laws are cited, or they are "merged (so to speak), they take the *most* restrictive parts of each and implement that.
This isn't an "American vs Australian" issue (well, this particular battle is, but not the war). More than several of the laws passed in the US are done so because "some random country" does it. Even the DMCA was mostly an amalgam of the most restrictive parts of what other countries do. Once it was passed here other countries cite us. Eventually someone else will pass another DMCA amalgam (maybe the US, maybe not - others have done so just as regularly in the past) and we all "have" to follow along.
It is like a feedback loop. Country A passes the same thing as country B - but just a bit stricter. country B adds those in - but just a bit more. Repeat cycle along with blame the other country. Never mind that neither one *has* to pass a shitty law because someone else did. As long as they can passably blame someone else and get thier money they do not care.
I really wish a major country would stand up and say "screw you". I figure it will take a major economic or sociatal event to wake people up. As long as it doesn't impact them much few will care.
Re:Why do this (Score:2)
And if they can't compete in an open market of course we should let them legislate so that we aren;t allowed to compete with them. I mean its only fair isn't it.
I started writing this as a joke but I realize that the various governments around the world think like th
Re:Why do this (Score:2)
Re:Why do this (Score:3, Interesting)
I really wish a major country would stand up and say "screw you". I figure it will take a major economic or sociatal event to wake people up. As long as it doesn't impact them much few will care.
unquote
Look to China.
Re:Why do this (Score:2)
Ralph Nader made a bet with the congress. He said that if any congressmen actually read the WTO agreements and answered five simple questions about it he would give a charity of the congressmen's choice 10,000.00 dollars. They could vote any way they wanted they just had to read it first. Only one congressmen took him up on it and after reading the agreement he voted against it.
The point is that nobody in the senate actually realiz
Re:Why do this (Score:2)
Whilst the countries may be random are the laws? Are we possibly seeing fight between national governments and transnational corporations for power. Where the governments arn't putting that much effort into fighting.
This article is full of it... (Score:2)
Copyright is another kettle of fish. Australia conceded a lot of ground to US interests there. Read my last post from my posting history.
The story overlooks one basic fact and more. (Score:2, Informative)
The story also overlooks the basic principle whereby you need to register or file for a paten
Re:The story overlooks one basic fact and more. (Score:3, Interesting)
Funny, the post above your claims exactly the reverse. Are you sure it isn"t a bit like in Europe? Here, those exclusions you mention are also in our patent law, and even computer programs themseves are explicitly excluded from patentabilty. And yet we have over 30,000 software patents
Musings on Patents, Copyrights and the FTA (Score:5, Insightful)
I ask myself what motivates the proponents of chapter 17 of the FTA. This is the chapter that seeks to extend the monopolies of patents and copyrights. By my understanding someone standing for free trade should be against increased regulation and monopoly and so against chapter 17. A paradox.
The best explanation I have come up with is that proponents of chapter 17 are not for free trade but are for private ownership. They are typically against public property and against increased regulation of property, as they believe those weaken private ownership. In the case of patents and copyright they are for increased regulation as they believe it strengthens private ownership.
Perhaps chapter 17 of the "Free Trade Agreement" is really a "Private Ownership Agreement"?
Chapter 17 of the FTA allows abstract ideas to be claimed as private property. We shouldn't be talking about whether chapter 17 of the FTA is good for free trade but whether ideas are property to be privately owned.
No idea is formed in isolation. Instead all ideas draw from those around and those who have gone before. It is impossible to have a non-social idea in that having ideas requires interaction with and inspiration by other people.
Witness the emphasis the scientific research community places on publishing ideas and establishing networks of collaboration.
Thomas Edison once said "Genius is one per cent inspiration, ninety-nine per cent perspiration." The existing patent and copyright system allows the 99% perspiration to be protected. Chapter 17 of the FTA extends the monopoly to include the 1% inspiration, thus hampering innovation.
They hate our freedom (Score:4, Interesting)
But it would be more accurate to say that the US government hates other countries' freedoms. That's why they use military and economic muscle and deception to coerce other countries into passing legislation that removes freedoms from the citizens.
Re:They hate our freedom (Score:2)
This is probably a simplification. It's more the case that the US Government is prefectly prepared to trample on other people's freedoms (including US Citizens) where the interests of big business are involved.
That's why they use military and economic muscle and deception to coerce other countries into passing legislation that removes freedoms from the citizens.
That's actually one of the "nicer" ways the US Gov
It's not US vs Australia VS Europe (Score:5, Interesting)
They've been working on toughening the laws worldwide in little steps, and then using international treaties to "level the playing field" so they can winch it up again in another corner. I don't know how long this has been going on, really... the Berne Convention, reasonable as it seems, may have been the trigger that started the whole process.
I hate to put it in these terms, but we're going to need to look to the union movement to solve this. It's the owning class, this time the owneres and managers of big companies with patent and copyright portfolios, versus the people who are actually creating the wealth they're accumulating.
Re:It's not US vs Australia VS Europe (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:It's not US vs Australia VS Europe (Score:2)
Apart from running into the problem of works created by teams of people, this is unnecessary and insufficient. It complicates the situation and passes more money through into the pockets of lawyers for no good purpose, but it doesn't address the problem of patent portfolios being used to suppress new works: the nature of the portfolio would change, but the bloke taking out a patent on something
Another inevitability... (Score:3, Insightful)
For that is what they can understand. It is apparenytly beyond them to understand any scientific proof to the contrary of what they want.
Ah, people are staring to awaken (Score:2)
evil corporations (Score:2, Interesting)
See article for the "microsoft of shoes"
http://bluemountains.yourguide.com.au/det a il.asp?c lass=news&subclass=local&category=general%20news&s tory_id=282021&y=2004&m=1
Using bogus patents for Monopoly.
T
Dump US's tea in harbor (Score:2)
It's a crying shame (Score:4, Insightful)
First his undying support for the USA in Iraq against all advice, then his signing of the FTA, which will probably not improve Australia's economic position as much as it improves the USA's economic position, and which is one step of the way to making Australia economically dependent on the USA.
I hope the little bastard gets his arse kicked in the coming elections, whereupon he can go visit his former cronies Bush and Blair and reminisce about their glorious pasts as nation builders and great leaders in an old age home for the mentally unstable.
Nonsense... (Score:2, Informative)
OMG no guns no revolution! (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny that most people consider out democracy to be better than America's in terms of representing the people. Our gun crime rates are WAY lower per head, in fact I think all crime is way lower (probably because we have real welfare, health and education accessable to all). In fact, in many ways, before the neo-liberal reforms of the past few decades Australia was probably only suceeded by war-time britain in representing an ideal socialist state married with real democracy.
But now we have compromised a bit towards market capitalism and our economy is one of the strongest in the world. However, our social amenities have also erroded. It's about striking a balance really.
This is why so many aussies are worried about the FTA with the US. Not because we don't like you, it's just that american companies will use the FTA to change our local legislation re: culture, software, drug prices. So it's not a FTA, it's signing away some of our sovereignty, equalising with a society who's ideals we respect, but who's standard of living is below ours in so many ways.
America is a ghetto compared to Australia. I recently had medical problems, and with no insurance I saw a doctor about 10 times, got xrays, blood tests etc. etc. Didn't hand over a dime, no waiting in line, it just all worked... for free. I don't think you americans understand this. Got my university degree via a government loan which I pay back with no interest once I start earning over a certain threshhold. So it was free too until I get a job with it that earns a reasonable amount. If I never get that job, I don't have to pay it back. And if I can't find a job I get a reasonable set of benefits, straight away none of this 6 months before benefits stuff you americans have. And on top of this our economy is arguably stronger than that of America's.
WTF? you say. WTF indeed.
The basis of good policy is to not argue about ideology it is to look at other societies do and learn from them. Case studies of other societies should inform the policy process, but in your myopic vision america cannot see that the standard of living we have is far greater than theirs even if you guys have a tad more GDP per head.
This is why you should vote back in the democrats and get a real healthcare system. Your health, edcuation and welfare systems are the laughing stock of the western world. It was once said if you want to know the essence of a country you should look at how it treats it's poor.
Oh mighty america, how you are powerless.
It's poor huh? (Score:2)
Re:OMG no guns no revolution! (Score:2)
I think your recollection is faulty. When Clinton entered office, there was a Democratic majority in both houses.
Re:OMG no guns no revolution! (Score:2)
I don't know what you are talking about (Score:2)
Most of the complaints I here about educational quality is regarding k12 education; where in order to get the
Re:What can we do? (Score:2)
Hack the USPTO website, see if we can get to their main patent database, and "delete * where description like '%microsoft%' || applicant like '%microsoft%';"