dailymaverick.co.za · Domains

Re:Civilization is hard work by Hal_Porter · 2018-01-12 04:35 · Score: 4, Interesting · on Will Cape Town be the First City To Run Out of Water? (bbc.com)

All my South African friends are now expats and gave swapped their SA citizenship for somewhere else. None of them really want to admit that SA is going the way Zimbabwe went post independence but it looks that way.

E.g. here's President Jacob Zuma singing 'Kill the Boer[white people]'. Bonus - the sign language interpreter obviously doesn't know sign language and is just bluffing

http://limpingchicken.com/2013...

The 'fake' sign language interpreter, at the centre of the world's attention following his bizarre performance at Nelson Mandela's memorial event, has been found interpreting in another video.

This time he's interpreting for Jacob Zuma, the South African President, as he sings a song called 'Kill the Boer'. Despite his now infamous short-comings as an interpreter, there is no mistaking his sign for machine gun!

Mr Zuma has since said that he'll stop singing the song to avoid creating racial tension.

'Kill the Boer' is actually illegal under SA hate speech laws, though the ruling ANC will appeal. And regardless of how that appeal goes, they'll keep singing it

https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...

Finally, on Friday March 26th 2010, the question of the legality of the phrase was brought before a South African court. According to Acting Judge Leon Halgryn of the South Gauteng High Court, it is now unconstitutional to utter or sing the phrase "dubul'ibhunu" ("shoot the boer") in the country. Halrgyn ruled that the phrase amounts to hate speech, and is therefore not protected by section 16 of the constitution, which safeguards freedom of speech.

https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...

So you've got President inciting genocide against white people and the people around him are too dumb or corrupt to hire someone who can do sign language.

Yup, if I was a South African I'd be looking for a passport someplace else too.

Re:Civilization is hard work by Hal_Porter · 2018-01-12 04:35 · Score: 4, Interesting · on Will Cape Town be the First City To Run Out of Water? (bbc.com)

All my South African friends are now expats and gave swapped their SA citizenship for somewhere else. None of them really want to admit that SA is going the way Zimbabwe went post independence but it looks that way.

E.g. here's President Jacob Zuma singing 'Kill the Boer[white people]'. Bonus - the sign language interpreter obviously doesn't know sign language and is just bluffing

http://limpingchicken.com/2013...

The 'fake' sign language interpreter, at the centre of the world's attention following his bizarre performance at Nelson Mandela's memorial event, has been found interpreting in another video.

This time he's interpreting for Jacob Zuma, the South African President, as he sings a song called 'Kill the Boer'. Despite his now infamous short-comings as an interpreter, there is no mistaking his sign for machine gun!

Mr Zuma has since said that he'll stop singing the song to avoid creating racial tension.

'Kill the Boer' is actually illegal under SA hate speech laws, though the ruling ANC will appeal. And regardless of how that appeal goes, they'll keep singing it

https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...

Finally, on Friday March 26th 2010, the question of the legality of the phrase was brought before a South African court. According to Acting Judge Leon Halgryn of the South Gauteng High Court, it is now unconstitutional to utter or sing the phrase "dubul'ibhunu" ("shoot the boer") in the country. Halrgyn ruled that the phrase amounts to hate speech, and is therefore not protected by section 16 of the constitution, which safeguards freedom of speech.

https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...

So you've got President inciting genocide against white people and the people around him are too dumb or corrupt to hire someone who can do sign language.

Yup, if I was a South African I'd be looking for a passport someplace else too.

Re:Insurmountable problems, indeed by silentcoder · 2016-12-23 06:21 · Score: 1 · on World's First 'Solar Panel Road' Opens In France (theverge.com)

The wikipedia pages are actually pretty good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Note the section on Ammendments. Our constitution is intended as living document. We've had more ammendments in 22 years than the US has had in 300. Ultimately all the rights US citizens have (including the ones in the bill of rights ammendments) we have as well - mostly in the main document (Chapter 2 section 9 for example guarantees the rights of prisoners, and protection against unreasonable search and seizure - it contains the same rights as your fourth amendment). Most of the ammendments are minor administrative things like changing the name of a province - but some are important clarifications well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

And then there is this guy:
https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...
He is a professor of constitutional law who writes a weekly column for a newspaper. Many of the articles are news topical - explaining what the law (and constitution) actually says about some current event or important case, but many are more generic explanations of what the constitution says in general. Some may be hard to follow without some knowledge of local news but it covers in quite a lot of detail key things about how the law and constitution works and applies in particular situations. He has a habit of predicting court cases at times - and generally gets them right.

Re:Insurmountable problems, indeed by silentcoder · 2016-12-23 06:21 · Score: 1 · on World's First 'Solar Panel Road' Opens In France (theverge.com)

The wikipedia pages are actually pretty good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Note the section on Ammendments. Our constitution is intended as living document. We've had more ammendments in 22 years than the US has had in 300. Ultimately all the rights US citizens have (including the ones in the bill of rights ammendments) we have as well - mostly in the main document (Chapter 2 section 9 for example guarantees the rights of prisoners, and protection against unreasonable search and seizure - it contains the same rights as your fourth amendment). Most of the ammendments are minor administrative things like changing the name of a province - but some are important clarifications well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

And then there is this guy:
https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...
He is a professor of constitutional law who writes a weekly column for a newspaper. Many of the articles are news topical - explaining what the law (and constitution) actually says about some current event or important case, but many are more generic explanations of what the constitution says in general. Some may be hard to follow without some knowledge of local news but it covers in quite a lot of detail key things about how the law and constitution works and applies in particular situations. He has a habit of predicting court cases at times - and generally gets them right.

Re:Insurmountable problems, indeed by silentcoder · 2016-12-23 06:21 · Score: 1 · on World's First 'Solar Panel Road' Opens In France (theverge.com)

The wikipedia pages are actually pretty good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Note the section on Ammendments. Our constitution is intended as living document. We've had more ammendments in 22 years than the US has had in 300. Ultimately all the rights US citizens have (including the ones in the bill of rights ammendments) we have as well - mostly in the main document (Chapter 2 section 9 for example guarantees the rights of prisoners, and protection against unreasonable search and seizure - it contains the same rights as your fourth amendment). Most of the ammendments are minor administrative things like changing the name of a province - but some are important clarifications well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

And then there is this guy:
https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...
He is a professor of constitutional law who writes a weekly column for a newspaper. Many of the articles are news topical - explaining what the law (and constitution) actually says about some current event or important case, but many are more generic explanations of what the constitution says in general. Some may be hard to follow without some knowledge of local news but it covers in quite a lot of detail key things about how the law and constitution works and applies in particular situations. He has a habit of predicting court cases at times - and generally gets them right.

Re:Insurmountable problems, indeed by silentcoder · 2016-12-23 06:21 · Score: 1 · on World's First 'Solar Panel Road' Opens In France (theverge.com)

The wikipedia pages are actually pretty good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Note the section on Ammendments. Our constitution is intended as living document. We've had more ammendments in 22 years than the US has had in 300. Ultimately all the rights US citizens have (including the ones in the bill of rights ammendments) we have as well - mostly in the main document (Chapter 2 section 9 for example guarantees the rights of prisoners, and protection against unreasonable search and seizure - it contains the same rights as your fourth amendment). Most of the ammendments are minor administrative things like changing the name of a province - but some are important clarifications well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

And then there is this guy:
https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...
He is a professor of constitutional law who writes a weekly column for a newspaper. Many of the articles are news topical - explaining what the law (and constitution) actually says about some current event or important case, but many are more generic explanations of what the constitution says in general. Some may be hard to follow without some knowledge of local news but it covers in quite a lot of detail key things about how the law and constitution works and applies in particular situations. He has a habit of predicting court cases at times - and generally gets them right.

Re:Insurmountable problems, indeed by silentcoder · 2016-12-23 06:21 · Score: 1 · on World's First 'Solar Panel Road' Opens In France (theverge.com)

The wikipedia pages are actually pretty good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Note the section on Ammendments. Our constitution is intended as living document. We've had more ammendments in 22 years than the US has had in 300. Ultimately all the rights US citizens have (including the ones in the bill of rights ammendments) we have as well - mostly in the main document (Chapter 2 section 9 for example guarantees the rights of prisoners, and protection against unreasonable search and seizure - it contains the same rights as your fourth amendment). Most of the ammendments are minor administrative things like changing the name of a province - but some are important clarifications well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

And then there is this guy:
https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...
He is a professor of constitutional law who writes a weekly column for a newspaper. Many of the articles are news topical - explaining what the law (and constitution) actually says about some current event or important case, but many are more generic explanations of what the constitution says in general. Some may be hard to follow without some knowledge of local news but it covers in quite a lot of detail key things about how the law and constitution works and applies in particular situations. He has a habit of predicting court cases at times - and generally gets them right.

Re:Insurmountable problems, indeed by silentcoder · 2016-12-23 06:21 · Score: 1 · on World's First 'Solar Panel Road' Opens In France (theverge.com)

The wikipedia pages are actually pretty good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Note the section on Ammendments. Our constitution is intended as living document. We've had more ammendments in 22 years than the US has had in 300. Ultimately all the rights US citizens have (including the ones in the bill of rights ammendments) we have as well - mostly in the main document (Chapter 2 section 9 for example guarantees the rights of prisoners, and protection against unreasonable search and seizure - it contains the same rights as your fourth amendment). Most of the ammendments are minor administrative things like changing the name of a province - but some are important clarifications well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

And then there is this guy:
https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...
He is a professor of constitutional law who writes a weekly column for a newspaper. Many of the articles are news topical - explaining what the law (and constitution) actually says about some current event or important case, but many are more generic explanations of what the constitution says in general. Some may be hard to follow without some knowledge of local news but it covers in quite a lot of detail key things about how the law and constitution works and applies in particular situations. He has a habit of predicting court cases at times - and generally gets them right.

Re:Insurmountable problems, indeed by silentcoder · 2016-12-23 06:21 · Score: 1 · on World's First 'Solar Panel Road' Opens In France (theverge.com)

The wikipedia pages are actually pretty good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Note the section on Ammendments. Our constitution is intended as living document. We've had more ammendments in 22 years than the US has had in 300. Ultimately all the rights US citizens have (including the ones in the bill of rights ammendments) we have as well - mostly in the main document (Chapter 2 section 9 for example guarantees the rights of prisoners, and protection against unreasonable search and seizure - it contains the same rights as your fourth amendment). Most of the ammendments are minor administrative things like changing the name of a province - but some are important clarifications well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

And then there is this guy:
https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...
He is a professor of constitutional law who writes a weekly column for a newspaper. Many of the articles are news topical - explaining what the law (and constitution) actually says about some current event or important case, but many are more generic explanations of what the constitution says in general. Some may be hard to follow without some knowledge of local news but it covers in quite a lot of detail key things about how the law and constitution works and applies in particular situations. He has a habit of predicting court cases at times - and generally gets them right.

Re:Insurmountable problems, indeed by silentcoder · 2016-12-23 06:21 · Score: 1 · on World's First 'Solar Panel Road' Opens In France (theverge.com)

The wikipedia pages are actually pretty good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Note the section on Ammendments. Our constitution is intended as living document. We've had more ammendments in 22 years than the US has had in 300. Ultimately all the rights US citizens have (including the ones in the bill of rights ammendments) we have as well - mostly in the main document (Chapter 2 section 9 for example guarantees the rights of prisoners, and protection against unreasonable search and seizure - it contains the same rights as your fourth amendment). Most of the ammendments are minor administrative things like changing the name of a province - but some are important clarifications well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

And then there is this guy:
https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...
He is a professor of constitutional law who writes a weekly column for a newspaper. Many of the articles are news topical - explaining what the law (and constitution) actually says about some current event or important case, but many are more generic explanations of what the constitution says in general. Some may be hard to follow without some knowledge of local news but it covers in quite a lot of detail key things about how the law and constitution works and applies in particular situations. He has a habit of predicting court cases at times - and generally gets them right.

Re:Insurmountable problems, indeed by silentcoder · 2016-12-23 06:21 · Score: 1 · on World's First 'Solar Panel Road' Opens In France (theverge.com)

The wikipedia pages are actually pretty good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Note the section on Ammendments. Our constitution is intended as living document. We've had more ammendments in 22 years than the US has had in 300. Ultimately all the rights US citizens have (including the ones in the bill of rights ammendments) we have as well - mostly in the main document (Chapter 2 section 9 for example guarantees the rights of prisoners, and protection against unreasonable search and seizure - it contains the same rights as your fourth amendment). Most of the ammendments are minor administrative things like changing the name of a province - but some are important clarifications well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

And then there is this guy:
https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...
He is a professor of constitutional law who writes a weekly column for a newspaper. Many of the articles are news topical - explaining what the law (and constitution) actually says about some current event or important case, but many are more generic explanations of what the constitution says in general. Some may be hard to follow without some knowledge of local news but it covers in quite a lot of detail key things about how the law and constitution works and applies in particular situations. He has a habit of predicting court cases at times - and generally gets them right.

Re:Stages of global warming grief by silentcoder · 2016-11-22 10:37 · Score: 1 · on Sea Ice In Arctic and Antarctic Is At Record Low Levels This Year (cnn.com)

I gave numbers for South Africa - for large scale plants, not home solar (which has very different pricing) and not American.

Here is one of several studies on the topic: http://www.dailymaverick.co.za...
This one done by the CSIR - the Center for Scientific Investigation and Research, probably the premier hard science organisation in South Africa - it's about equivalent to the USA's NSF. Note that though the CSIR is government funded -their findings actually harm the case by the government for investing in nuclear and coal, which strongly suggests it's not biased - since if they were biased they would want to defend that decision (which is making a lot of corrupt government officials very rich).

http://www.dailymaverick.co.za...
That's another study, by an independent research organisation with no ties to either government or industry.

Home solar, where viable is significantly cheaper than coal for consumers anyway. In fact the price difference (at least here in South Africa) is so massive that you can BORROW the money to install it, and 7 years later borrow MORE money to replace the batteries - and STILL pay less than if you had used coal all along - since the monthly repayments and interest will be less than the cost of the same amount of coal power. My dad is an electrical engineer specialising in project planning and finance - he does these sort of calculations for a living, for very wealthy customers who would sue his company into bankruptcy if they lost money by following his advice.

Re:Stages of global warming grief by silentcoder · 2016-11-22 10:37 · Score: 1 · on Sea Ice In Arctic and Antarctic Is At Record Low Levels This Year (cnn.com)

I gave numbers for South Africa - for large scale plants, not home solar (which has very different pricing) and not American.

Here is one of several studies on the topic: http://www.dailymaverick.co.za...
This one done by the CSIR - the Center for Scientific Investigation and Research, probably the premier hard science organisation in South Africa - it's about equivalent to the USA's NSF. Note that though the CSIR is government funded -their findings actually harm the case by the government for investing in nuclear and coal, which strongly suggests it's not biased - since if they were biased they would want to defend that decision (which is making a lot of corrupt government officials very rich).

http://www.dailymaverick.co.za...
That's another study, by an independent research organisation with no ties to either government or industry.

Home solar, where viable is significantly cheaper than coal for consumers anyway. In fact the price difference (at least here in South Africa) is so massive that you can BORROW the money to install it, and 7 years later borrow MORE money to replace the batteries - and STILL pay less than if you had used coal all along - since the monthly repayments and interest will be less than the cost of the same amount of coal power. My dad is an electrical engineer specialising in project planning and finance - he does these sort of calculations for a living, for very wealthy customers who would sue his company into bankruptcy if they lost money by following his advice.

Re:Why no right-thinking person believes in free t by ArcherB · 2012-02-23 14:02 · Score: 1 · on Where Next-Generation Rare Earth Metals May Come From

The mine owners may be forced to sell then mine to someone with enought foresight to know that the prices won't stay low forever.

And that will be the Chinese, as they're the only one able to concentrate enough money (through state-owned companies) to buy up the mines.

Just a few examples.

Libertarian, busted you are.

Risk = Reward. If the Chinese can buy up all the mines in the world to corner the market on NEW materials, then they deserve the monopoly... wait, monopolies are illegal in this and many other countries. I wonder how that will play out.

But again, like people have said, even if all the mines are not producing, that will mean a HUGE market for recycled materials, increased research into alternatives and alternative supply chains.

So, yeah, China could bank if they could buy out the world's mines, buy out the future potential mines, outbid all other investors for those last few mines, prevent alternative sources from being found, and finally, prevent alternative materials from being discovered... yeah, then they could corner the market and reap huge rewards. However, that's a very VERY risky venture that, let's face it, won't pay out.

Sure, others have tried and some do quite well at it. DeBeers, for example, have a controlling chunk of the diamond market. However, the more they raise prices, the more alternative sources of diamonds are discovered. OPEC controls oil prices, but every time they cut production, more sources of oil are found.

There are laws of economics. The free market is based on those laws. Governments can bend the market one way or the other, but the laws may not be broken. When governments try to bend it too far one way or the other, a thriving black market will take over, which runs on... you guessed it... FREE MARKET principles.

I'm not recommending a free market. It's unavoidable. You may not break the laws of economics no more than you may break the laws of physics. You may try to manipulate them one way or the other and may even make a bit of progress, but in the end, the laws of supply and demand will win out. The trick is to not fight it. Know how the laws work and you can predict the future to make sure you are on the winning end every single time.

(yes, there are times when government intervention is required, like regulating natural monopolies such as utilities and insulin providers, but less is almost always better. Subsidies are almost never a good idea and if it really looks like China is about to corner the market on critical materials, then the US government can always declare the area around the mine a "national park" like ANWR to prevent anyone from owning it. Then the government would actually lease the rights to mine there.)

And that will be the Chinese, as they're the only one able to concentrate enough money (through state-owned companies) to buy up the mines.

No. Actually, US private sector is much larger than the Chinese government. The US private sector is larger than the US government. For that matter, US banks have more money than the Chinese government.

Sorry, but government only takes a percentage of GDP. That means that GDP is larger than government as long as tax rates are under 50%. All liquid money ends up in banks. Yeah, you may have put it in the stock market, but the company you invested in put it in the bank. If they spent it, whoever they spent it on put it in the bank.... all money goes through the banks. The banks in the second largest economy in the world can easily outbid the government of the third largest economy in the world (EU is first according to Wikipedia).

By the way, the US economy is still 2-3 times larger than the Chinese.

Re:Why no right-thinking person believes in free t by blind+biker · 2012-02-23 12:05 · Score: 1 · on Where Next-Generation Rare Earth Metals May Come From

The mine owners may be forced to sell then mine to someone with enought foresight to know that the prices won't stay low forever.

And that will be the Chinese, as they're the only one able to concentrate enough money (through state-owned companies) to buy up the mines.

Just a few examples.

Libertarian, busted you are.

Slashdot Mirror

Domain: dailymaverick.co.za

Comments · 15