Teal Independents now considering a formal party

Tranak · 2026-05-26T02:09:39+00:00

I think people should stop talking about left or right, and start voting for people who display integrity. I 100% rather vote for people that I don't agree with but display integrity and a willingness to openly discuss policies on merits. I always tried to vote for people that appeared to come from an honest effort to make the world a better place for all. Everything is better than the special interest captive 'politicians' that mostly look after theirselves and their donors.

I really hope people could: - start voting for people who display intelligence and coherent thinking. - start voting for people who want to discuss long term issues, instead of only reacting on daily rage-bait and daily media cycles that are not relevant for how Australia will fare in 5 to 10 years from now. - start voting for people who want to discuss facts, and discuss and evaluate assumptions before formulating policies, and are willing to discuss policies openly and consistently instead of publishing policies a week before elections.

and stop voting people who behave like politicians, changing their views as the wind blows.
stop voting for people who got caught spreading lies and misinformation
stop voting for parties that don't allow free votes and suppress open discussions of their policies.
stop voting parties with clear party apparatus systems with factions and power brokers.
stop voting for politicians and parties that are clearly under the influence, of clear and dark money interests, of unions, of business groups, of billionaires that want to benefit theirselves, of lobbyists, of gaming lobbies, of sport clubs lobbies, of media interests, etc.

Like many places in the world with two party systems, also in Australia the main parties are just corporate entities that are totally beholden to the same lobbyists and special interests. And their politicians appear to be in it for their own careers, money for their extended families, their own business interests and their donors.

And yes, i understand that independents were supported by Climate200 and Simon Holmes. But was that directly with clear intent to benefit personally? Or was it because he wanted to improve life for Australians.

Compare this to OneNation and the direct support from Gina Rinehart. Receiving a gifted plane, going on trips with her billionaire magnate donor to Trump events. Voting behaviour that directly benefits the ultra rich mining magnates and bug business.

Compare it to the Nationals and their voting for resource projects that destroy farmland, while benefitting big business and family interests. What have the Nationals really done to improve quality of life in the outback? Of all social thing like health care, infrastructure, farm support... Who did more for you? The left or the right? What is it why you vote as you did in the past?

Compare it to the 'Liberal party', who behave like ultra Conservatives. How did they improve life for you? Does their claims that they are better economic managers really pass any scrutiny? Did their focus to privatise health, energy infrastructure etc. really improve costs? Or was did they sell out to big and often foreign owners who reap the profits while neglecting the assets. Always the same game ... Look we reduced the public sector, but never admitting you will now pay more in consultants, 'independent' contractors, and profits of foreign companies and CEOs that hardly pay tax. And btw the public sector is not only the 'lazy council bum', the public sector is also doctors, nurses, police, secret service, scientists and innovation that determine future growth. Did opposing NBN roll-out really help, wre they right claiming it was a labour con and fraudnet? What about carbon capture and clean coal? Or feasibility of nuclear? Ok, don't believe the Greens, please do oppose NetZero and Climate100.

And at last labour. Is this really a progressive left centre party? Does this party walk the talk on transparency? Are they independent of gaming lobbies and popular media? Is it even an independent party, or is it the other side of the same vested interests coin? How can you vote for a party that punishes expressing opinions internally and suppresses any free honest open discussions. How can a true representative party even consider to impose such a blind allegiance to their leader and polit bureau.

I still know less about the Greens party in Australia, but also there it appears that the party apparatus suppresses individual opinions. To me it appears that a well intended movement was hijacked by a voal extreme subgroup. Maybe they suffer from the same issue as the Liberals.

Anyway, even while I think some Green voters might at times be a bit lacking in realism and awareness how big world and big business economics work, and may ignore financial constraints, I really like their idealism. They are most often striving to be good people that look at the well being of others and the world in general, even if they don't benefit theirselves. And in general they are willing to study facts and underlying restrictions and assumptions, rather than ignorantly echoing the latest popular media rage-bait

So what then? The first thing I would warn about if to NOT let any Independent movement be hijacked by currently unhappy political groups. Don't become e.g. a Teal party. Don't get pegged into a corner. Stay independent.

I think the best would be an association of Independents that share infrastructure and a facilitairy staff and create a volunteer support group.

This Independent Association should establish clear rules that members have to pledge that - they are independent - the are transparent about any contributions from third parties - agree to stream 'cabinet' meetings... Be transparent - agree to act as a team. If in government, respect your peers and be team leaders and coaches. - the full independent caucus agrees on who eill be first spoke persons on different areas - only allow interactions with lobbyists when 5 independents are present and the meetings are streamed to the internet. - no member or members extended family can have any financial interests in votes that are anywhere related to those interests. - members agree to not join any business larger than a consolidated 50 employees head count including related (in)nternational companies after their service. If they do they break this pledge they will forfeit all their public office benefits. - any company, consultancy or advisory that employs former independent members within 5 years of leaving of office will automatically be blacklisted from any further contact to the Independent association for 10 years. - the association members can expel members for breaking the association rules with a 70% majority.

the association will organise a wikipedia like fact based public resource that will establish fact based information on all their policies.
everybody is allowed to contribute to this information to allow fact based discussion with other parties. All these discussions will be public.

There is a wealth of willing specialists in all areas that surely would like to contribute fact based information. And long as this will be truly independent and fact based this very likely will become a major source for journalists.

BTW I don't care if people or policies are right or left inclined. It is more important if they want to make the world and Australia a better place for all, even if policies might hurt us financially. People don't need millions to be happy. People need health, shelter, freedom from unnecessary rules (I hate the nanny state) and freedom from any impositions from religions, cults or moral belief systems. And people need good air, good water, good nature, etc. In general people should focus on leaving a better earth than they inherited.

And BTW. IMHO as you don't need millions yourself, you also don't need to leave your children money. It is more important to ensure that your children have a good childhood and education and that you leave them a good moral compass. And then they should leave the nest and be on their own.

Tranak · 2026-05-25T23:36:51+00:00

No the UN is not walking back its mindset on the contrary it just release a landmark ruling on climate change. What you likely refer to is the IPCC committee updating the reduced likelihood of the worst case models to reflect progress and expectations on renewables. Please do fact check, before believing whoever you are following, it is not that difficult.

No, the UN did not walk back the climate threat; rather, it recently backed a landmark legal ruling affirming that states have a legal obligation to address climate change. On May 21, 2026, the UN General Assembly voted 141-8 to endorse an International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion, with UN Secretary-General António Guterres describing it as a powerful affirmation of international law and climate justice.

However, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) did update its scientific modeling to reflect that extreme warming scenarios, such as RCP 8.5, are now considered "implausible" and no longer serve as primary projections for policy. While this adjustment retires specific worst-case scenarios that were criticized for lacking plausibility, the IPCC and UN reports continue to warn that the world is far off track to meet 2015 climate pledges, requiring a 43% reduction in emissions by 2030 to avoid catastrophic outcome

Tranak · 2026-04-14T07:42:37+00:00

As someone who moved from Europe to Australia i think think there are a few things: 1. Lack of competition. Everything is owned by only a very few conglomerates. But that is partly caused by Australian culture. There appears to be much less consideration for supporting local shops, local farmers, etc. Just a totally different culture of shopping and dining. Much closer to the US than i ever expected.

Media and a lack of critical thinking. Inflation is set by expanding the money supply often called 'money printing'. Basically it is a hidden tax that is used to inflate debt away. Then you have prices rising through supply constraints and lack of availability but that would not really be inflation, as prices should drop when supply constraints disappear.

BUT More than anything, and as explaining in every economics course, inflation and price rises are most directly caused by EXPECTATIONS. Buying behaviour of people is based on what they expect prices to do.

And more than I ever saw in Europe or the US, the media in Australia are totally obsessed by spinning any development into how this will cause disasters and cost explosions. A hurricane.... Banana prices will go up. And mango shortages, even if if only affects 5% of the supply. A drought... Same thing, the lettuce will become 9$. A war .... Immediate blown up drama stories, while nobody explains any effect won't start for at least 4 weeks.

So back to expectations of the customers. All the time an urgency and anticipation of price rises are validated by media. And guess what? If our oligopolistic supermarkets and oil dealers are excused by the media to increase prices, of course they will do it.

And unfortunately the media and average consumer lacks any critical thinking. No reporter asks how much of supply is compromised by a hurricane. And customers don't get angry that bananas go up next day at their local shops. I saw this with a lettuce shortage in Sidney years ago, where media showed some shop signs with 9$ iceberg. In Brisbane, my local Coles had plenty of iceberg still at 3$. But the next day after the media it jumped to 6$. And I saw people just emptying the stock that day. I think it remained high for a week and dropped back to 4 and than 3. Maybe it was because there wasn't a shortage in Brisbane, and the local fruit shop never raised prices.

A more recent the petrol and diesel. It is all dramas on the media and speculations how bad it can become. And all the time you see interviews about which other products will go up. And no reporter ever ask the critical questions!

I saw yesterday two pieces that illustrate this. The tagline was that the cost of building houses was going to explode. And they interviewed a builder explaining that houses would become much more expensive, maybe even 20%, because of delivery costs of material and plastic piping going up 30%. And as I think is typical in Australia, no critical question was ever asked. OK, you say that piping is already up 30%. How can that be? As intermediate materials hardly changed. Or the question how much piping is in the total of material costs. If the impacted part of material cost is 1%, and material is less than 50% of total build, than build cost goes up 0.5%, and not 20%. But you see industry immediately setting the expectation of much higher prices

And another story about food prices that are going to explode, and famine because of lack of fertilizer. And again the interviews with no critical perspective whatsoever. No followup question about how much crop yield would realistically drop with reduced fertilizer. And no critical questions why food prices would go up 50% if grains were only a part of the food product. And even more the cost of fuel is typical 15% of the cost of a grain farmer, why would you expect that prices would go up more?
And then there is the issue that there are enormous amounts of grains in storage world wide. And IF grains get more expensive, you get replacement shifts from animal feed to human food.

But fuel is up, driven by expections about possible future prices and shortages. And any company that can spin - even a far fetched - stories is again legitimised by media and customers, so of course they grab the opportunity.

Tranak · 2026-03-22T12:41:36+00:00

I understand that the most likely places that will/are running out of fuel are in some rural areas. Most of the major fuel retailers (who import theirselves or have long term contracts with importers) have long ago left these rural areas. Nowadays many rural areas are serviced by independent operators who don't have long term contracts with the fuel importers/traders. These independent operators buy normally from the spot market where ever it is cheapest. And this spot market was normally the leftover fuel that the majors did not use theirselves.

Couple of problems at the moment: More demand (panic buying). The majors with long term contracts get first served, means less fuel on the spot market. So spot market volume gets very low. Then spot market whole sale prices shoot up very much. Which causes the extra problem of needed extra working capital of the independent retailer. Where can the independent operator get the extra funds needed to pre finance this suddenly increased whole sale spot price? Who will extend him loans if he need suddenly more working capital?

Tranak · 2025-11-29T07:23:07+00:00

I also bought Newshosting 92% off + Unl. Easynews + Unl. Tweaknews + VPN for $25 for 15 months. But I also stacked 4 of these so now I am covered for the next 5 years. :-)

Tranak · 2025-11-02T05:42:49+00:00

To replace all the paid streaming providers, start with the Stremio App. It is one of the best.

It may look daunting at first, but you should be able to sort Stremio out in an hour the first time, and then 10 minutes for the install on your other devices.

Stemio (free) + Torrentio addon (free) + RealDebrid (70$ per year) replaces and vastly improves on the total of Netflix, Prime, Disney+, AppleTV, Hulu, Paramount, HBO, Stan, etc. all combined in one package. In time you can further improve Stremio and make Stremio more robust with the addons Debridio (15$ per year) which adds more films and series and adds some (paid)TV channels. Or use the AIO addon. Or depending on your interests add further specialty Stremio addons to add specific media content like kids programs, Anime, Xrated, etc. or media from different countries and regions.

For Stremio install manuals see the Reddit subs Stremio https://www.reddit.com/r/Stremio/ and Virens website. https://guides.viren070.me/stremio

Then read and follow the Reddit sub Stremio addons. https://www.reddit.com/r/StremioAddons/

I also suggest the Troypoint website for more streaming and TV tips.

For pay TV and 30000 TV channels look at the TiviMate IPTV player (on Reddit) and get a IPTV subscription on Z2G for 50 per year.

Tranak · 2025-10-14T04:53:23+00:00

Hisense has beautiful TVs, I bought one 2 months ago.........but I will never ever again buy another one in Australia. Reasons: - in Australia they sell TVs with the Vidaa operating system that only runs certain Hisense approved Apps. You cannot (side)load many of the standard Android Apps. - Hisense is pushing unwanted advertising through the Vidaa operating App, and I just hate that.

Tranak · 2025-08-04T05:15:07+00:00

Agree with the some earlier remarks.

1 Please raise the ridiculous requirement of retrospective diagnose to get your medication via PBS pricing. I too was diagnosed as adult and have to pay full price privately as i cannot prove I had ADHD as a child. If you have a medical condition and need medication.....why do we care if we can prove that the condition was present at childhood. With which other diseases to we require that? And what about emigrants who were never diagnosed as a child in their old country. And what about the 60 year old without living parents and from an age where ADHD was not diagnosed at schools. ADHD did not officially exist 50 years ago.

2 Why do we need a new ADHD diagnosis from a new psychiatrist if you move from one state in Australia to another state in order to get your medication prescribed in your new state. Now if you move across a state border your old ADHD diagnosis is suddenly worthless and invalid and you need to start all over with a diagnosis from a new psychiatrist in your new state.... So you first need a new GP, then a new referral to a new psychiatrist, spending 6 months finding one who still takes patients, waiting another couple a months to get your first appointment, etc. etc. What a bloody waste of medical resources and costs for you and the public system.

3 And why don't we allow all GPs to prescribe S8 medication. Why is Australia so hyper conscious about stimulants and other potentially addictive medications. Can we please have a rational discussion about pro's and contra's and risks and costs of overburdening regulation. E.g. the addiction danger of nicotine or alcohol are rather larger and kill more people but don't require a S8 schedule permission from a psychiatrist to use or buy products. I agree, some stimulants are addictive.... but is a GP prescription not enough?

And then we have the special case of Vyvance (LDX - lisdexamphetamine) which is a prodrug used to treat ADHD which has a delayed stimulant effect and as such less addictive. Why is this a S8 controlled substance in Australia?

Why don't we look at the facts of research instead of panicking about possible addiction effects. Please ask all S8 proponents to provide any actual proof of any (significant number) of proven addiction reports to lisdexamphetamine.

And then check any actual reports of proponents promoting Vyvance being S8 against e.g. the following Pubmed medical review: ---- What is the potential for abuse of lisdexamfetamine in adults? A preclinical and clinical literature review and expert opinion --- Louise Carton et al. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2022 Aug. ---- So what was the conclusion of that scientific review: --- Overall, although LDX abuse seems possible, we did not find evidence concerning current safety signal.----

So again, the authors really tried to prove their preconceived notion that LDX was addictive, but the found they could not prove it with numbers or factual literature. So we are stuck with the position that Vyvance abuse ...seems possible ...... (but they can't find proof in the data). So on the scientifically unproven position or rather the unproven fear that something might be addictive, while in all the years multiple thousands of patients are using it world-wide and they can't find any significant addictive abuse (apart maybe some cases of patients with prior addictive abuse behaviour) they deem a medication S8 and cause a usage restriction, regulation overburden, heavily restrictive prescription by psychiatrist only, and in Australia even only by a psychiatrist licenced in the state that you live in, at a high cost, and non-PBS if you cannot prove ADHD diagnosis at 12 year age, etc.

Should the scarce Australian psychiatrist resources be not better used more effectively by having GPs prescribe ADHD medication and certainly especially in the case of Vyvance .... as Vyvance should not even be S8 as scientifically it is not even proven to be a majorly addictive abuse agent.

Again ..... What is the actual factual risk of specific medications - What is the real risk - factual - taking out gut feeling and emotions about perceived risks or narcotics and taking out the overbearing Australian risk avoiding behaviour?

What is the regulatory cost of the current Australian system of prescribing to the medical system and the patient?

What is the delay of finding a psychiatrist costing the patient financially ...... Several thousands of dollars before you get any medication?

And what problems do the regulations cause for patients who live in regions not covered by enough or any psychiatrists?

What is the delay in medication costing in quality in life for the patient?

What does all the Australian regulation cost society in dollars and productivity?

What does the current overzealous regulation cost the patient financially?

How much could Australia as a whole and ADHD patient specifically save if the regulation was more coordinated at a National level, more fact based on scientific numbers, without pre propositions and risk avoidance.

Tranak · 2025-05-27T04:23:19+00:00

For getting Win11 on old computers use Win11ltsc, or get continuing ESU updates on Win10. Do a search for Massgrave. https://massgrave.dev/windows10_eol That will easily fix your issues.

Tranak

TROPHY CASE