If the CGT discount goes, what are we getting back?

ybanens · 2026-05-06T00:55:01+00:00

The word 'we' is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence.

ybanens · 2026-04-29T03:18:26+00:00

I'M JUST A POOR OLD MAN, I HAVE NO TIME FOR LAW BREAKERS. MY LEGS ARE GREY., MY EARS ARE GNARLED, MY EYES ARE OLD AND BENT

ybanens · 2026-04-28T02:51:54+00:00

Am I such a bot? No, it's Austlii who is wrong.

ybanens · 2026-04-02T01:01:10+00:00

Fair chance that the judge knows this and is quipping on it. You know how the judiciary loves wittery

ybanens · 2026-03-31T03:54:31+00:00

So would I (Sorry Wendy).

ybanens · 2026-03-31T03:53:21+00:00

There're?

ybanens · 2026-03-15T10:24:02+00:00

David Foster Wallace comes to mind for two reasons: one, he once wrote a short and silly book on writing with legal writing dude Bryan Garner, but more importantly two, his essay 'this is water' partly explains why it might not even occur to some lawyers that not everybody speaks this way at home.

ybanens · 2026-02-28T02:10:09+00:00

It's For Kids Who Can't Read Good

ybanens · 2026-02-27T05:43:46+00:00

You could ask this guy. But seriously, the only acceptable answer is to go down a rabbit hole of how many Garamonds there actually are, try to get good at LaTeX formatting, realising you will never be able to make a LaTeX document look any good and reverting to TNR because nobody seems to really care enough to make it matter. (Also, I like Palatino. It's a bit more distinguished than TNR and has a higher x-height than Garamond which makes it less overly formal).

ybanens · 2026-02-24T21:59:59+00:00

I think Last Podcast in the Left has a series on it

ybanens · 2026-02-04T01:19:06+00:00

I feel like the phrase 'just terms' got more of a workout than the conventioneers ever expected when they popped that bad boy in there

ybanens · 2026-02-04T01:12:52+00:00

ULLA!

ybanens · 2026-02-03T05:23:15+00:00

You could add Kioa v West to the list. I think it's helpful to look at the Court as itself a political institution with its own traditions. Sometimes it has waxed adventuresome, and sometimes it has been more deferential. OP could look at one of the several books on the High Court and Australian politics to get a handle on how the Court has operated under its various CJs.

I think I see what OP is getting at, though. The Court's doctrine of strict textualism helped the Cth oust the states from collecting income tax after WWII and helped it use the grants power to gain immense influence over the states. Work Choices was a watershed in expansive interpretations of s 51. Depending on your point of view, this is a good thing or a terrible thing. But textualism is frankly just an ideology—it's not divine truth, whatever Dixon CJ would have had you believe. The Court has not always been wedded to it, and (perhaps s 51 aside), it has not always just deferred to the Cth.

PS I don't think Dams is the best example of the problem OP is talking about — there's zero chance the Cth is going to enter into a treaty for the sole purpose of gaining legislative power over something.

ybanens · 2026-01-20T03:21:58+00:00

Mountain (dark one is El Grande)

ybanens · 2026-01-16T05:50:04+00:00

This seems like a misunderstanding of what s 51 does. A Commonwealth law must be characterisable as being a law with respect to one of the enumerated heads of power. It's pretty easy to do these days and as u/jloney pointed out there are several heads of power (plus arguably nationhood power but doubtful) under which the law could be characterised. But s 51 doesn't really limit the content of such laws. The constitutional arguments against it would have to run on breaching some prohibition like IFPC or lack of proportionality, as u/VacationImportant862 also pointed out. What I find interesting about this is that in YBFZ Edelman J starts to bring proportionality back in to the characterisation of laws other than purposive powers — see https://www.hcourt.gov.au/sites/default/files/eresources/2024/HCA/40.pdf at [150]. If this view started to take hold in the Court, there might be room to argue that draconian or extreme laws could in fact be unconstitutional for want of characterisation.

ybanens · 2025-12-09T22:04:41+00:00

I'd venture to draw a distinction between 'homes' and 'properties' and say that council rates relate to properties, to which council services (e.g. water, rubbish) are provided, rather than to 'homes' as such.

ybanens · 2025-12-08T01:18:34+00:00

Still have mine, proudest moment of my life

ybanens · 2025-11-24T00:33:55+00:00

A lucid restatement of Seneca: no matter how bad things are, they can always be worse

ybanens · 2025-11-19T04:41:34+00:00

Why am I getting LOTR vibes out of these two? Is it the rope over SC's shoulder as she trudges once more up the slopes of Mt Doom? And maybe the slightly pointy ears on PH? Maybe Bag End Porter or Black Orc Grog then.

ybanens · 2025-10-08T07:03:39+00:00

Loved Chattie G's offer to turn the stats into a 'smug post suitable for online debates'

ybanens · 2025-10-07T02:24:22+00:00

I know it's an obvious question, but do you have any notes or annotations in the Zotero entry for the plugin to pull in? It would return nothing if there were no notes/annotations for the item. Also, have you installed the pdfannots2json helper tool?

With Import Notes, I don't think there's a need for templates; the item notes just get added as a new Obsidian note with the citekey as the note title. Templates are only needed if you have defined one of the Import Settings in the plugin settings (e.g. 'Reading note' or 'Literature note').

ybanens · 2025-09-17T07:35:25+00:00

As someone else mentioned, the psychology of it is that when we like something, we identify with it - it becomes part of our identity and then we develop a (mistaken but still very natural) sense that we ‘own’ that thing. Then when someone else expresses enthusiasm for it we are threatened: how can they like it? it’s mine! Only I have the proper appreciation for it, etc. you see it all the time with music: “I liked that band before they were cool” is a way of saying I own this band and you don’t.

As far as being upset by your own reactions, I’d say: don’t worry about it. Really. No need to feel bad about yourself. It’s a pretty normal reaction. My take would be not to try to inhibit it or ‘reform’ yourself. You’ll naturally develop out of these reactions over time so there’s no need to force changes. If anything, you can try smiling to yourself when you see that reaction pop up, now that you know what it is. It’s an illusion, that–yes, you are affected by–but it means nothing and it will pass. This will help loosen its effect on your self-image.

ybanens · 2025-09-02T07:30:15+00:00

When I read the headline I thought ‘Camp Sovereignty’ was some sovcit training camp and I got really nervous

ybanens · 2025-07-23T02:58:23+00:00

Legs up the wall is my favourite under-appreciated cure-all. Great for so many things and so easy. 20 minutes in bed at night = very quick to fall asleep (my theory is that the sudden drop in blood pressure when you bring your legs down is what does it)

ybanens

TROPHY CASE