Coronavirus.

Status
Not open for further replies.

south of heaven

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
29,247
Reaction score
25,695
Lol.. well maybe, but I actually like a curry, can’t beat beef rogan josh hot and a garlic naan.. certainly kills anything bad in the system :tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy:
I'm ordering Indian tonight foods great it's the lack of deodorant on the humans
 

Howard Moon

Kennel Addict
2 x Gilded
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
6,568
Reaction score
3,445
Lol, oh ok .. I go straight Bollywood/Indian curry, no one makes it better than the creators. probably wouldn’t want to purchase anything from japan at the moment :tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy: sorry had too!! given then circumstances, but one day I may try it.

yeah fair enough mate, I wouldn't use it when out but when I make my own I always run it.. I would never let some made up disease get in between me and my Kewpie
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
KORMA!

I'm about to give you the best piece of culinary advice..

Kewpie atop of your curry
I occasionally put Kewpie in bolognese. It's as sickening as it is delicious.
 

Mr 95%

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
22,161
Reaction score
22,880
Only in The Kennel can a topic about a deadly virus turn to a discussion about food.. Ahhh ya gotta love this place..:kissingheart:
 

Squash the Berries!

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
May 27, 2019
Messages
1,406
Reaction score
502
My take on the Virus and other major shit.

If only one person watches in full I'm happy.

 

Alan79

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
13,201
Reaction score
18,952
My take on the Virus and other major shit.

If only one person watches in full I'm happy.

Pretty interesting video. I wasn't aware that the government had been trying to introduce a bill allowing banks to access people's money in cases of financial instability. And the idea of the cash ban is a path I'd hate to see them take. They're both measures that don't serve the public at all. It speaks volumes about the mainstream media that these things are happening in parliament without the public being informed.
 

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,741
Reaction score
27,950
Scary stuff. But why are they calling on voters to badger/repetition Labor? It's the Govt putting up the Bill. Be more effective to take on the Libs wouldn't it and ask their members and senators why they are advancing this legislation.
Pretty interesting video. I wasn't aware that the government had been trying to introduce a bill allowing banks to access people's money in cases of financial instability. And the idea of the cash ban is a path I'd hate to see them take. They're both measures that don't serve the public at all. It speaks volumes about the mainstream media that these things are happening in parliament without the public being informed.
 

Mr 95%

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
22,161
Reaction score
22,880
Pretty interesting video. I wasn't aware that the government had been trying to introduce a bill allowing banks to access people's money in cases of financial instability. And the idea of the cash ban is a path I'd hate to see them take. They're both measures that don't serve the public at all. It speaks volumes about the mainstream media that these things are happening in parliament without the public being informed.
Just a note on Bail-In before more paranoia sets in..

Australian Financial Review

Regulators reject fringe fears on APRA crisis powers

James EyersSenior Reporter


Feb 11, 2018 — 11.00pm

A Senate committee and each of Australia's financial regulators have categorically rejected concerns raised by the fringe political party the Citizens Electoral Council that a bill enhancing the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority's crisis resolution powers could trigger the "bail-in" of customer deposits.

A report by the Senate economics legislation committee published on Friday afternoon dismissed more than 1000 submissions from members of the CEC, which is campaigning for the introduction of a "Glass Steagall"-style regime to prevent commercial banks taking any risks with deposit funding.

Treasury confirmed that because deposits are not classified as "capital instruments" and do not include terms that allow for their conversion or write-off, they cannot be "bailed-in" under the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Bill 2017.


"The proposed legislation does not give APRA any additional powers that could be used to the detriment of retail depositors," the Reserve Bank told the Senate committee. Patrick Cummins

"The proposed legislation does not give APRA any additional powers that could be used to the detriment of retail depositors," the Reserve Bank told the committee, chaired by Liberal Senator Jane Hume.

The committee had asked Treasury, the RBA and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority to respond with written answers to concerns of the CEC.

The CEC had pointed to section 11CAA of the bill, which says conversion relates to "Additional Tier 1" and "Tier 2" capital, "or any other instrument". The CEC argued this reference to "any other instrument" could be read to include deposits.

A former APRA researcher, Dr Wilson Sy, also provided a submission to the committee, stating the bill "is designed to confiscate bank deposits to 'bail-in' insolvent banks to save the financial system".

But Treasury said these readings of the legislation were "incorrect".

"Suggestions in the submissions that these provisions will allow APRA to subordinate the interest of depositors in favour of financial system stability in a crisis are not a correct reading of the legislation," Treasury said in its response to the questions on notice.

"The use of the word 'instrument' in paragraph (b) is intended to be wide enough to capture any type of security or debt instrument that could be included within the capital framework in the future. It is not the intention that a bank deposit would be an 'instrument' for these purposes."

APRA told the committee "the reforms do not constitute a statutory power for APRA to write down or convert the interest of any other creditors in resolution, including depositors of a failing ADI".

The committee noted that the provisions relating to capital conversion made sure that the bail-in of any AT1 or T2 capital instrument "cannot be overturned due to any legal impediment".

The law, if passed, will change eight acts governing the financial system. Its genesis was the 2014 financial system inquiry recommendation that APRA be given "comprehensive powers" to facilitate the orderly resolution of banks in a crisis.

The bill includes provisions to give APRA stronger powers to transfer assets, engage in resolution planning, and to control local branches of foreign banks. It also makes some administrative changes to the Financial Claims Scheme, which guarantees all deposits up to $250,000.

The Senate committee reassured Australians that protecting depositors is APRA's core purpose. The bill will amend the definition of "prudential matters" to include the words, "to protect the interests of depositors of any ADI". The committee said this "further enshrines in law the importance of protecting depositors' interests".

APRA chairman Wayne Byres told the committee last October that the bill had been many years in the making and would provide "vital infrastructure for the wellbeing of the financial system".

On Friday the committee called for the bill to be passed. It thanked the CEC members for engaging with the legislative process. The CEC has about 2000 members and is influenced by the ideas of US political activist Lyndon LaRouche. Among its other policies is a national bank, to boost the financing of rural Australia.

James Eyers writes on banking, fintech and technology. Based in our Sydney newsroom, James is a former Legal Affairs and Capital editor for the Financial Review
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Alan79

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
13,201
Reaction score
18,952
Just a note on Bail-In before more paranoia sets in..

Australian Financial Review

Regulators reject fringe fears on APRA crisis powers

James EyersSenior Reporter


Feb 11, 2018 — 11.00pm

A Senate committee and each of Australia's financial regulators have categorically rejected concerns raised by the fringe political party the Citizens Electoral Council that a bill enhancing the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority's crisis resolution powers could trigger the "bail-in" of customer deposits.

A report by the Senate economics legislation committee published on Friday afternoon dismissed more than 1000 submissions from members of the CEC, which is campaigning for the introduction of a "Glass Steagall"-style regime to prevent commercial banks taking any risks with deposit funding.

Treasury confirmed that because deposits are not classified as "capital instruments" and do not include terms that allow for their conversion or write-off, they cannot be "bailed-in" under the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Bill 2017.


"The proposed legislation does not give APRA any additional powers that could be used to the detriment of retail depositors," the Reserve Bank told the Senate committee. Patrick Cummins

"The proposed legislation does not give APRA any additional powers that could be used to the detriment of retail depositors," the Reserve Bank told the committee, chaired by Liberal Senator Jane Hume.

The committee had asked Treasury, the RBA and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority to respond with written answers to concerns of the CEC.

The CEC had pointed to section 11CAA of the bill, which says conversion relates to "Additional Tier 1" and "Tier 2" capital, "or any other instrument". The CEC argued this reference to "any other instrument" could be read to include deposits.

A former APRA researcher, Dr Wilson Sy, also provided a submission to the committee, stating the bill "is designed to confiscate bank deposits to 'bail-in' insolvent banks to save the financial system".

But Treasury said these readings of the legislation were "incorrect".

"Suggestions in the submissions that these provisions will allow APRA to subordinate the interest of depositors in favour of financial system stability in a crisis are not a correct reading of the legislation," Treasury said in its response to the questions on notice.

"The use of the word 'instrument' in paragraph (b) is intended to be wide enough to capture any type of security or debt instrument that could be included within the capital framework in the future. It is not the intention that a bank deposit would be an 'instrument' for these purposes."

APRA told the committee "the reforms do not constitute a statutory power for APRA to write down or convert the interest of any other creditors in resolution, including depositors of a failing ADI".

The committee noted that the provisions relating to capital conversion made sure that the bail-in of any AT1 or T2 capital instrument "cannot be overturned due to any legal impediment".

The law, if passed, will change eight acts governing the financial system. Its genesis was the 2014 financial system inquiry recommendation that APRA be given "comprehensive powers" to facilitate the orderly resolution of banks in a crisis.

The bill includes provisions to give APRA stronger powers to transfer assets, engage in resolution planning, and to control local branches of foreign banks. It also makes some administrative changes to the Financial Claims Scheme, which guarantees all deposits up to $250,000.

The Senate committee reassured Australians that protecting depositors is APRA's core purpose. The bill will amend the definition of "prudential matters" to include the words, "to protect the interests of depositors of any ADI". The committee said this "further enshrines in law the importance of protecting depositors' interests".

APRA chairman Wayne Byres told the committee last October that the bill had been many years in the making and would provide "vital infrastructure for the wellbeing of the financial system".

On Friday the committee called for the bill to be passed. It thanked the CEC members for engaging with the legislative process. The CEC has about 2000 members and is influenced by the ideas of US political activist Lyndon LaRouche. Among its other policies is a national bank, to boost the financing of rural Australia.

James Eyers writes on banking, fintech and technology. Based in our Sydney newsroom, James is a former Legal Affairs and Capital editor for the Financial Review
The big issue I see with this is that APRA is funded by the industries it's meant to regulate. It only takes a few changes to the higher powers in such an institution to completely remove ethics from the equation. The global financial crisis showed that many of the figures that set regulations on the strategies taken to negate risks banks and insurers take was infiltrated by people who actively profited from the downfall of a large number of insurers and banks and again profited when banks were given bail out money by governments.

So any reassuring words from these organisations mean very little to me when their reassurance is basically just saying that specific wording is not intended to be read in a certain way. If it isn't clearly expressing that the bill excludes financial organisations from taking the deposits of customers, it leaves that as an option legally.
 

Squash the Berries!

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
May 27, 2019
Messages
1,406
Reaction score
502
Pretty interesting video. I wasn't aware that the government had been trying to introduce a bill allowing banks to access people's money in cases of financial instability. And the idea of the cash ban is a path I'd hate to see them take. They're both measures that don't serve the public at all. It speaks volumes about the mainstream media that these things are happening in parliament without the public being informed.
Cash bail in made law in 2018 in the dead of night with just 8 politicians voting!
 

Alan79

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
13,201
Reaction score
18,952
Scary stuff. But why are they calling on voters to badger/repetition Labor? It's the Govt putting up the Bill. Be more effective to take on the Libs wouldn't it and ask their members and senators why they are advancing this legislation.
It does seem to be an attack on the ALP. But given the fact that the libs were willing to introduce a controversial bill to parliament with only 8 people sitting in the vote, it's not an endorsement that the libs are at all trustworthy. A large part of the LNP strategy in the last decade has been to implement the unpopular decisions early in their terms, secure in the knowledge that people largely forget they've been shat upon a few years later. I agree that the CEC aren't offering a balanced commentary on it though. People need to be badgering both parties. I didn't gain much admiration for the CEC with their insistence that they've been a strong force in defying changes like this. But to their credit, it's not a mainstream media outlet providing this information. And I think that we still need many sources of independent information to combat the fact that mainstream media sources are seemingly biased.
 

Squash the Berries!

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
May 27, 2019
Messages
1,406
Reaction score
502
Scary stuff. But why are they calling on voters to badger/repetition Labor? It's the Govt putting up the Bill. Be more effective to take on the Libs wouldn't it and ask their members and senators why they are advancing this legislation.
This is just their last post, they have been asking everyone to contact all parties in the lead up to this plus were really the only ones drawing attention in 2018 to the bail in law.

They and channels like Walk the World, Heise Says, In the interest of the People and Nuggets News are called tin foil hat conspiracy nutcases by the mainstream press in particular the Financial Review which is just an advertisement for the banks.

Next step negative interest rates then bank bail in of everyone's (including business) deposits.

Then anarchy in the streets.

And we think Corona Virus is dangerous.
 
Last edited:

Alan79

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
13,201
Reaction score
18,952
This is just their last post, they have been asking everyone to contact all parties in the lead up to this plus were really the only ones drawing attention in 2018 to the bail in law.

They and channels like Walk the World, Heise Says, In the interest of the People and Nuggets News are called tin foil hat conspiracy nutcases by the mainstream press in particular the Financial Review which is just an advertisement for the banks.

Next step negative interest rates then bank bail in of everyone's (including business) deposits.

Then anarchy in the streets.

And we think Corona Virus is dangerous.
The fact that Americans haven't stormed their parliament or attacked the ultra wealthy when it became clear that the regulatory bodies ruined so many people with policy changes tells me a lot about how easily manipulated the population can be. They'll willingly shoot their neighbours if their financial systems collapse (watch doomsday preppers). But when it's the ultra wealthy ruining the poor to add some more to their excess, they're passive. Unfortunately Australian people are too passive and brainwashed to fight back too. The old myth of one party being as bad as the other contributes to the passive nature. As you say, these independent media sources are also painted as conspiracy theorists. And the boring nature of politics makes a lot of people just zone out and stay ignorant of what is going on.
 

Mr 95%

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
22,161
Reaction score
22,880
The big issue I see with this is that APRA is funded by the industries it's meant to regulate. It only takes a few changes to the higher powers in such an institution to completely remove ethics from the equation. The global financial crisis showed that many of the figures that set regulations on the strategies taken to negate risks banks and insurers take was infiltrated by people who actively profited from the downfall of a large number of insurers and banks and again profited when banks were given bail out money by governments.

So any reassuring words from these organisations mean very little to me when their reassurance is basically just saying that specific wording is not intended to be read in a certain way. If it isn't clearly expressing that the bill excludes financial organisations from taking the deposits of customers, it leaves that as an option legally.
Well the point is..it’s not hidden..it’s in msm..I merely point this out.. People can take what they want out of it.. I know I won’t be losing any sleep over it.. Much more important things to worry about..
 

Lov_Dog

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
2,994
Reaction score
1,697
Korea has confirmed that they have one case of a person catching the virus twice

http://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=285335
So little remains unknown; were both infections same strain? was patient fully recovered? if so, what criteria indicate full recovery?
>>I suspect diagnosing full recovery is very difficult to land on given only two months in to this pandemic.

https://www.todayonline.com/world/1...covid-19-test-positive-again-guangdong-report
>> also >10% reinfection rate, possibly.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top