Driving again.

[Boogs]

if found guilty of corruption they could end up having to forfeit all personal assets which will be auctioned off, proceeds to go to public coffers. (proceeds of crime law)

Oh no! Tell me it's not so!! You mean they'd have to pay back the money they stole?
I'm shocked they'd be treated so cruelly, after all, it was the only thing to do! [◀ insert own trite excuse if this one not sufficient!]

 

[Outdated]

Oh no! Tell me it's not so!! You mean they'd have to pay back the money they stole?
I'm shocked they'd be treated so cruelly, after all, it was the only thing to do! [◀ insert own trite excuse if this one not sufficient!]

We started doing this to drug dealers back in the 80s then extended it to all major crimes. They don't just lose what they profited from crime, they lose everything, they are left with only the clothes they are wearing. And trying to hide assets by putting them in the wife's or children's names doesn't help, forensic accountants find everything.

I think it's a good law. It's never been used for political corruption before though so it will be interesting to see how things pan out. I really like the idea of politicians being held accountable for the decisions they make, once a few precedents are set there we should have a much more stable democracy.

 

[Forest Cat]

I thought Norway was a big oil producer?

Yeah it's a common joke to hear here when people talk about the gas prices. "I just wish we were the biggest oil producer in western Europe, then we would have very cheap gas. ....wait a minute, we are!!"

It's all taxes. tax on the gas, a road-use tax, a CO2 tax and a couple of extra taxes on top of that. And of course a tax on the taxes, gotta have that. It all adds up. Without it we would pay $1,60 for one gallon.

 

[Boogs]

Notice that Australia exports all of it's gas and uses almost none domestically. This is because of corruption in government.

I know not all these people are outright sociopathic (although research tends to indicate these personality types are in prevalence in positions of wealth and power (as compared to their normal ratio among the population)), or at least that it's unlikely, so I have to wonder how they justify such grievous behaviour to themselves?

Most people (who don't have severe personality disorders) would I'd imagine, need to tell themselves the big lie first, and believe it, so as to enjoy the enrichment it brings them without the attached guilt of what they've done/are doing. But as the evidence stacks up so rapidly, I wonder if they act on the need to believe ever more outlandish fantasies? Because it seems that if they didn't then their previously satisfactory excuse is no longer covering up the insanity, and telling themselves 2+2=3 at the same time that 2+2=5 is stretching even their credulity.

Come to that, I wonder if the majority of the human race could be said to be institutionally insane? And I mean that quite seriously (for a change?). Because taking recent history into account, even the rabid greed that occurs in some less well regulated minds doesn't seem enough to knowingly self-condemn one (and one's descendants) to effective suicide, even Pharaoh failed to take it all with him, hence Howard Carter's little windfall.

 

[Boogs]

We started doing this to drug dealers back in the 80s then extended it to all major crimes. They don't just lose what they profited from crime, they lose everything, they are left with only the clothes they are wearing. And trying to hide assets by putting them in the wife's or children's names doesn't help, forensic accountants find everything.

I think it's a good law. It's never been used for political corruption before though so it will be interesting to see how things pan out. I really like the idea of politicians being held accountable for the decisions they make, once a few precedents are set there we should have a much more stable democracy.

Sorry if I was unclear, was being 200% sarcastic!
I totally agree with it, except when it's used as an excuse for not giving them serious jail time.

"I really like the idea of politicians being held accountable for the decisions they make"
Absolutely, but you know where I think it would be even more important to set some examples?
The commercial oligarchs who now wield more power than most politicians, and yet have the fewest checks and balances, lowest accountability, greatest entitlement, to the degree that they can openly and publicly flaunt the law, or at least push it to it's limits in testing how far they can push it - and so far, it seems only now are a few nations and organisations pushing back as best they can (huzzah for Brazil and the like!).

 

[Judge]

How is that measured?

Good question. I took it off of a certain article directly from a Norskpetroleum.no site. Figured they know their own business. I just assumed they were dealing with global ranking rather than by continent alone.

But no, I don't recall the exact article. Only the URL. That's what caught my attention. Though on a more consistent basis I always thought Norway was just below Russia's oil production...if that hasn't changed.

Yet if this is a metric based on "the big picture", I could see how even a local source would play down their position in a global market. Indeed...how are such things measured and perhaps why would be another good question.

 

[Boogs]

...how are such things measured and perhaps why would be another good question.

I probably didn't express myself very well (as usual! ); this (↑) was really what I was getting at, and not so much the methodology and data points used for volumes, but more the measuring as a ratio.
Since all measurements are only valid within a context, a relationship; all measurements are of that nature.

As I often struggle with subtext, I often need to look for it deliberately before I can settle on using the measurement (or whatever) as part of a conclusion (this is more pathological than deliberate on my part), so those sorts of questions are a part of my mental make up (I'm not saying this is some deliberate conscious decision to think in that fashion like a latter-day Sherlock (it would be far more flattering to my ego if that was case! )).

 

[Judge]

I probably didn't express myself very well (as usual! ); this (↑) was really what I was getting at, and not so much the methodology and data points used for volumes, but more the measuring as a ratio.
Since all measurements are only valid within a context, a relationship; all measurements are of that nature.

As I often struggle with subtext, I often need to look for it deliberately before I can settle on using the measurement (or whatever) as part of a conclusion (this is more pathological than deliberate on my part), so those sorts of questions are a part of my mental make up (I'm not saying this is some deliberate conscious decision to think in that fashion like a latter-day Sherlock (it would be far more flattering to my ego if that was case! )).

That's ok. I'm not prepared to get into any heavy discussion over economic metrics, whether the source I quoted is inaccurate or not. I was just surprised that a domestic source would weigh in so candidly as it appeared.

I've been a shareholder of such entities, but not as a petrologist. Just an investor.

 

[Boogs]

I'm not prepared to get into any heavy discussion over economic metrics, whether the source I quoted is inaccurate or not.

That wasn't what my comment was about, more to do with how it's used rather than how it's obtained, but no matter.
Reading back, I realised you gave a context of 'global crude markets', where I would imagine absolute values count more than ratio's against other factors.

 

[Judge]

That wasn't what my comment was about, more to do with how it's used rather than how it's obtained, but no matter.
Reading back, I realised you gave a context of 'global crude markets', where I would imagine absolute values count more than ratio's against other factors.

LOL....clearly we're overthinking this. We're both BUSTED!

 

[Boogs]

Both Australia and Norway are large players when it comes to natural gas exports.

I have to confess, I was thinking more of just oil, but I guess thar's gas in them thar oilfields!

I guess you could say "Oil's well as ends well"?
Or should that be "Oil well's as ends well"?

 

[Boogs]

LOL....clearly we're overthinking this. We're both BUSTED!

Speak fer yerself! I can run very fast when caught out red handed!

 

[blue_bird]

I don't know about other drivers out there, but does anyone else feel like modern (particular last 10 years) cars are made cheaply and not made to last for even a decade.I just learnt about a family friend's BMW (recent one) alternator failing already. I had gearbox problems with a virtually brand new car from just a few years back. Cars seem to be made with more emphasis on getting them off the production line rather than making sure they are worthy of being off the production line. Also how reliable do you think Chinese cars are? I think the standards of European manufacturers have slipped in recent years.

 

[Outdated]

I don't know about other drivers out there, but does anyone else feel like modern (particular last 10 years) cars are made cheaply and not made to last for even a decade.

For decades in Australia we have believed that this is deliberate. Manufacturers don't want you keeping the same car for 15 or 20 years, if they could have their way you'd be forced to buy a brand new car every 5 years. As if the average mug in the street could afford that.

 

[Boogs]

Built-in obsolescence is what you may be thinking of? The principle that more waste makes more profit, established industrially back in the days of Edison (and before, I'm sure) et al. Many (most?) products nowadays are designed and built to have a specific lifespan, and with modern materials and techniques items can be made to be reasonably functional and yet much cheaper than the high-quality end of the market, but for the time they last they end up more expensive and yet not as good functionally as the high quality version of the item. Of course there's also the knock-on effects such as increased environmental damage, materials used may be more toxic, and sometimes may have an indirect impact on other things.

With the automated computer controlled manufacture of cars the lifespan of the item(s) can be quite accurately controlled with the quality of materials also having an impact. Often harder wearing materials with better attributes cost more to source too, so are used less. To not do this means not being able to compete in the market, but sadly our world suffers for our desire for readily available consumer products.

There again, there's sometimes a balance with improved performance through better technology made cheaper by mass production, so in the case of cars they usually handle better, are safer, cheaper, and have more driver aids than their counterparts of twenty years ago, but unfortunately this has only been factored in by the built-in obsolescence crowd to shave a little more profit at the customers expense.