Text Size

Larger Font Normal Font

Sixty is NOT the new forty

A Current Affair is probable my least favourite show so it is surprising I actually caught their segment Fifty + fabulous last night. My excuse is that I was at the gym and it was on the shared TV, but for whatever reason I did watch this truly appalling item, and having just viewed it again, I can confirm it is one of the worst pieces of reporting I have seen for many a long year.

It was screened straight after ACA’s first two reports – a “bizarre” love triangle, and the best frozen chips. I guess these topics should have been a warning about the level of seriousness ACA might attach to the concept of turning 50. What purported to be a celebration of the way “older” celebrities are (not) ageing, was the most condescending pap to hit the airwaves in a long, long time.

Now we don’t expect much from this show – a recent low point saw a recent previous report describe residents of a retirement village as “pensioners” – clearly the reporters do not understand the distinction – some may be on social security benefits, some may be self-funded. Last night Fifty + fabulous offered a round up of celebrities (no, no brain surgeons, Nobel Peace Prize winners or distinguished philanthropists, just actors, singers and those who like to marry a lot) who appear to have great bodies. As Homer Simpson would say, duh! We also heard the astonishingly naïve statement from the editor of The Australian Women’s Weekly, Robyn Foyster, referring to Olivia Newton John, “She looks so happy and beautiful. You can’t believe she is about to turn 60!”
Oh dear. Is this the level of maturity our society deserves from such powerful editors? I think not!!

What exactly is the problem, here?
Are turning 60 and looking happy and beautiful mutually exclusive? I sincerely hope not – if so the 5.5 million baby boomers heading toward their sixties might as well give up on good looks and happiness right now.

We know that many magazines and TV shows are based on the cult of celebrity, but it really is sad that what is supposed to be a “celebration” of older people is in fact a patronising, ignorant, often wilful misunderstanding of the beauty and wisdom and good looks which are commonplace for people aged 50, 60, 70, 80 and beyond. And for those who wish to view intelligent television highlighting the real achievements of older Australians, Andrew Denton’s Elders series is a great start. In fact it is hard to believe both Denton’s show and ACA were produced on the same planet.

It is said we get the politicians we deserve. Is it also true that we get the television we deserve? Until we rise up in our hundreds and thousands and share with the decision makers at all television stations that we think this type of reporting is gratuitous rubbish, then TV producers have every good reason to keep on serving it up!

What do you think?

Geoff’s Blog - Mistake on a mast

image

When Peter Garrett or Penny Wong blurb on our media about the virtues of Solar Power I have the “chuck bucket” ready. Have either of them a solar installation? A real one? I doubt it. If they had they would have experienced the total and utter unreliability of solar and wind where there is no back connection to the grid.

I guess that on the farm we have spent close to $70,000 for an installation using professionals all the way only to find that the equipment, the batteries, the exposure to the elements makes this a very dubious technology indeed. As part of our installation we had two wind turbines. Not only did they keep us and the neighbours awake at night, they became victims of lightning which struck at the very core of our system and took significant money and time to re-asses and replace.

That’s not the only thing. Over- zealous sales people (who talk more like religious fanatics than green-power professionals) sold us the wrong batteries for our installation, gave us, and recommended, an installer whose work had to be redone, etc, etc, ad nauseam. So P.G & P.W, get some first hand experience before you become such evangelists. The solar/wind cost per KW hour is something, which, if applied to a suburban household will have our beloved Kevin out on his ear in no time.

And another thing, as I was out preparing the mast for the new wind generator there was certainly no global warming, it was just above 0 degrees and the windchill reminded me of my time in the snows of Canada. So all in all, P.G and P.W for me, your credibility gets lower by the minute. It was probably not enhanced by my mood because I had to adjust the old wind mast guides to accommodate a new, heavier mast. My mistook. Grumble. Grumble. Fumble. Fumble.

Which, now I’m sitting in the comfort of the house at the computer, seems a little unfair (but only maybe) because here I am, taking out my frustrations on our elected’s who are probably easy targets.
And I am reminded of the parable about a man who owed a king’s ransom and who begged for time to pay from the monarch. Not only was he given time to pay, but the debt was wiped.

However, once out of the king’s presence, he saw a person who owed him a tiny debt, just enough to get him into court. Which he duly does and sells the family of the small debtor into penury and prison. This is observed by some of the king’s other servants and they duly report it. Where upon the tables are turned.

Perhaps I should grant P.G. and P.W. a little more slack. My green power frustrations are my business not theirs. I’m sure they mean well. However I do have a question of them.

At dinner last night we had a guest who works at a coal fired power station. He bulldozes the coal into the station. 25,000 tons per day. Assuming no CO2 capture or advanced technology, and being generous in that one ton of coal produces one ton of CO2 (it’s up to 3 times that), if Kevin, P.G and P.W set the carbon price at $20 per ton, that power station is going to be paying a tax to the aforementioned of $500,000+ per day ($182,000,000 p.a) to operate. What is that going to do for power bills? Is it my imagination or is the hoax on us because of some “ expert” scientists and the economist’s report?

We may all find ourselves owing a king’s ransom just for power and petrol to satisfy the government’s desire to lead the world in what is demanded of them by the global warming high priests who may be proven wrong when the ice age approaches in the next decade.. I somehow suspect that we won’t be getting our debts forgiven.

To comment, click here

To read Geoff’s previous blogs, click here

What do you think?

Post your thoughts using the comment form below. You must be a registered member of @boutSeniors to comment, you can register here: Register as a new member. All comments are moderated, so keep it nice. Have fun!

Kaye I take my hat of to you, well I would if I wore one.
What can I say “Bloody good on you”
As for TV and the CRAP! that we all have had been more or less forced down our throats 24/7 is in my mind is from another planet. I’m really not a big TV watcher I wonder why?? I would rather go watch a dam good movie on DVD.
As for Mr. Denton, give me more it’s the only show I will stay a wake for on TV..............

Old Fart! 64 ..... well almost
A. Roy

By AngryLittleAnt on Tuesday 22nd July 2008

My simple reply seems so insignificant to the great dialog written by you. The (and any western government) has only one answer to any problem, TAX IT! It doesn’t work but it looks like they are trying to do something. Worked well with alco-pops didn’t it, the last report is the kids are drinking more. Australia basically invented solar power, the government back then sent them packing (pretty much like the Sarich orbital engine, and the Australian invented gun that only allowed the owner to use (electronic smart stuff, all gone to the USA). Big business buys it up, the government is too thick to realize, and the technology that is right now available is in the hands of the power supplier giants.
So they think taxing giant power suppliers will hurt them and make them be cleaner? The government thinks they won’t pass on the costs? The world will be much cleaner because the government won’t have to print more money because they’ve got all of ours?  I have no idea what they are thinking but unless they can offer a viable alternative it is just another giant tax grab which will fund nothing but more committees to study how they can do nothing.
Has anyone heard how much power is generated by waves? Yes the ocean, day in day out for millions of years just keeps going and a few countries have harnessed this to create electricity. How big is our coastline and the waves keep pounding in. If the government is hell bent on trying to reduce green house gasses, perhaps they could go to Holland (I think that’s one of the countries using ‘wave’ power) and find out how we could stop digging coal.

By corvette on Tuesday 29th July 2008

Geoff, I enjoyed your blog immensely.

I well remember the sound of our two domestic sized wind turbines howling like approaching aircraft. One flew off the roof and crashed, thankfully away from the house.
I have to say that I’m more impressed by solar, but here I agree with you that connection to the grid is probably the way to go where possible. I hate the batteries. Apart from being expensive, I feel as though there is a bomb just through the wall.

Like many on this list, I grew up with lamp light, Coolgardie coolers, kero fridges, flat irons and petrol irons, to name just a few of the innovations of the time. I have since wasted my share of electricity.

Now I would really like a lot less hysteria and hype, and genuine support for the development of new and diverse technologies. It doesn’t have to be doom and gloom.
Ellie.

By EllieMC on Tuesday 29th July 2008

Re global warming. The climate is changing there’s no doubt about that, it always has been and always will because it is a dynamic system. It is such a large & complex system that I doubt mankind’s puny efforts can influence it much if at all.
This is not an argument for doing nothing. The problem with the global warming crowd is that they think “if you are not with us you must therefore be against us” ( polarizing opinion is the classic way of all movements, political ,environmental or any other). We simply do not have enough reliable data on which to base decisions of such magnitude as the introduction of an ETS. As some commentator recently said, “if the weather bureau can’t forcast the weather next week accurately and the Treasury Dept can’t get their estimate of next years surplus correct to within a few million dollars then why should we have any faith in the ability of the combination of these two organisations to accurately predict “global warming and the cost of it’s mitigation”
There’s heaps of things we can do to reduce our environmental impact. Here’s a few: Insulate our houses better, Do not build houses without eaves. Use solar hot water heaters. Walk where posible,don’t drive .
Remember in the Middle Ages itwas possible to grow grapes in the middlands of England and yet in the 1800 the River Thames in London froze sufficiently to allow the lighting of bonfires on the ice!

By mike naylon on Wednesday 30th July 2008

Make a comment?

You must be logged in to make a comment



Forgot your password?
Ads by Google

Subscribe to our enewsletter or read a recent issue.

Your email address:

Join now - it’s free

Join now to get access to:

  • Competitions
  • Personal Adverts
  • The Meeting Place
  • A weekly enewsletter

Already a member? Sign in!


Advertisement