SR,

I've already told you where I got the information about the WWF sabotaging shipments to the Diggers in the MENA warfronts.

What I find most extraordinary is that you find this surprising. The control of the CPA by the Comintern is the 1940s is hardly controversial except, its seems, to those who are blissfully ignorant of the issue.

Try this... http://vuir.vu.edu.au/32983/1/The%20Comintern,%20The%20Communist%20Party%20of%20Australia%20and%20Illegality%20-%20Robert%20Bozinovski.pdf

In terms of the specific issue of the WWF's sabotage, I've pointed you to the places I recall learning of this way back when ie articles in the National Times as well as the book by Margo Beasley "Wharfies: A History of the Waterside Workers' Federation of Australia".

There may be stuff on the WWW but I'm not aware of it.

Again,are you disputing that the Australian communists were opposed to the war while Hitler and Stalin were allies? And if they were opposed to the war, why do you find it surprising that the WWF would act on that position?

Just screaming "I don't want it to be true" isn't the way adults think.

SR,

What unadulterated drivel. Given that from when the Nazis took control of Germany, the German economy had gone through a spectacular boom compared to the rest of the world and the dark side of Nazism wasn't yet apparent, Germany at that point got the admiration of many people most of whom had no love for fascism.

Likewise given the 18m killed in WW1 the policy of appeasement was accepted by pretty much every world government who were reluctant to start WW2. All this time the politically motivated mass slaughter of nearly 20m Russians by the communist party was happily underway.

By the 1950s it was clear that the communists were at least as bad as the Nazis ever were, and the WWF being run by communists was just as odious as if they were run by Nazis.

Hasbeen, the Sydney Harbour Bridge is actually a perfect example that supports the point I'm making.

I think you may misunderstand what it is that I'm saying so I'll try to explain it again:

My point is that the *current* working population, is the cohort that is responsible for more wealth/production in our society than any other cohort.

This actually applies pretty much at any point of time for a very long time previously. And it also applies to most societies, especially those free market based, that haven't suffered from cataclysmic events such as a scorched earth war or plagues or etc. The main reason for this is because of exponential growth in factors such as population, production efficiencies, technology and scientific knowledge, etc.

Let's examine the Sydney Harbour Bridge as an example:
A bridge was first seriously proposed way back at the turn of the 20 century. At that time the only publicly accessible way across the harbours was by ferry, which I'm guessing would have been slow, low capacity, steam powered ferries. After a few decades of typical governmental stuffing around and a world war the bridge was finally opened in 1932. This event was a tremendous improvement over the ferries and greatly contributed to Sydney's productivity and wealth. This is an example of the current working population at the time greatly increasing the nation's wealth/productivity at that time.

However, the story doesn't stop here. Because close to a hundred year's since has past and we need to examine what's happened in the meantime.

Well long story short: the bridge as been properly maintained and is in good nick. That is, considerable resources are spent maintaining it so this means that the original input from those who built it is a continually diminishing fraction of the overall input into the bridge- ie: with each passing day less of the current wealth generated by the bridge can be attributed to the original builders due to maintenance costs.

-- continued below --

-- from above --

But not only that, since it was originally built it has been rejigged/upgraded: the trams line have been replaced with a couple more car lanes and also a bike lane has been added on the side. This improvement has increased the utility of the bridge- but you can't attribute this to the original builders- it gets attributed to the generation at the time that made the improvement. Then some time after this is it was altered and improved again; a tidal flow system was introduced which has increased daily usage. So once more we attribute this increase in utility and its subsequent production boost to those who implemented it- not the original builders.

There's still even more to note: because since the initial boost in total harbour crossings when the bridge opened another major harbour crossing boost has arrived- the Sydney Harbour Tunnel!! And in addition to this, it should be noted that the bridge didn't replace the ferries, the ferries are still there. Today they're faster, higher capacity, efficient diesel boats and can transit more people across the harbour per day than the ferries of 1932.

So overall, over the whole life of the coat hanger: Compared to its initial potential at its opening, its relative contribution to the wealth derived from all harbour crossings (bridge or otherwise) has continually decreased.

And this is typical of pretty much any asset built by previous generations- the relative contribution of the original asset to society's wealth continually decreases as time passes. So consequently, it's a fact that the percentage of wealth/production that can be attributed to a previous generation eventually pales into insignificance when compared to that of the latest generation. This is quite an obvious fact! Even a child could tell you that the productivity and production due to the efforts of the population years ago is undeniably significantly less than that of today's population. But for some reason, that I don't understand, people like individual just don't seem to get this.

Clearly in the Menzies letter to his sister, it shows him having an admiration for Faschism, even believing it could benefit Australia if introduced.

Yes I can just imagine 'Pig Iron' Bob kneeling at the feet of Tojo as the lacky PM of a Japanese Australian state.

SM, if things had come to pass, you would be speaking Jaoanese with your mate mhaze. Most likely both of you would have minor jobs in the Dept of Human Control. Being loyal party members and all.

Thinkabit- You made a good point but it's still wrong in my view. It's orders of magnitude harder to build things than maintain them- the distortions of currency over time is a source confusion. Accountants understand cost but not value.