Serge <sergejag@no-spam> wrote in message
news:VeTLa.164$Rs6.6871@no-spam
>
> "GetCarter" <getcarter@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:bdn2k3$ug3ls$1@no-spam
> >
> > BULLSHIT alright. For a population as small as it is, Australia does
> > remarkably well on the World stage in numerous team and individual
sports.
> >
> > GCarter
>
>
> Australians really must stop using the "small population" excuse to
> justify our insignificance in the world.
>
> We seem to think that all the other nations on Earth are teeming with
> populations much larger than ours
>
> The truth is that only 10% of all the countries on this planet have
> populations which are larger than Australia's.
>
> I would suggest that the 90% of the world with smaller populations, such
as
> Greece, Portugal, Malta, Hungary, Finland, Iraq, Syria, Jordan,
Switzerland,
> Bulgaria, Austria, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Uganda,
> Libya, Singapore, Israel, Kuwait, Bolivia, Chile, and all of the Oceania
> countries to name but a few, have a much greater claim to that excuse than
> us.
>
> The Sydney Olympics was another case in point. I thought that as the host
> nation we did rather badly.
>
> The stars for me were the Dutch (again, another country with a smaller
> population).
>
Australia ranked 4th in the medal count (58) behind the US (96), Russia (85)
and China (59) in Sydney 2000. In "medals per million" Australia was also
4th behind Bahamas, Barbados and Iceland - Netherlands (25) was 12th with
half the M's/Mil of Australia. I thought the only Australians with a problem
were the IofS pluggers who think you can buy medals with a handful of elites
because they thought that's what the East Germans used to do. It was also
voted "best Olympics" ever by the IOC - however silly that sounds it might
indicate we did better with the true Olympic games philosophy than many in
the past, which means more to me than medals. If you feel we need an excuse,
perhaps you would indeed be happier in the land of 15 million Barry Joneses.
Don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.
[Medals per million]
1 Bahamas 6.78
2 Barbados 3.64
3 Iceland 3.62
4 Australia 3.03
5 Cuba 2.64
5 Jamaica 2.64
6 Norway 2.23
7 Estonia 2.10
8 Trinidad 1.70
9 Hungary 1.68
10 Bulgaria 1.67
11 Belarus 1.64
12 Netherlands 1.57
http://www.photius.com/rankings/medals2.html
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 19:19:55 +1000, "Serge" <sergejag@no-spam>
wrote:
[snip]
>The Sydney Olympics was another case in point. I thought that as the host
>nation we did rather badly.
>
>The stars for me were the Dutch (again, another country with a smaller
>population).
>
>I know that this revelation must come as a shock to many of the uneducated
>cretins amongst you, hitherto safely cacooned in the false belief that
>Australia wasn't doing too badly considering its 'tiny' population but I
>make no apologies for pricking that sacred cow.
>
>Serge.
>
"Serge" <sergejag@no-spam> wrote in message
news:VeTLa.164$Rs6.6871@no-spam
>
> "GetCarter" <getcarter@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:bdn2k3$ug3ls$1@no-spam
> >
> > BULLSHIT alright. For a population as small as it is, Australia does
> > remarkably well on the World stage in numerous team and individual
sports.
> >
> > GCarter
>
>
> Australians really must stop using the "small population" excuse to
> justify our insignificance in the world.
But we're not insignificant. Australia is right up the top with their
sporting achievements. That HAS to be linked to the size of the population.
> We seem to think that all the other nations on Earth are teeming with
> populations much larger than ours
Many of them are. Thats a fact.
>
> The truth is that only 10% of all the countries on this planet have
> populations which are larger than Australia's.
>
> I would suggest that the 90% of the world with smaller populations, such
as
> Greece, Portugal, Malta, Hungary, Finland, Iraq, Syria, Jordan,
Switzerland,
> Bulgaria, Austria, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Uganda,
> Libya, Singapore, Israel, Kuwait, Bolivia, Chile, and all of the Oceania
> countries to name but a few, have a much greater claim to that excuse than
> us.
And Australia is much better at sport than most of them too.
>
> The Sydney Olympics was another case in point. I thought that as the host
> nation we did rather badly.
I didn't. I thought we did well.
> The stars for me were the Dutch (again, another country with a smaller
> population).
The Dutch? Bah! A couple of swimming medals but Australia beat them anyway.
More medals.
Nothing you can say will diminish Australias sporting achievements because
you don't seem to have the facts.
Therefore you are irrelevant.
"Serge" <sergejag@no-spam> wrote in message
news:VeTLa.164$Rs6.6871@no-spam
>
> The truth is that only 10% of all the countries on this planet have
> populations which are larger than Australia's.
Not quite right.
Australia currently ranks 52 out of 227 countries in terms of population,
which means that 23% of countries have populations larger than Australia.
Source: http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbrank.pl
"dx0r" <hehe@no-spam> wrote in message
news:gke0gv43fnd86l5jindovcqvm20j79e91t@no-spam
>
> Don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.
>
> [Medals per million]
> 1 Bahamas 6.78
> 2 Barbados 3.64
> 3 Iceland 3.62
> 4 Australia 3.03
> 5 Cuba 2.64
> 5 Jamaica 2.64
> 6 Norway 2.23
> 7 Estonia 2.10
> 8 Trinidad 1.70
> 9 Hungary 1.68
> 10 Bulgaria 1.67
> 11 Belarus 1.64
> 12 Netherlands 1.57
>
> http://www.photius.com/rankings/medals2.html
Okay I appologise.
I had no idea that the Bahamas pissed all over Australia.
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 19:19:55 +1000, "Serge" <sergejag@no-spam>
> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > The Sydney Olympics was another case in point. I thought that as the
> > host nation we did rather badly.
> >
> > The stars for me were the Dutch (again, another country with a smaller
> > population).
> >
> > I know that this revelation must come as a shock to many of the
> > uneducated cretins amongst you, hitherto safely cacooned in the false
> > belief that Australia wasn't doing too badly considering its 'tiny'
> > population but I make no apologies for pricking that sacred cow.
> >
> > Serge.
> >
>
>
Serge <sergejag@no-spam> wrote in message
news:eudMa.129$35.7915@no-spam
>
> "dx0r" <hehe@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:gke0gv43fnd86l5jindovcqvm20j79e91t@no-spam
> >
> > Don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.
> >
> > [Medals per million]
> > 1 Bahamas 6.78
> > 2 Barbados 3.64
> > 3 Iceland 3.62
> > 4 Australia 3.03
> > 5 Cuba 2.64
> > 5 Jamaica 2.64
> > 6 Norway 2.23
> > 7 Estonia 2.10
> > 8 Trinidad 1.70
> > 9 Hungary 1.68
> > 10 Bulgaria 1.67
> > 11 Belarus 1.64
> > 12 Netherlands 1.57
> >
> > http://www.photius.com/rankings/medals2.html
>
> Okay I appologise.
>
> I had no idea that the Bahamas pissed all over Australia.
>
>
........but your assessment of John Howard is spot on - right?
11 Countries pissed all over your hero's
12 Netherlands 1.57
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:38:07 +1000, "Serge" <sergejag@no-spam>
wrote:
>Okay I appologise.
>
>I had no idea that the Bahamas pissed all over Australia.
>
>
>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 19:19:55 +1000, "Serge" <sergejag@no-spam>
>> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> > The Sydney Olympics was another case in point. I thought that as the
>> > host nation we did rather badly.
>> >
>> > The stars for me were the Dutch (again, another country with a smaller
>> > population).
>> >
>> > I know that this revelation must come as a shock to many of the
>> > uneducated cretins amongst you, hitherto safely cacooned in the false
>> > belief that Australia wasn't doing too badly considering its 'tiny'
>> > population but I make no apologies for pricking that sacred cow.
>> >
>> > Serge.
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>
I am doing research on your country. I find it very interesting there
are still myths about the population of Australia. Could you tell me
what life is like in the outback. Thank you
"Back In Town" <living@no-spam> wrote in message news:<3f005a05$0$30568$afc38c87@no-spam>...
> "Serge" <sergejag@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:VeTLa.164$Rs6.6871@no-spam
> >
> > The truth is that only 10% of all the countries on this planet have
> > populations which are larger than Australia's.
>
> Not quite right.
>
> Australia currently ranks 52 out of 227 countries in terms of population,
> which means that 23% of countries have populations larger than Australia.
>
> Source: http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbrank.pl
Jessica <j_monique79@no-spam> wrote in message
news:b72c9064.0307011822.585ab414@no-spam
> I am doing research on your country. I find it very interesting there
> are still myths about the population of Australia. Could you tell me
> what life is like in the outback. Thank you
You're not MI5 are you? I think the reason many have a "small population"
idea of Australia is because we are so widespread. To those who spend time
stuck in traffic & supermarkets it seems quite a populous place.
> "Back In Town" <living@no-spam> wrote in message
news:<3f005a05$0$30568$afc38c87@no-spam>...
> > "Serge" <sergejag@no-spam> wrote in message
> > news:VeTLa.164$Rs6.6871@no-spam
> > >
> > > The truth is that only 10% of all the countries on this planet have
> > > populations which are larger than Australia's.
> >
> > Not quite right.
> >
> > Australia currently ranks 52 out of 227 countries in terms of
population,
> > which means that 23% of countries have populations larger than
Australia.
> >
> > Source: http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbrank.pl
"Jessica" <j_monique79@no-spam> wrote in message
news:b72c9064.0307011822.585ab414@no-spam
>
> I am doing research on your country. I find it very interesting there
> are still myths about the population of Australia. Could you tell me
> what life is like in the outback. Thank you
Well, it's like living in a palace.
Our Prime Minister has given billions of dollars to the greedy hayseeds in
the outback since he's been in Office. They squeal, he forks out more cash.
There's no limit to that demented dwarf's pork-barrelling in order to shore
up his political support.
While the rest of Australia is forced to adopt a "user pays" regimen, the
unproductive dross in the bush have everything laid on for them.
Serge.
On Tue, 01 Jul 2003 19:22:19 +0000, Jessica wrote:
> I am doing research on your country. I find it very interesting there
> are still myths about the population of Australia. Could you tell me
> what life is like in the outback. Thank you
Australia doesn't really have a small population.
Australia does have a small export market, hence many industries in this country
is by enlarge unviable.
This is compared to Sweden, a nation with a population of only 8 million,
which has a thriving car export industry, thriving homegrown defense
industry. This because Sweden has an export market in the form of Europe.
Australia does not.
Hence, the previous Labor government's attempts to establish relations in
Asia.
Also hence, the current tory government's attempts to suck up to the yanks.
"jg" <jg@no-spam> wrote in message
news:qnRMa.1712$oN.73463@no-spam
>
> Serge <sergejag@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:1IxMa.120$d21.10322@no-spam
> >
> > "Jessica" <j_monique79@no-spam> wrote in message
> > news:b72c9064.0307011822.585ab414@no-spam
> > >
> > > I am doing research on your country. I find it very interesting there
> > > are still myths about the population of Australia. Could you tell me
> > > what life is like in the outback. Thank you
> >
> >
> > Well, it's like living in a palace.
> >
> > Our Prime Minister has given billions of dollars to the greedy hayseeds
> > in the outback since he's been in Office. They squeal, he forks out more
> > cash.
> >
> > There's no limit to that demented dwarf's pork-barrelling in order to
> > shore up his political support.
> >
> > While the rest of Australia is forced to adopt a "user pays" regimen,
> > the unproductive dross in the bush have everything laid on for them.
> >
>
> Oh well, looks like that informative & unbiased appraisal answered
> Jessica's questions. Ever thought about where your lunch comes from
> Serge? - even froot loops came from a farm originally, grown by
> unproductive dross.
The only "fruit loop" around here, jg, is you.
Whilst I don't have you for breakfast, I do enjoy doing you like a dinner
whenever our paths cross.
Serge.
"Hunter1" <hunter1@no-spam> wrote in message
news:3f0694c4$1@no-spam
> Back In Town wrote:
> > "Serge" <sergejag@no-spam> wrote in message
> > news:VeTLa.164$Rs6.6871@no-spam
> >
> >>The truth is that only 10% of all the countries on this planet have
> >>populations which are larger than Australia's.
> >
> >
> > Not quite right.
> >
> > Australia currently ranks 52 out of 227 countries in terms of
> > population, which means that 23% of countries have populations larger
> > than Australia.
> >
> > Source: http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbrank.pl
>
>
> stooge is a troll, the truth doesn't interest him.
FUCK me!
Hunter's re-surfaced from the depths of his pond.
At least he now accurately describes himself as being a *No.1*
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Hunter1" <hunter1@no-spam> wrote in message
news:3f0693ac$1@no-spam
> Serge wrote:
>
> >> Australians really must stop using the "small population" excuse to
> >> justify our insignificance in the world.
> >>
> >> We seem to think that all the other nations on Earth are teeming with
> >> populations much larger than ours
> >>
> >> The truth is that only 10% of all the countries on this planet have
> >> populations which are larger than Australia's.
> >
>
> Considering we only have abou....... (huge yawn)
(Hunter's soup snipped as a service to Usenet)
Listen Hunter, I can't possibly take someone who freely describes himself as
a turd seriously.
You do understand?
Serge.
"BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
....................................
Your plagiarism is showing, you have nicked this from the antagonist you
fear most....Phil?
"Serge" <sergejag@no-spam> wrote in message news:OrBNa.493
"Jon°" <jon_jon106@no-spam> wrote in message
news:3f06e919@no-spam
>
> "BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
> ....................................
>
> Your plagiarism is showing, you have nicked this from the antagonist you
> fear most....Phil?
Are you serious?
"BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahaha!!!!!" has been used by posters since Usenet's
inception.
As for Phil, I've seen him off. Just do a google search on the last time
he's posted.
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Serge
Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2003 03:32:57 +0800
Serge wrote:
> (Hunter's soup snipped as a service to Usenet)
>
> Listen Hunter, I can't possibly take someone who freely describes himself as
> a turd seriously.
>
> You do understand?
Yes we do stooge! We don't take you seriously either! Duly
noted that I soundly obliterated yet another one of your
lies as well, resulting in you giving up entirely and trying
to avoid the issue, you're too bloody easy to make a fool of.
"Serge" <sergejag@no-spam> wrote in message news:<VeTLa.164$Rs6.6871@no-spam>...
> "GetCarter" <getcarter@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:bdn2k3$ug3ls$1@no-spam
> >
> > BULLSHIT alright. For a population as small as it is, Australia does
> > remarkably well on the World stage in numerous team and individual sports.
> >
> > GCarter
>
>
> Australians really must stop using the "small population" excuse to
> justify our insignificance in the world.
>
> We seem to think that all the other nations on Earth are teeming with
> populations much larger than ours
>
> The truth is that only 10% of all the countries on this planet have
> populations which are larger than Australia's.
>
> I would suggest that the 90% of the world with smaller populations, such as
> Greece, Portugal, Malta, Hungary, Finland, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Switzerland,
> Bulgaria, Austria, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Uganda,
> Libya, Singapore, Israel, Kuwait, Bolivia, Chile, and all of the Oceania
> countries to name but a few, have a much greater claim to that excuse than
> us.
>
> The Sydney Olympics was another case in point. I thought that as the host
> nation we did rather badly.
>
> The stars for me were the Dutch (again, another country with a smaller
> population).
>
> I know that this revelation must come as a shock to many of the uneducated
> cretins amongst you, hitherto safely cacooned in the false belief that
> Australia wasn't doing too badly considering its 'tiny' population but I
> make no apologies for pricking that sacred cow.
>
I agree countries with smaller populations have achieved far greater
success in many areas. I believe we are far to socialistic and lazy
for our own good. Perhaps it is because of our great weather and
abundant natural resources and low population density that we haven't
been forced to compete as much as we should to obtain our standard of
living.
X-No-Archive: Yes
On 5 Jul 2003 17:37:04 -0700, ausstu@no-spam (ausstu) wrote:
>"Serge" <sergejag@no-spam> wrote in message news:<VeTLa.164$Rs6.6871@no-spam>...
>> "GetCarter" <getcarter@no-spam> wrote in message
>> news:bdn2k3$ug3ls$1@no-spam
>> >
>> > BULLSHIT alright. For a population as small as it is, Australia does
>> > remarkably well on the World stage in numerous team and individual sports.
<snip>
>> I would suggest that the 90% of the world with smaller populations, such as
>> Greece, Portugal, Malta, Hungary, Finland, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Switzerland,
>> Bulgaria, Austria, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Uganda,
>> Libya, Singapore, Israel, Kuwait, Bolivia, Chile, and all of the Oceania
>> countries to name but a few, have a much greater claim to that excuse than
>> us.
<snip>
>> The stars for me were the Dutch (again, another country with a smaller
>> population).
>>
<snip>
>I agree countries with smaller populations have achieved far greater
>success in many areas. I believe we are far to socialistic and lazy
>for our own good. Perhaps it is because of our great weather and
>abundant natural resources and low population density that we haven't
>been forced to compete as much as we should to obtain our standard of
>living.
One thing that's been omitted here: many of the smaller countries
(e.g. Sweden, Switzerland etc.) are a lot closer to major markets than
we are. In addition, they either subsidise or heavily protect their
industries, especially those they consider vital to the national
interest (it's no coincidence that Sweden designs & manufactures it's
own submarines & fighter aircraft). Try importing god Australian
products into the EEC and see how far you get.
Regards,
Peter.
Peter Hodges <peterh@no-spam> wrote in message
news:3f08f7ea.1543921@no-spam
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> On 5 Jul 2003 17:37:04 -0700, ausstu@no-spam (ausstu) wrote:
>
> >"Serge" <sergejag@no-spam> wrote in message
news:<VeTLa.164$Rs6.6871@no-spam>...
> >> "GetCarter" <getcarter@no-spam> wrote in message
> >> news:bdn2k3$ug3ls$1@no-spam
> >> >
> >> > BULLSHIT alright. For a population as small as it is, Australia does
> >> > remarkably well on the World stage in numerous team and individual
sports.
> <snip>
> >> I would suggest that the 90% of the world with smaller populations,
such as
> >> Greece, Portugal, Malta, Hungary, Finland, Iraq, Syria, Jordan,
Switzerland,
> >> Bulgaria, Austria, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Saudi Arabia,
Uganda,
> >> Libya, Singapore, Israel, Kuwait, Bolivia, Chile, and all of the
Oceania
> >> countries to name but a few, have a much greater claim to that excuse
than
> >> us.
> <snip>
> >> The stars for me were the Dutch (again, another country with a smaller
> >> population).
> >>
> <snip>
> >I agree countries with smaller populations have achieved far greater
> >success in many areas. I believe we are far to socialistic and lazy
> >for our own good. Perhaps it is because of our great weather and
> >abundant natural resources and low population density that we haven't
> >been forced to compete as much as we should to obtain our standard of
> >living.
>
> One thing that's been omitted here: many of the smaller countries
> (e.g. Sweden, Switzerland etc.) are a lot closer to major markets than
> we are. In addition, they either subsidise or heavily protect their
> industries, especially those they consider vital to the national
> interest (it's no coincidence that Sweden designs & manufactures it's
> own submarines & fighter aircraft). Try importing god Australian
> products into the EEC and see how far you get.
>
The yanks & Japanese practice that a lot. We had import tarriffs to try and
protect our own industry, not sure if we gained anything by abandoning them
but we can still have some influence by buying Australian, or at least not
having cynical govt's with Buy Aust campaigns while they purchase anything
but.
"jg" <jg@no-spam> wrote in message news:<oR7Oa.4040$oN.165335@no-spam>...
> > >I agree countries with smaller populations have achieved far greater
> > >success in many areas. I believe we are far to socialistic and lazy
> > >for our own good. Perhaps it is because of our great weather and
> > >abundant natural resources and low population density that we haven't
> > >been forced to compete as much as we should to obtain our standard of
> > >living.
> >
> > One thing that's been omitted here: many of the smaller countries
> > (e.g. Sweden, Switzerland etc.) are a lot closer to major markets than
> > we are. In addition, they either subsidise or heavily protect their
> > industries, especially those they consider vital to the national
> > interest (it's no coincidence that Sweden designs & manufactures it's
> > own submarines & fighter aircraft). Try importing god Australian
> > products into the EEC and see how far you get.
> >
> The yanks & Japanese practice that a lot. We had import tarriffs to try and
> protect our own industry, not sure if we gained anything by abandoning them
> but we can still have some influence by buying Australian, or at least not
> having cynical govt's with Buy Aust campaigns while they purchase anything
> but.
I was thinking in terms of small countries such as Singapore, Taiwan,
Israel, which are a distance from major markets, yet have suceeded
economically because of their focus on technology driven industries
whereas we are complacent with exporting commodities that no longer
command the premium they once had.
X-No-Archive: Yes
On 7 Jul 2003 21:49:41 -0700, ausstu@no-spam (ausstu) wrote:
<snip>
>I was thinking in terms of small countries such as Singapore, Taiwan,
>Israel, which are a distance from major markets, yet have suceeded
>economically because of their focus on technology driven industries
>whereas we are complacent with exporting commodities that no longer
>command the premium they once had.
I don't really think they qualify as being a long way from their
markets in the sense Australia does. All are close to major Asian
markets, and while Australia is physically close to Asia, our
manufacturing & agricultural operations are all based in the south of
the continent; and that still doesn't overcome the tariff's &
protection problem.
Regards,
Peter.