It's bullshit doublespeak that really means "we're cutting costs (in the short term, the only term that matters)". Reducing headcount doesn't reduce the workload, it just means each remaining person has to do more work.
TrippaSnippa
joined 2 years ago
I can think of a few fun combos for Star Wars (Episode 4 specifically):
Alec Guinness (Obi-Wan Kenobi) as mentioned elsewhere in this thread
Carrie Fisher (Princess Leia) - Leia being interrogated by Muppet Tarkin and rescued by Muppet Luke, Han and Chewie
Peter Cushing (Tarkin) would be a case of "less is more" but it could be funny. Not sure how well it would work for the whole movie though.
Sigourney Weaver in Aliens as well. "Game over man, game over!" Muppet Hudson flails wildly
I had a colonoscopy years ago when I was engaged to my now-wife, and when I woke up from the anaesthesia I just babbled about how much I loved her. At no point did I come remotely close to doing a Nazi salute.
The trial never ended, Captain.
Those particular drums are usually used for solids, but with a plastic liner inside they can be used for viscous liquids as well. I wouldn't fill one with a low viscosity liquid, you'd want a plastic or metal drum for that.
Those drums in the picture are really badly filled as well, I'd have rejected them if they'd turned up to the warehouse looking like that back when I was doing QA.
The Sydney airport line uses the exact same rolling stock as the rest of the suburban network (and the airport stations are just stops along the line, not their own dedicated line). The surcharge is just revenue raising because the train is the easiest way to get to the airport, so fuck you, pay up.
By not taking any other jobs in the meantime I guess
Why the hell does the US get to decide what we do with our tanks?
That's fair, I was talking specifically about Melbourne. However, the redistribution doesn't account for the swing against Bandt. The ABC's analysis put his first preference vote nominally on ~45% after redistribution, but he only got 39.5% (and I believe their swing figures are adjusted for redistributions, which is why they show Bennelong as a Labor gain from the Liberals even though Labor previously held the seat).
You're completely right about Brisbane though (and the same thing nearly happened in Ryan). The swing against the Greens alone wouldn't have dropped them out of the 2CP, the massive surge for Labor at the expense of the LNP was what did it.
The precipitous drop in support for the LNP mostly went to help Labor (side note: for weird historical reasons, our party spells its name the American way, despite in every other context in Australia, labour having a u), which helped them finish ahead of the Greens on 3-candidate-preferred, which meant the Greens got eliminated and their votes went to support a Labor victory. In essence, a drop in support for the right-wing candidates resulted in a centrist candidate winning where previously a left-wing candidate had won. That's an aberrant result that doesn't really match anyone's intuition of how elections should work. And it's one reason a proportional system would be better.
This isn't what happened though. Bandt had a 5.2% swing away from him on first preferences which seems to have gone largely to Labor, who had a 5.7% swing towards them. The Liberals actually had a miniscule swing of 0.2% towards them. That swing away from the Greens and towards Labor pushed them ahead of the Libs into the 2 candidate preferred count, where they won on Liberal preferences.
9News is right leaning and has always sanewashed everything to do with Trump, along with the rest of the Australian mainstream media (which is all right wing, even the supposedly lefty ABC).