Scott Morrison is right to say China is a developed country

From The Guardian:

Scott Morrison has challenged China to do more heavy lifting on climate change, saying Australia welcomes its economic growth, but that prosperity and power also come with responsibility.

The Australian prime minister used the keynote speech of his US visit, at the Chicago Institute for Global Affairs on Monday, to praise China’s “economic maturity”. Morrison characterised China as a “newly developed” rather than a developing economy, and argued that status conferred developed-world obligations on the Chinese leadership.

“Having achieved this status, it is important that China’s trade arrangements [and] participation in addressing important global environmental challenges, with transparency in their partnerships and support for developing nations, reflect this new status and the responsibilities that go with it as a world power,” Morrison said.

Another developing country? South Korea. Yes – South Korea:

The South Korean government has decided not to maintain its developing country status in the WTO. This is because the status is no longer leading to substantial practical benefits and South Korea as a developing country member of the WTO may be seen as a proxy for China with China, which wishes to continue to enjoy its developing country status, continuing to quarrel with the United States in their trade war. The latter point is related to concerns that the South Korean government is cracking its alliance with the United States by having decided to terminate the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) with Japan.

It’s wrong to laugh

But seriously, Trump is the finest comedian of his generation. We are witnessing a true craftsman at work:

Then there’s Kevin Rudd …

Missed him like a hole in the head.

Have you noticed the way his vowels become rounder when he’s overseas and he puts on his serious pompous voice? No one from Queensland talks like that.

And “white guys”?!

Oh, do go away.

Campaign finance

This isn’t a campaign finance issue; it’s a free spech issue:

Clive Palmer spending $60 million = bad.

Unions spending $14.4 million to fight Howard = good.

Got that?

Would it have been OK if Clive had only spent $30 million?

Or what if he’s spent it to support the Greens? Bad then?

Didn’t think so. To the story:

Clive Palmer’s $60m in spending at the 2019 election shows Australia needs caps on political expenditure – not just donations – a group of civil society organisations has warned.

The group, led by the Human Rights Law Centre, Australian Conservation Foundation and the Uniting Church in Victoria and Tasmania, called for the electoral reform in a submission to the joint standing committee on electoral matters inquiry into the 2019 election.

The call for caps on both donations and spending was echoed in separate submissions by Melbourne University’s professor Joo Cheong-Tham and GetUp.

Oh, GetUp. For a moment you might have thoght they were serious about this issue.

The fans speak – and they want Izzy back

The gap between the elites and the Quiet Australians is pretty large:

… a staggering 83 per cent of respondents voted for Folau’s return to rugby league with Tonga.

The poll attracted more than 3000 votes with accompanying online comments strong in support of Folau.