Turmoil-enomics VIII

We have finally reached the end of a tumultuous week. The guarantee on savings has caused side-effects, Turnbull and Bishops know everything with perfect 20-20 hindsight, and the markets have been up and down quicker than the level in a blogocrat’s glass at five o-clock on a Friday.

So this is the thread for everything economic for Friday, and will stay open for all discussions over the weekend. This will (hopefully) allow the Friday thread to stay ecomomically free.

Overnight, the Dow was up 2%, but the SPI200 Futures was down 77 point. Fasten seat-belts, please, it may get bumpy.

(I will be out most of the time on Friday getting an MRI scan on my dicky shoulder, so it will be up to reb to approve any comments that get trapped in the spam queue – joni)


As we close in on 20000 hits for the blog (and I think they are unique IP address page hits), we should be proud in what we have achieved in under 4 weeks:

  • nearly 20000 hits
  • averaging over 1300 hits per day (and climbing)
  • over 2600 comments

That means that around 13% of our hits are resulting in comments from the blogocrats.

So spread the word on other blogs, and if you see one of our old friends (especially Sherlock, Carlyle etc) – tell them to come and play with us. And if you see our favourite manic trannie, Briannie – run away!!!!

Gene Ingenious – let yourself pay!

In what I think is a disgraceful move – Genetic Technologies Ltd’s has told public hospitals to stop using a test to find out whether patients have inherited a genetic mutation that causes breast cancer.

The company owns a patent on the genetic code, and now wants patients to pay $2100 per test.

From SMH:

The company, which is listed on the stock exchange, licenses the genes exclusively from Myriad Genetic Laboratories in the US.

Luigi Palombi, an expert in patent law at the Australian National University, said state or federal governments could allow laboratories to continue testing under a crown-use provision in the Patents Act, but he was unaware of this ever being used.

Dr Palombi said patent law refered only to inventions, not discoveries, and he believed a federal court would find against Genetic Technologies. But the issue had never been tested, and he was not aware of a body that could afford to mount the case.

And here we were thinking that we owned our own genetic makeup?