Markets 
One Nation is unlikely to defeat Labor alone, but Labor will take an enormous hit at the ballot box due to Treasurer Jim Chalmer’s budget tax changes, which penalise financial success (“Women drive surge in Hanson’s popularity,” June 4). Many women seeking financial freedom may switch their votes away from the teals and Labor to One Nation, especially if their candidates are women, as the teal members of Parliament seem to have become puppets of Labor and have let many women voters down. That could well decide Labor’s fate. Hurt the female electorate at your peril. David Sayers, Gwandalan
Jenna Price’s opinion piece did not reveal anything surprising about One Nation (“One Nation, masters of zero policy”, June 3). It did, however, confirm its lack of coherent policy and has motivated me to consider standing at the next election. I can offer voters just what Pauline Hanson offers – no policies, no plans and no strategies. I can organise a good birthday party, so I’m willing to try organising a political party. I can talk into a microphone with confidence on stuff I don’t really understand. I also offer the alternative of not being her and have a seniors Opal card, so I don’t need a private plane. If you want to waste your vote, consider me. Leo Murphy, Westleigh
Yet another opinion poll at the front of the Herald charting the meteoric rise of One Nation and Pauline Hanson. At the risk of shooting the messenger, the Herald is giving Hanson the kind of publicity that even Gina Rinehart’s money can’t buy. I expect millions of Americans have been ruing their media’s elevation of Donald Trump by giving him so much ink. Mark Paskal, Austinmer
Yes, Pauline Hanson is “a real person” and yes, she is outspoken and speaks for many older women.
But is her One Nation party anything more than a Pauline fan club and a ragtag band of elected representatives? Hardly a recipe for an effective, stable government. Frederika Steen, Chapel Hill (Qld)
So it is women who are causing Pauline’s popularity surge? I hate to admit it, but Alan Jones was truly a prophet in his time – women are “destroying the joint”. Jennifer Whaite, Oatley
Much noise is being made about the rise of One Nation, but remember the election is two years away. We all know people like to register a token protest, but when elections come around voters become more focused. I predict One Nation and Australia’s Trump will fail spectacularly. Edward Lange, Ashfield
I hope women realise there is a very rich puppeteer running this show. Zuzu Burford, Heathcote
Wedge-tailed politics
Why do we need heavily armed submarines in the North Pacific (“Scott Morrison backs new AUKUS plan, urges Australia not to ‘surrender’ to doubt”, June 4)? If we’re worried about China, remember that Beijing is much closer to Berlin than it is to Sydney. The vast sums we are giving to the US for subsidising American shipyards could be much better spent on equipment to defend our own region. But let us not forget why AUKUS came into being in the first place. Former PM Scott Morrison knew he was in trouble before the 2022 election. Announcing AUKUS was simply a means of wedging Labor. If Anthony Albanese had rejected AUKUS, as I’m sure he wanted to, the Coalition would have pushed the “Labor weak on defence” line, backed by their media allies. Ken Webb, Coogee
If you ever needed a reason to abandon our wasteful attempt to buy these submarines, Morrison’s support for the deal is it. Ken Pares, Forster
AI irony lost
Professor Cath Ellis believes it was legitimate for her to use AI to compose an opinion piece submitted under her name “rather than spending a lot of my time writing sentences from scratch” (“How an academic’s AI use was exposed by her peers”, June 4). In other words, she sees no problem with passing off computer-generated prose as her own. What a splendid example that sets for her students. The irony clearly escapes Ms Ellis that she occupies the position of pro vice chancellor for quality and integrity at a university where teaching staff now spend too much of their time weeding out assignments completed with the undisclosed assistance of AI. Sentences “written from scratch” are how ideas and sensations become coherent, transmittable thought. Perhaps Ms Ellis should find time to read some Aristotle. Remarkably, he was able to explore this concept quite well without the help of ChatGPT. David Salter, Hunter’s Hill
I am one of Australia’s leading researchers on academic integrity and student cheating. Three years ago, generative AI (GenAI) threw a hand grenade into the practices of assessment in higher education, and we have been reassembling a better set of practices from the debris since. In light of this, I’m aghast at the article that undercuts the reputation of Professor Cath Ellis, who contributed to some of the most seminal research into the integrity problems caused by ghostwriting, which existed long before GenAI. Rather than using GenAI to provide fake evidence of learning, as students might do, Professor Ellis used GenAI to more efficiently distil her knowledge into words. Crucially, the knowledge and opinions reflected in her article remain her own. There is nuance here that the Herald’s decision to retract her piece and sully her character entirely misses. Worse, what was called an “odd choice of words”, such as referring to completed assessments as “artefacts” and “to assure learning”, are commonplace in the current scholarly discourse on assessment redesign. What some described as possible clues to GenAI use are, in fact, clues that Professor Ellis knows what she is talking about. Professor Guy Curtis, Bull Creek (WA)
I can confidently announce that I don’t use AI in my writing for Herald letters. I have a long and growing list of rejections from the editor to prove it. Paul McShane, Burradoo
Business on the hook
Shane Wright’s opinion piece boils down to the struggle between labour and capital (“AI tosses up so many questions, it’s hard to know which way the coin will fall,” June 4). The role of government is to minimise the level of conflict between the two. If the implementation of AI, owned by capital, displaces huge numbers of workers, then the Australian government needs to seriously consider implementing a system of universal basic income for all. Then the taxation system would need an overhaul, with the business sector paying the price for the social dislocation it has brought about. That would be the price of social stability and progress. Glenn Johnson, Leura
Shane Wright is not the first and won’t be the last to explore the problems and possibilities of AI. Some time ago, Stanley Kubrick’s film 2001: A Space Odyssey dealt with the dangers associated with technological advancement and our search for meaning in a universe which, seemingly, has no interest in us. From its “dawn of man” beginning when apes discover their power to use tools as weapons, to the ending of the film when astronaut Dave Bowman is jettisoned into transcendence through Stargate, we are compelled to consider the ambiguity of our future as humans. As Shane asks, will it be as dark as Pope Leo fears or can we harness AI to promote a better life for all on this planet? Ron Sinclair, Windradyne
I was much disturbed when, with my granddaughter, watching a YouTube cartoon telling a classic fairy story, I realised the narrative was coming from AI, and not very good AI at that. After all, if even this old codger could tell it was AI-generated it must have been bad. There are enough problems for children learning English without AI getting things horribly wrong. Aidan Cuddington, Umina Beach
Action essential
Ross Gittins has described the anthropogenic risks to our continued existence (“There’s a one in six chance we’ll be extinct in 100 years. So what can we do about it?” June 3). If we do nothing to control nuclear weapons, catastrophic climate change, advanced artificial intelligence and synthetic biology, we will be condemning our children and grandchildren to live in a dystopian world – far more frightening than it is already. Mark Porter, New Lambton
Dartboard decisions
Just when you thought US foreign policy had reached a new low, it sinks even lower (“Trump proposes new 12.5 per cent tariff on Australia”, June 4). The US Trade Representative report lists the 60 countries that have “failed both to impose a forced labour import prohibition and to effectively enforce such a prohibition”, yet does not list Afghanistan, Albania, Belarus, Mauritania, Myanmar, North Macedonia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan or Ukraine, all of which rate very high on the Global Slavery Index (GSI) for slavery prevalence. Furthermore, on the GSI, Britain and Australia rate respectively higher than and equal to the US in the government response rating. The Netherlands and Portugal rate the same as the US, yet are not on the tariff list. This is yet another Trump administration list that was probably made by throwing darts at a world map. Christopher Woods, West Hobart (Tas)
Australia should impose its own anti-slavery tax on the US for not paying a livable minimum wage to its own workers. Geoff Holmes, Woonona
Reality cheque
If I were one of the lowest paid workers in Australia and had just received a 4-6 per cent pay increase, would I be dashing out to fuel inflation with a new iPhone, big TV or wardrobe revamp (“Employers warn of price pressures as one in five workers get 4.75% pay rise”, June 4)? Tempting, but I’m more likely to try to catch up on some overdue bills – water, electricity, rent, telco, gas etc. Clearly those on big business incomes decrying the pay increase are too far removed from the coalface to understand the spending habits of their lowest paid employees. Sue Hoad, Merewether
Rails run
I have followed the long-running saga of high-speed rail in Australia and have just returned from China, travelling the length of the country by rail. The statistics tell the story: Australia, zero kilometres of high-speed rail, China, 45,000km of high-speed rail. After World War II, Australia imported American expertise and engineering companies to manage large parts of the Snowy Mountains hydro scheme. Is it time to import Chinese experts and companies to kick-start the transition to a modern rail system? Andrew Moran, Narara
Unlevel paying fields
The government proposes to remove concessions on investment housing in an attempt to increase the supply of housing to first home buyers. It then proposes to extend the revised tax regime to other investment vehicles, notably shares, using the argument that it would introduce distortions if different investment types were subject to different taxation. But it intends to grandfather the scheme to protect current owners of investment homes, though no such grandfathering will apply to shares and other investments. So under the new taxation regime, if I own an investment property, I can still get a 50 per cent CGT discount when I sell, but if I own shares, no such concession will be available. Where is the fairness in that? Richard Grant, St Leonards
Worldly sums
It’s not too hard to tax wealth correctly, Ken McNamara (Letters, June 4). Just take the buy price of any asset, adjust that price for the inflation rate over the holding period, and then subtract the inflation-adjusted price from the sell price. This gives you the real gain in the value of the asset (wealth), and the amount that the CGT is applied to. Easy. Philip O’Sullivan, Artarmon
She deserves a raise
I was struck by Joseph Ting imploring people to consider the “ethical question of bringing children into an unstable and overpopulated world” (Letters, June 2). These concerns keep us awake at night, but what allows me to move forward is the hope I see in the children around me – their incessant curiosity, search to find their purpose and innate desire to improve the world around them. Our responsibility is to help them navigate this journey. If I could add another philosophical contribution to Australia’s declining birthrate, it would be the perceived value of parenthood. When pregnant with my first child, the most common question I received was: “When will you return to work?” Several years, jobs and another child later, I find myself a stay-at-home parent. The questions have not stopped – “What else do you do? Don’t you get bored?” This alternates with backhanded judgments about the luxury of not having to “work”. I am tertiary-educated, had a fulfilling career, and this was a choice made together with my husband. The role is not glamorous, it’s 24 hours a day and unpaid, but it’s been the most humbling, character-developing privilege of my life. In addition to the very real-world barriers to having children, should prospective parents or those considering another child be made to feel that this is a lesser or even morally reprehensible choice? Celeste Hankins, Ashfield
My wife and I have decided we don’t want children. If anybody wants them, we can drop them off tomorrow (“For many it’s time to have fewer children, or none”, June 1). Alan Eason, Miami (Qld)
- To submit a letter to the Sydney Morning Herald, email letters@smh.com.au. Click here for tips on how to submit letters.
- The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform. Sign up here.
Read the full article here
