How to destroy ScoMo in eighteen months

Via the AFR:

Scott Morrison’s shock win in the federal election may have been delivered by the “battlers” – non-university educated voters in lower income brackets – and Christians.

ANU professor Ben Phillips found that electorates with a lower percentage of persons with bachelor degrees and income greater than $100,000, and a higher percentage of persons identifying as Christian, positively correlated with a swing to the Coalition.

Overall two-party-preferred swing to the Coalition was modest at less than 1 per cent since 2016. Falling primary votes for both major parties suggest that preference flow from minor parties like One Nation significantly contributed to the swing.

Here’s what Chris Bowen said yesterday when announcing his candidacy for the Labor leadership:

Mr Bowen, a member of the ALP right, formally announced his bid on Tuesday morning in front of the house where he grew up in Sydney’s Smithfield.

“I think the party does deserve contest. I think that the party deserves a choice,” he told reporters.

He took ownership of Labor’s franking credits policy which was devastatingly described as a “retiree tax” by the coalition during the campaign, but said the party would start with a blank policy slate for the coming term.

“No political party ever takes to the next election, exactly the same policies they took to the last. That would be dumb.”

Yes it would. So what to change? I have a suggestion, courtesy of the Social Democrats in Denmark, previously via The Guardian:

She marked her return on Facebook, with a video straight out of a Quentin Tarantino film, buttoning her jacket, arranging her hair and slipping on stiletto heels to heavy metal music. “I’m ready again,” she declared to camera. “Let’s get this bus rolling.”

Mette Frederiksen, leader of Denmark’s opposition Social Democrats, was in hospital with food poisoning when the prime minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, called a general election last week, and was two days late joining the campaign.

But the 41-year-old has all the momentum, with her left-of-centre bloc starting with an eight percentage point lead, and few doubting that she will become Denmark’s youngest-ever prime minister after the election on 5 June.

“I’m super excited because we so desperately need a change of government,” said campaign volunteer Malou Astrup Clemmensen as she prepared to hand out roses on the streets of Copenhagen for Frederiksen’s campaign launch.

A victory for Frederiksen would be a boon for Europe’s social democrats as they gaze across the continent at a dispiriting political landscape. But it would not be without controversy, for under Frederiksen the party has been ruthlessly reshaped: dragged to the left economically – and sharply to the right on immigration.

“For me, it is becoming increasingly clear that the price of unregulated globalisation, mass immigration and the free movement of labour is paid for by the lower classes,” she said in a recent biography.

Denmark’s current right-wing coalition government last year enacted the most anti-immigration legislation in Danish history and, rather than position her party in stark opposition, Frederikson has embraced much of it.

Under her leadership, the SD have called for a cap on “non-western immigrants”, for asylum seekers to be expelled to a reception centre in North Africa, and for all immigrants to be forced to work 37 hours a week in exchange for benefits.

She has reached out to the populist Danish People’s party (DPP), doing a series of joint interviews with its leader, Kristian Thulesen Dahl, and discussing cooperating with them in government.

But it is the government policies her party has supported or failed to oppose which have been most alarming for her allies in the left-of-centre red bloc. The Social Democrats voted in favour of a law allowing jewellery to be stripped from refugees, and a burqa and niqab ban, and abstained rather than voted against a law on mandatory handshakes irrespective of religious sentiment at citizenship ceremonies, and a plan to house criminal asylum seekers on an island used for researching contagious animal diseases. In February, she backed what the DPP has branded a “paradigm shift” – a push to make repatriation, rather than integration, the goal of asylum policy.

“I find it odd that it’s possible to make such a shift, not just in your policy but also in your fundamental values,” Morton Østergaard, leader of the centrist Social Liberal party, told the Observer. “What’s different in Denmark is that we’re seeing parties coming out of a Liberal or Social Democrat value base eating into national conservatism in a race-to-the-bottom contest, because they’ve decided that the marginal voter can’t get tough enough on immigrants.”

Many believe her party’s new populist profile is a pure power play. The Danish People’s party has slipped from 21% in the 2015 elections to below 13%, according to a poll of polls by the Berlingske newspaper.

An internal Social Democrat survey of the party’s core voters carried out last autumn found that 37% of loyal Social Democrat voters thought immigration policy was too lax. And this was after three years of the most anti-immigration government in Danish history.

There is no reason for Labor to adopt the social conservatism expressed by Frederiksen. And it could and should sustain a helpful stance to refugees (though continue with stops the boats).

But the rest is pure gold for Labor. If it were adopt a platform of cutting immigration to historical average levels at 80k per annum it would:

  • massively wedge the LNP Government which is hopelessly in thrall to corporate Australia on huge influxes of foreign workers to crush wages, lift house prices and deliver stupid growth via more warm bodies and rent-seeking infrastructure opportunities;
  • it would immediately recapture the nationalist imaginations of One Nation and and United Australia Party (if it still exists), ie QLD;
  • it gives Labor a huge edge in managing climate and all other green issues;
  • it positions Labor as the party of housing affordability which is still popular;
  • it would throw the inner city dwelling left to the Greens, which is fine given the preferences flow back anyway;
  • it would immediately recapture the crush-loaded suburbs in the west of both Sydney and Melbourne;
  • and it would massively boost Labor on national security grounds.

There would be debates around the budget and how to grow the economy with a lower immigration intake but those can be won. The narrative writes itself. The China and housing booms are slowing. We need to get smarter about how to grow while lifting not lowering living standards. That should be via innovation, competition, productivity and participation, a lower dollar and energy prices, not crush-loading everything in sight, including universities.

It de-emphasises climate change policy while also making it much easier to manage.

Most importantly, Labor would implicitly become the Australia First party, not the globalist elite flunky, listening to its traditional constituency, speaking their language and delivering on their views.

The wedge into ScoMo would be epic. He would be forced to defend the indefensible even as the evidence mounted everywhere that their is no reprieve coming for wages, house prices are still far too high, the economy weak and overloaded service delivery crashing all around, especially for the aged.

ScoMo’s surplus obsession would also become a millstone around his neck as he refuses to invest enough into infrastructure.

If ScoMo answered with immigration cuts he would only confirm Labor’s leadership while wearing any adjustment costs. If not, his weak polls will put all kinds of pressure on him from the party, threatening another spill.

Classic “blue ocean” strategy.

All of that said, I suspect that if there is anyone left within Labor with the sense to go this way, it would probably break the party in half as the fake lefties had a breakdown.

David Llewellyn-Smith
Latest posts by David Llewellyn-Smith (see all)


  1. I read or heard somewhere that super funds affiliated with the unions would lose much value if brakes were applied to the ponzi. Hence Labor are captured in this regard.

    • If they haven’t been quietly shifting their funds out of the country, especially after the scare of a few years ago which should have served as a warning, then they are as thick as bricks. You’re totally right, the whole labour movement has been captured by the ponzi, from construction to investment. This is why we’re on the road to nowhere.

      • CBUS seems to have a very high percentage invested in Australia property compared to other industry super funds.
        I suppose that’s only fair as its a construction industry based super fund.

        But your’e right, I suspect some of the major industry super funds have been ever so been quietly offshoring.

    • How so? Migrant gig economy jobs, wage theft, cash in hand arrangements – its not like this is flowing rivers of super guarantee contributions to the Industry funds.

      • I think they’re hoping to keep things rolling by unrolling more and more infrastructure projects including projects that will cost the economy, that’s why suddenly everyone is ganging up on Dan in Victoria to push the canned E-W project even though it has been shown over and over that it’s a bad project. Another such dodgy project to watch will be a dusting off of the high speed rail. The other thing is flooding the country with people to make these projects viable and too keep rents high and support the housing bubble which ultimately supports the ASX valuations of the FIRE sector.

  2. TailorTrashMEMBER

    Yes indeed ……Penny and Tanya could break away and form their own little big hearted feel good for the foreigners party.
    This would soon see them out on their arses without the cover of the larger ALP that they have hijacked and feed off as they destroy its electoral chances

  3. blindjusticeMEMBER

    Why would you go get a degree in ancient Roman civilisation or some such if you can get paid well working a jumbo at a mine?
    Akin to correlation causation. Just because an area has low educational attainment doesn’t mean people are stupid.

    • This is what the left always says when it loses the argument. Next they’ll be blaming the Russians. They said it for Brexit, they said it for Trump, and now they’re trotting out the same delusional excuses. The next step is for them so say people didn’t know what they were voting for so the election has to be re-run now that we have more information (without the option to vote for the LNP).

  4. TailorTrashMEMBER

    Good to see the poo hat is back ……after the Scomo miracle might we say holy sh1t ……..

  5. Anyone outside the ALP echo chamber of apparatchiks, who can pull their eyes away from the fascinating spectacle that is the ALP leadership sandpit, can see the global trend that Mette Frederiksen epitomises. This isn’t going away boys of the Labor Right faction. It is bigger than you and your decaying party. It’s coming for you just like the rest of us and it has to do with robotics, natural resources and ecological change.

    None of you are fit to be social engineers and one must question what passes for information and evidence in your minds.

    It’s time for you to put away your self-centred globalist toys, nice neoliberal ideas and smart suits that you acquired in that tough career path from university to ministerial advisor to think tank to parliament – roll up your sleeves, and grow the [email protected]#& up. Many workers and average people detest you for the insular wankers you have become where your fascination with your own political navel lint stops you recognising that you are a big part of the problem. It stops you from getting to know that you have failed to represent the needs of your base because you are precious types whom have become ever bit as arrogant and snide as the ‘born to rule’ types you sneer at.

    There is a massive social and cultural change on the way in the west where immigration and the nation state are front and centre – this is new and cares not for your delusions. If your makeover of ALP image and adolescent politics is far more important to you than setting Australian society and especially its workers up to weather this storm, then why not become hairdressers? Apparently this is one of the skills we are most in need of in our migration program that is in short supply. In fact, I think you might say that there is a Shorten-age of them.

    • Clive, you should run for Parliament.

      And then use your parliamentary privilege to deliver weekly missive like that from the floor. That would be awesome.

    • Clive eliteism is alive and well in all the parties. None of these people have a clue about the lives of the deplorables in their sheltered lives making rules for us all. One thing that whoever is in power, is to set a minimum “must pay tax” to operate in Oz. Ok so a bit lower yearly returns, but everyone wins as we all have a bit more dosh to spend, rather than none as our wages asymptote to pure survival as all our services continue to climb.

      • Had to laugh at Bowen yesterday holding a press conference outside the digs he grew up in to announce his running for the leadership.

      • TailorTrashMEMBER

        Hareeba ……..yes noted that ……….the old log cabin routine …..pity he is no Abe though ……..

    • DominicMEMBER

      The poor Guardian must have been torn writing that piece: on the one hand a Left-wing, rousing ‘woman story’. On the other, said woman railing against mass immigration. They must have suffered a near brain haemorrhage over these seemingly conflicting stances. Love it.

    • TailorTrashMEMBER

      Clive you Sir, are a Master ……….Id love to see you with a colum in the Daily Telly …….You should team up with Latham Mark 2 ……he is as close to that wonderful language as we have in any Parliament …….but hopefully as you say more of it is coming

  6. mild colonial

    Imagine our press coping with the policy shift. I would be laughing and laughing. Imagine the moral outrage on Insiders and some smug angle they’d dismiss it with.

  7. Denmark is (was) very ethnically homogeneous. The Danes are described as a tribe.

    Is Australia like that? Nope.

    Sadly, I think the equation is just too different here. Both parties are too reliant on the immigration nexus. They both court the ethnic vote. What do you think the granny migrant policy was? Look at the drama surrounding Chinese language campaigning in must win seats like Bennelong.

    Every time I talk to folk about our far too high immigration rate, I get nods and murmurs. However, people are very afraid of being labeled racist…which is exactly what happens as soon as you begin to seriously talk about immigration.

    There is a rump, mostly Green voters, who essentially believe in open borders….even if they never directly say this. Bizarrely they have the high moral ground on the left.

    • Blah, blah, blah. All it takes is one leader to break ranks. One. The rise of China used to inevitable. Today it is a declining trade cheat.

      One leader stands up and refuses to be cowed by labels then the entire bullshit group think edifice collapses.

      • Yeah, I think so too.

        But remember how I cheered Donald Trump before the US election and y’all sneered and laughed?

        Unfortunately I fear that we don’t have a great Australian Don to emerge. Best case scenario is we get to (willingly, or under strong persuasion) ride the US coat tails to a happier place.

      • I don’t understand why you get so cranky all the time- aren’t you doing what you love? Maybe you just need more sleep?

        Denmark is racially and culturally homogenous- this is a nation of immigrants from all over the shop

        Denmark is in Europe- this is a nation in Asia

        Denmark is seen as a progressive social democratic nation- this is a nation that is seen as ‘casually’ racist with a history of racial exclusion

        These are some of the reasons Denmark ( and other European nations) can make such changes. If you consider Australias political situation -vis-à-vis the major parties economic reliance on immigration- it just becomes less likely.

        What will be interesting to watch is how Morrison deals with ON….I suspect he will move in their direction for survival reasons.

        Get some sleep, buddy.

      • Look at Nigel Farage and his Brexit party.. they are apparently getting a lot of support right now. Despite the milkshakes being thrown around.

    • I am RASCIST. So is everyone. It’s farqing natural. Certain races and cultures i dislike. You can’t like everyone.

      • Did you mean “racist”?

        Sweetheart, if you can’t even spell the word properly…..

      • I would suggest that may not be a racist. The term is abused by many trying to shut down honest debate by persons who are truly racist. If you take certain highly homogenized nations and examples where people of different ethnicities have lived and inter-married over generations sharing common values and culture. If suddenly a group of people from outside move in with different values and the population notice the differences that is not racism.

      • Saco +1, it’s about culture not race. And not all cultures share equal values. In fact some cultures are downright toxic in my humble opinion. It’s not about skin colour, the way you look, it’s the way you behave.

    • HadronCollisionMEMBER

      Also, too, some otherwise intelligent people automagically, unthinkingly ascribe a desire to reduce pop ponzi with racism or hard-heartedness (whomsoever posted this yesterday – thanks – we need to repost: Not because they have a vested interest in it, but because that’s been the line from both parties for so long.

      This leads them to then mass-label voters for PHON and UAP who voted for these parties because of some perceived idea those two would cut immigration (maybe one of them) or because they feel bereft of real choice (irony alert: prefs flowed to LNP anyway) as racialist.

      It’s all so silly.

      Like DrDemography said, we need an (airquotes) managed conversation (/ airquotes) but just not in the direction DrDemography thinks.

      It’s all a bit depressing.

    • Trout à la Crème

      Nathan makes a good point here imo about the differenece between Denmark and Australia and shouldn’t be flippantly dismissed (except I didn’t quite follow the moral high ground bit). Though that doesn’t preclude leadership or action.

      One also has to ask about the progressive social democratic policies. Why did Denmark think that it had to import people in the first instance? And which policies and ideologies were that reason a direct result of? Although it’s difficult to bring up and discuss those obvious observations without being met with aggression, hate and name calling. If feminist equality progressive social democratic policies lead to a genetic population dying out, why would a rational country pursue those policies? Because it makes you feel good when one recites ‘equality’ slogans on social media? Because it doesn’t make you one of those others? Because it’s the current year? Because reality never needs to be dealt with if one can simply forever declare themselves morally triumphant? Because Malthus? Because questioning the article of faith ‘equality’ is blasphemy? ..

  8. So you want to destroy Scomo? Then give yourself to the Moron Side. Your public capitulation will crash the housing market, which will in turn wreck the economy, which will in turn destroy the incumbent……

    Do what must be done, Lord HnH. Do not hesitate. Show no mercy. Only then will you be strong enough in the Moron Side to destroy Scomo…..

    • Interesting perspective, dumpling. You may even be right.

      We may even be close….. recently we saw the suggestion to buy a house. Perhaps soon we will see the suggestion to cap the migrant intake at a more “forgiving” 280,000?

    • DominicMEMBER

      If change doesn’t happen voluntarily then it will happen via a crisis. Given the intransigence of the two main parties to change (partly hostage as they are to boomers and big business), I suspect it will be the latter for us.

      • Not so long ago in a galaxy not so far away……

        There was only one catch and that was Catch-23, which specified that a concern for one’s repayment capacity in the face of default that was real and immediate was the process of a rational mind……. Dominic was financially irresponsible and could be barred from taking out a loan. All he had to do was ask to be assessed on his repayment capacity; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be deemed financially irresponsible and would have to take out more loans. Dominic would be crazy to take out more debt and sane if he didn’t, but if he were sane he had to take out more loans. If he took out more loans then he was crazy and didn’t have to, but if he didn’t want to he was deemed sane and had to…..

        ….. would you be able to survive Straya?

    • HnH is already waaay ahead of you, moite.

      He’ll be wearing his own poo hat, with relish, before you know it.

    • I agree that the “moron-side” of the population is winning big time. I asked a few of my colleagues (Asian Australians) and they’re all voted for Coalition for lower priority reasons like they don’t like Labor promoting same-sex marriage and anti-Christian message, or Labor wants to increase humanitarian refugee intakes etc…while they look blank when I told them about Labor contribution to force banking royal commission, Labor’s initiative to reform bad tax incentives in housing for their kids’ sake in the future, etc. So, yes the moron side is surely winning. I suspect the high immigration rate is secretly aimed to “dumbed-down” the intelligent level of the voting population so that politicians can get easy rides.

  9. Hey, I think I remember this post for 3 years ago (minus the tasty danish addition of course).

  10. Labor cutting immigration is like asking Ted Bundy to stop killing people. Never going to happen.

    • In the old days immigration helped Labor politically because immigrants worked in factories and were unionized. Now immigration hurts labor politically….

  11. SweeperMEMBER

    The lesson for Labor is that they have to attack and discredit the media so that they can get the message through to the people direct.
    It doesn’t matter what their policies are, unless they are neoliberal lite Murdoch will filter erverything into a bunch of lies.
    Bowen is not up to this job. The only person in Labor shadow cabinet who I can see firing back at the media is Kim Carr if he was given a HoR seat. He has a strong record on jobs, industry and manufacturing as well.
    A Murdoch divestment policy should be laid out and their should also be a review of reporting during the campaign. Deliberate falsification and echoing the lies of one side should be re-classed as electoral advertising with all the disclosure that entails. and then the attack on the media needs to be relentless. No question should be taken at face value and no journalist should be able to hide behind their stupid “journalist” PD.

    • Maybe. But the first thing for Labor is to thoroughly clean out the leadership cabal and replace them with people who understand the issues facing the people they want to vote for them. Am I the only person who sees total disconnect between the extreme sjw Labor left of Wong, Plibbers, Bowen and co and the real world wisdom of a labor foot soldier like Ermo on this site?

      • DominicMEMBER

        +1. The SJW / progressive set is not as big as people like to think and that is precisely who Labour has been aiming at all this time. The current leadership group really are as dumb as rocks. They are the LNP’s biggest and bestest weapon

      • SweeperMEMBER

        Yes I agree. Those three and Albo would not be good.
        Carr would be good because he has always stood by his principles even when unpopular (eg defending manufacturing), he also comes across as more authentic and has never got involved in identity guff and he is the only one I can see who would stand up to the media. Which should be the number one criteria tbh because they are out of control. Journalists need to be held to account.
        Anyway he could run on a credible platform of jobs and fairness and cut through the media’s lies.

      • HadronCollisionMEMBER

        I didn’t vote Labor (this time) and I think social justice issues are very important especially where there is nonsensical discrimination, like same sex marriage.

        Now that has been resolved, let us celebrate the happy stories, and move on.

        We can definitely take on SJI at the same time as the economy, jobs, transition to renewables, raising Newstart, defence, anti corruption etc. We can chew gum and walk at the same time, but it appears some in the Labor party cannot.

        So, like you said, SJI may not be as important as Labor thinks, but let us not think they’re not important to a lot of people.

      • SweeperMEMBER

        I disagree chewing gum is preventing Labor from walking.
        SJI have been a disaster for the labour movement. They have just created division and have redirected anger away from the real enemy.

  12. Laugh about Captain Getup, but Labor’s communications are garbage. In my electorate the welfare hotspot booths were spiting almost 50/50. Someone told me their dopey unemployed brother was voting ScoMo ’cause the Liberals are the better economic managers’ WTF?

    Labor doesn’t understand you’ve got 5 seconds between the next drag from the ciggie or swig from the beam can to get your message through. You accuse your opponent of something, then you let the media endlessly replay you saying it.

      • Pretty much. The liberals aren’t above hammering home the same dunderhead messages without shame, day in, day out. Labor thinks they’re pitching to their own when they’re already in the bag.

  13. ALP had this election won until Shorten and whom ever advised him went after Morrison and his religious beliefs.

    Younger generations may not be as attached to Christianity which is a foundation of the western world and that’s perfectly fine as people are allowed to believe what they want. But the ones who are religious are likely to be passionate. ALP and their soft stance on immigration and non Christian religion with their heavily left inclined stance have back fired.

    The media may make it seems that a big chunk of society is SJW minded. But for every SJW there is probably 1.5 to 2 people who are sick of their crap. Do research outside of the heavily scripted and biased mainstream media and there many pockets of society who are sick of whinging. It’s only natural. People have bigger struggles in life… But the media focuses on first world problems which SJWs tend to focus on.

    In the end Labour only need to be neutral to win this election but they went swung to the wrong direction.

    Also their negative gearing policy was always a scam it seems. Because they wanted to raise immigration and also introduced Visa policies for migrant elderlies which would help offset the negative hearing policies.

    In the end both major parties don’t want to lower house prices and make it affordable. They just want to appear like they are.

    • This is dumb…Australian’s don’t like religious types….especially happy clappers. I suggest you go an talk to some Australian’s outside your Pentecostal church.

      • I know many North Qlders who made religion the central theme of their vote. It might not be easy to grasp by city progressive corporatists, but then progressive corporatism is hard to grasp as well when all the work in your town has gone OS and there’s 30% youth unemployment etc.

      • Mate, I’m from the Riverina. I know a great many Australian’s from all walks of life, and what you say just doesn’t stack up.

      • Well you might need to meet a few more people. I personally found it surprising, but it is what it is. It wasn’t the hammer blow, but it’s part of the story.

      • Nat, you may see the issues as”religious types”. But in reality many people hold certain values and will react when these values are derided. And if you don’t think that mattered in the election, you are deluded.

    • I agree that this was likely a factor in the surprising support for the LNP.

      The Guardian did an article the other week about the Australian Christian Lobby. Apparently the ACL is becoming just as politically active as GetUp but prefers the more subtle approach of working through church services and prayer meetings. Just as it could be argued that conservative catholics tipped the balance in favour of Donald Trump in 2016 so could an activist group have influenced the outcome of our election by moblising hundreds of church groups across Australia to support one of their one.

  14. This thesis ignores the role of immigration for economic growth – reduce the rate as drastically as proposed and recession is almost certain. The entire economy is built on this growth – construction and education especially. I think best let things collapse of their own accord and reset from the ashes. .

  15. Torchwood1979

    Considering how the Greens and most of the Labor left are open borders nutters with an identity politics obsession I can’t see this happening. But I can live in hope, right?

  16. I know you really want the policies you crafted on housing affordability to be popular but in the marginal suburban belts they aren’t – plain and simple particularly the blue collar belt who stood to lose their jobs if housing crashes. The costs to construction jobs and blue collar skills far outweigh getting their house a little bit cheaper especially when many can afford houses out there anyway and its not seen as a big issue. Using Western Sydney as an example home ownership is much higher in Camden/Richmond (15% renter) than say Newtown (60%+ renter) hence the massive swings for these suburbs to the Liberals. Here in Sydney even safe Labor seats have really swung and are converting to Liberal seats. For the battler voter housing affordability will now be seen as a policy favoring inner city progressives looking to have their cake (live close) and eat it too (cheap house).

    • Housing (and mining) are the only two jobs that haven’t been offshored, because they can’t, and these were the areas tinkered with without a clear message on the benefits. Interesting point that home ownership is not really an issue for regions and outer rim where property is in decline, reasonably cheap, and part of the remaining ‘productive’ economy.

  17. Let’s just list the number of sectors that would be negatively impacted by a drastic cut in immigration numbers:

    the construction sector
    the farming sector
    the mining sector
    the retail sector
    the housing sector
    the financial sector
    the university sector
    the VET sector
    the schools sector (mostly high schools but now increasingly primary schools as well)
    the tourism sector
    the media and advertising sectors

    If Labor could not overcome the resistence to their negative gearing and franking credit changes and Rudd could not win out over BHP over some changes targetted at the mining sector what hope of disadvantaging all of those sectors by slashing immigration numbers.

    I seem to recall that MB was full-on supporters of the negative gearing and franking credit changes in the early days but as soon as judgement day came close they found reasons to fade into the background (what was again? oh yeah Labor was going to commit treason so on balance we better stick with scromo).

  18. Commentary like this shouldn’t be behind a paywall. It should be spread around so others can consider it. Let me know if there’s a way I can share stuff like this in the small groups I’m in contact with.