Where to now for long term investors of Telstra, page-11606

I'm not a ballet nut, but I'm glad Telstra devotes 0.0001% (I just made that up) of its budget to the fine arts, in particular, the joy of rhythmic movement. They've been associated with the ballet for over 30 years .... very little to do with Mr Penn really.

I just did a quick check on the recycling of wind turbine blades. It seems that they are difficult to recycle, but it's unfair to be spreading the suggestion that they're anything akin to asbestos - recycling however is a work in progress. My takeaway is that "wind turbines are inert and landfill-safe, unlike waste from some other renewables such as photovoltaic panels".

Let's hope they advance the science on that, but in the meantime I won't be blaming Telstra for the problems to date. That would be very silly.

And speaking of science, I wasn't aware that the CSIRO had adopted an anti-nuclear stance. Another yawning gap in the breadth of my understanding of that organisation. The point of your critique "pathetic taxpayer funded institute" eludes me though. Are you saying that taxpayer funded organisations shouldn't take stances? Perhaps you feel that stances should only be taken by privately owned outfits .... now there's an idea! No chance of inappropriately derived motivation or financial influence by outside sources. Yes, taxpayer funded organisations should only adopt beliefs which are in line with .... hmmm .... the government of the day? No, that won't work. Come to think of it, I don't mind the CSIRO taking a stance on something. They could even change their stance with the benefit of further research .... that's if anyone's doing any; the government funding is becoming increasingly hard to come by.