Thanks to Five Star Games and Sega be sure to enter for your chance to win a copy of Yakuza Kiwami!
Win! A Copy of Yakuza Kiwami: Steelbook Edition on PS4
Developer Volition's follow-up to the Saints Row series doesn't stray too far from the over-the-top and entertaining nature of the series.
Saturday Morning Saints - Agents of Mayhem Reviewed!
We review Episode 1 of Season 2 of Telltale's Batman series, "Enigma".
The Dark Knight Returns in Telltale's Batman - The Enemy Within
From Fullbright, the developer of Gone Home, comes Tacoma. A sci-fi interactive story quite unlike anything we've played before.
Tacoma Review - 2088: A Space Oddity
Political Thread 2.5 (Because we really haven't made any progre...
Vash
4457 posts
How did our country get to this point? The libs are as nutty as the tea party. Such a disconnect from reality in the confines of their comfy wealthy electorates.
We need to keep wealth & religion out of politics. To do this we should elect people from disadvantaged backgrounds who have sought an education.
The likes of Labor/Greens suit this.

See:
05:30pm 31/03/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24969 posts
How did our country get to this point? The libs are as nutty as the tea party. Such a disconnect from reality in the confines of their comfy wealthy electorates.
Think of a prissy little private school kid. The kind who constantly f**** things up yet never faces any criticism or consequences for their actions. Daddy's special little boy.

Now daddy's special little boy is going to copy the traits of daddy, so he's dumb, racist - a real one dimensional thinker. This person doesn't think for themselves, they're told how to think. This training doesn't happen overnight. It's a lifetime thing, so by the time it's fully engrained it's impossible to remove like a tick with titanium jaws, forever trapped in the mind of this well trained little doggy.

They've managed to bluff their way through private school. Pay To Win. Their prize a golden ticket to the TC Beirne School of Law. Congratulations Junior, daddy says, you made it all by yourself.

More bluffing, they pass. Into the real world they go. All of a sudden things are different. Criticism, attention - cruel mistresses of the limelight suddenly cast upon them showing every flaw like a black light on a cheap motel mattress. It's the classic hothouse flower. Able to flourish within the safe confines of daddy's bosom but shown hopelessly wanting when pulled screaming away from it.

So what does prissy little Junior do? Screams so loud he is brought back in. Into daddy's office safe from the realities and confusions of the real world. In daddy's office it's impossible to fail. No-one says any mean things. Except of course for daddy's staff, who on one hand enjoy the endless font of hilarious incompetence to make fun of, on the other suffer greatly working for a complete and utter boob.

The person I described is the personification of the LNP. A sheltered little miscreant. A dumb racist piece of garbage who is only interested in serving themselves. An incompetent yes-man surrounded rose petal who wilts in even the dimmest of sunlight. Both belong at the bottom of a drop toilet.
05:53pm 31/03/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17353 posts

How did our country get to this point? The libs are as nutty as the tea party. Such a disconnect from reality in the confines of their comfy wealthy electorates.


I'm coming to the conclusion that we came to this point by allowing countless reams of legislation to pass, slowly eroding our rights under Common Law, even eroding our rights of our constitution.
An example is the recent piece about mandatory data retention. Ironically part of this erosion comes from keeping religion out of politics, many of our original laws are based on 'God given rights'.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 18:50:05 31/Mar/15
06:48pm 31/03/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22509 posts
How did our country get to this point? The libs are as nutty as the tea party. Such a disconnect from reality in the confines of their comfy wealthy electorates.


We got to this point because everyone likes to receive freebies but no one likes to pay. Howard had a good thing going with his "Aussie battlers" pitch. The politics of envy was defeated for 10 years. But soon enough the seductive temptation of free money was used to allure voters with school payments, childcare rebates, superannuation concessions, Howard eventually diluted his own principles to stay elected. The concept of working to achieve personal freedom and lifestyle is now frowned upon, the concept of paying consume services like education and health is offensive. People who work are now considered a source of revenue for redistribution for government "nation-building projects" and "social programs".

Once the entire presumption to the way society and the economy interacts is upended the incentive to take risk and aspire are destroyed. Over a period of about 75 years Australia has managed to codify and tax every aspect of Australian life. Now the expectation is to earn the minimum required to get by, spend the excess, collect the aged pension and b**** the whole way about how hard done by one is. That's so Aussie it should be in a rap song. The intergenerational report predicts that over 80% of taxpayers will still be on the aged pension by 2050.

"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money." Margaret Thatcher.
08:40pm 31/03/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17355 posts

Now the expectation is to earn the minimum required to get by, spend the excess, collect the aged pension and b**** the whole way about how hard done by one is.


Is that your expectation infi? If it isn't yours, is it possible that it isn't the expectation of others? If it is possible that it isn't the expectation of others, than how can you make that statement?

I agree though, with your general context, socialism is a double edged sword and the public should be protected from it, as much as they should expect it.
09:13pm 31/03/15 Permalink
Vash
4459 posts
"The problem with capitalism is eventually the wealthy run out of people to sap money from " - Me.
09:17pm 31/03/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1978 posts
We got to this point because
Your whole post reeks of nothing but the same constant dribbling rhetorical diatribe of accusation about people stealing your hard earned money. F*** I take back every thing I've ever said to you in that PM not long back. You really are a c*** and I was wrong to think otherwise and that's all there is to it.
09:27pm 31/03/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22510 posts
"The problem with capitalism is eventually the wealthy run out of people to sap money from " - Me.


The problem with your quote is that capitalism has existed since the dawn of civilisation. Two parties entering into voluntary exchanges for persona benefit is what lifted humanity for the primordial ooze. Cooperation goes to the very essence of what it is to be human.

You may think I am a c*** SFB but I am the one in favour of people being free. You and all the Vash-types support government agencies controlling our lives and confisctaing wealth. You support bullying and it is disgraceful.
09:58pm 31/03/15 Permalink
Vash
4460 posts
there is no such thing as pure freedom. People are then free to take advantage of others. example, the wealthy. Unregulated free markets allow the wealthy business owners to have no minimum wages, and exploit the less well off.
Our standard of living is because of socialism policy, not because of pure free market capitalism.
10:08pm 31/03/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10441 posts
Extremists are always extreme.
All things in moderation.
10:29pm 31/03/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17356 posts
You can't be free from the person with the biggest stick, that is true.

Is it just as fair that someone gains a benefit because someone else threatened another with a stick?

Our standard of living is because of socialism policy, not because of pure free market capitalism.


No, it's because of both. Too much socialism reduces overall living standards as there is less to go around because there is less work being done.

An example, if we right now split the worlds wealth equally among everyone I guarantee that our standard of living will reduce.
11:52pm 31/03/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11637 posts
there is no such thing as pure freedom. People are then free to take advantage of others.


No, thats Anarchy.

Freedom is not a Utopia for the individual, it is the setting Free of Man from other Men.

11:53pm 31/03/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1979 posts
You and all the Vash-types support government agencies controlling our lives and confisctaing wealth. You support bullying and it is disgraceful.
What a load of delusional clatrap you have concluded from my stance. Really, it's dumbfounding. I am now so sure you are a one-dimensional cardboard cut-out of a human being.

You seem to have the f*****g idea you should be considered worthy wholly and solely due to your wealth and if people don't agree then they're some poor c*** wanting to steal from you and the rich. Sorry sonny, and I definitely use that in the most patronising way imaginable, I can tell you I'm no f*****g lazy panzy at making money and working f*****g hard. I'm more than sure after working in mountains, jungles and deserts across this world, I've worked harder than you ever have or ever could while sitting in the public service behind a desk or in daddy's business in his executive chair under the illusion you earned it.

You also show no idea that I am one of those f*****g rich c**** you say I'm stealing from, numbf***. I pay an absolute fortune in tax and I don't whine, whinge, scream or f*****g complain about it cause I live f*****g awesomely, better than many, in a f*****g awesome country. I'm not a c*** that thinks I should keep everything for myself or be the focus and centre of societies attention over and above every other human being on the planet. I'm happy to share, I leave greed for c**** like you. Altruistic, absof*****glutely but compared to your constant paranoia that "people are stealing from me" I'm sure I'm the better for it too.

I donate to every cause I feel passionate about, I spend very small proportion of my earnings on myself, I spend it mainly on people and issues I care for or care about and I like to consider myself first and foremost a generous person who firmly believes in the humanity of the human species. And yes, I put my money where my mouth is so don't bother wasting my time with some glib comment like "if you want it, you pay for it if it means so much to you, why should everyone else". Sorry sonny, this is where you and I differ enormously and you get all things wrong from being such a wuss "I do it cause it means way more and so much to them", everything I do in my life is not all about me and secondly "why should everyone else" is cause everyone can and should as everyone helps make this country the f*****g great place it is and no one deserves it more than any other and I f*****g hate seeing people like you who don't care people live in poverty as long as it's to your benefit or doesn't cost you.

There are many of us wealthier people around this planet that seriously can and want to make a difference to all people, not just our rich friends and associates (and don't use their relationships/associations to further themselves like some others). All were not given a wealthy lifestyle/career by their parents and no one begrudges the ones that have/were but what gets up my goat is c*******s like you then turn around and have the audacity to claim some sense of superiority and should be the most "heard" person in society and everyone else is just trying to steal my money.

You know, you're so swarmy with your glib rhetoric you've become the ultimate boor. In my view you come across with a world view equal to an uninformed, uneducated, unappealing child with little life experience much like our current government. You both come across, entirely clueless.

You remind me so much of Bill O'Reilly on Fox, whenever Bill shows a clip of George Soros to rail against him and his ideas of social justice, Bill places a title tag under George's clip stating "George Soros - Billionaire Communist". It's so juvenile and so, well, pathetic.

The differences between rich people and greedy c**** is stark, e.g. Twiggy Forrest and Gina Rinehart - with Twiggy I have nothing but the utmost respect as he uses his wealth to better the lives of many whereas Gina is just a greedy fat c*** who can't even share her enormous wealth equally with her kids for Christ sake. I know which one you resemble and it isn't Twiggy Forrest.
12:51am 01/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39233 posts
You also show no idea that I am one of those f*****g rich c**** you say I'm stealing from, numbf***. I pay an absolute fortune in tax and I don't whine, whinge, scream or f*****g complain about it cause I live f*****g awesomely, better than many, in a f*****g awesome country.


thats the crux of it right there sfb old chum.

infi is a greedy mofo who thinks he shouldnt have to pay tax and contribute to our awesome society. he gets mad that those poor people having such an awesome time are doing so on his money.

what a c***.

i couldnt agree with you more, im happy to pay my taxes, i also live a very comfortable life, and im extremely thankful, i have a good job and can provide for my family so that we can live a nice life. i am extremely thankful, im not one of these poor families who aren't doing so well and i want my taxes to help them out, because i would hope im not a c***.
06:30am 01/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1639 posts
Yes Twiggy Forest is so generous he wants to form an iron ore cartel.

He might not be as revolting as Rinehart, but I wouldn't go ringing the charity bells too hard on his behalf, he still has $5b or so, he could happily give away 90% of that and still have enough to live out his days in opulence.

i couldnt agree with you more, im happy to pay my taxes


Does that include the taxes that will be used to monitor all your internet activity? How about the ones used to torture children on manus island?

infi might be a bit hysterical when it comes to tax but the nugget of truth is in there.

Taxes are coerced. You shouldn't coerce money out of people unless you have damn good reason. The government doesn't always have one.
07:19am 01/04/15 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
20595 posts
i couldnt agree with you more, im happy to pay my taxes


Really? Is that why you claim the 5000km that you never drive for work every year as well as all the other little bulls*** tax deductions i'm sure you claim

Obviously not that happy about it
08:07am 01/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39236 posts
i drive to a lot of client sites bro
08:26am 01/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1668 posts

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-state-election-2015-key-union-leader-tim-ayres-blasts-the-crisis-of-policy-in-labor-campaign-20150331-1mbvgp.html

lols, labor made themselves nearly indistinguishable from the liberals with regards to progressive policy, now claiming that it's a crisis because people are voting green instead.
10:38am 01/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17357 posts

Socioeconomic disparities are associated with differences in cognitive development. The extent to which this translates to disparities in brain structure is unclear. We investigated relationships between socioeconomic factors and brain morphometry, independently of genetic ancestry, among a cohort of 1,099 typically developing individuals between 3 and 20 years of age. Income was logarithmically associated with brain surface area. Among children from lower income families, small differences in income were associated with relatively large differences in surface area, whereas, among children from higher income families, similar income increments were associated with smaller differences in surface area. These relationships were most prominent in regions supporting language, reading, executive functions and spatial skills; surface area mediated socioeconomic differences in certain neurocognitive abilities. These data imply that income relates most strongly to brain structure among the most disadvantaged children.


Taken from:
Nature Neuroscience
Family income, parental education and brain structure in children and adolescents

In other words there a a variety of mechanisms in place that show the Cycle of Poverty is an actual thing and not made up. I would argue it is the duty of the not-poor to help those that are poor, after all cooperation is what life is about.

Given how nasty the cycle of poverty can be, it would be a huge risk to remove all social welfare and rely on private funding sources to bridge the gap. In this case the current inefficient redeployment of wealth is the probable better choice.

So would it not be best to instead of fighting against the welfare of the disadvantaged, to fight for a more efficient system of wealth redeployment? BasicCard for instance, is set to be a rather expensive measure in order to control how people spend their money (which is a rather non-libertarian thing).

10:45am 01/04/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
15999 posts
i drive to a lot of client sites bro

About 100km of driving every week, eh? Road warrior!
10:49am 01/04/15 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
20598 posts
i drive to a lot of client sites bro


on the bike you ride to work every day?

and lets face it, as if they are going to let you near clients... lets be real here
12:51pm 01/04/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2189 posts
I really wish you people would stop calling others c**** because they aren't that useful.
12:53pm 01/04/15 Permalink
taggs
6380 posts
Really? Is that why you claim the 5000km that you never drive for work every year as well as all the other little bulls*** tax deductions i'm sure you claim

Obviously not that happy about it


Hah
01:57pm 01/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39241 posts
and lets face it, as if they are going to let you near clients... lets be real here


clients love me bro. they are always excited to talk to an IT person not wearing a propeller hat.
01:57pm 01/04/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16000 posts
on the bike you ride to work every day?

hahahhahahaah
02:03pm 01/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
943 posts
This post has been removed.
Reason: Dumb
Send Private Message
11:12pm 01/04/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10443 posts
Don't you live in Mexico ... err ... Columbia (I mean your sports teams do drugs) ...

Politicians are human, they represent the populace, apparently women abusing males are common ... therefore ...
11:28pm 01/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17358 posts

The so called "poor" would be better off, if they weren't taxed.



I'm assuming you mean if everyone wasn't taxed. Explain how.
08:31am 02/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1226 posts


I'm assuming you mean if everyone wasn't taxed. Explain how.


No, I clearly said "the so called poor" unless you are implying all Australians are poor since you said "I'm assuming you mean everyone?". You have a major tendency to imagine things that have been written, that haven't.

It's obvious how the "poor" would benefit from not being taxed.
11:51am 02/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17359 posts
Sorry, your comment didn't make sense to me.
What are the 'so called poor'?

If you mean the people who are living under the international recognized poverty line of 50% of median income for Australia. Then consider this: In 2012 this line for a single adult was $400/week. Which is $20800 anually. The current Tax Free Threshold is $18,200, So the remaining $2600 is taxed, a total of $494.

I agree with you, people under the Poverty Line shouldn't be taxed, so to keep it fair for everyone increase the Tax Free Threshold to $20800, reviewed every 3 years to match the poverty line.

Of course it is made more complicated when including house hold income, etc, instead of just a single adult.



last edited by Tollaz0r! at 12:43:44 02/Apr/15
12:34pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16002 posts
You guys reckon that if nobody spoke to it for a month would it just f*** off?
01:07pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1669 posts
Remember the time the liberals brought down the tax free threshold from 18k to 6k for low income earners?

That will teach those leaners.
01:08pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Vash
4462 posts
The only true leaners are the wealthy. When you have the means to live very comfortably and still take welfare via family tax benefits, pensions and super concessions.
Reduce welfare access to those who need it to survive, and the streets will fill with more homeless.

We can wipe out our deficit with ease if we fight this age of entitlement to the wealthy.
01:21pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17360 posts
So where is the cut-off Vash? At what point, exactly, are you deemed wealthy an any form of welfare should be inaccessible to you. 150% of the median income for Australia (exact opposite of poor)?
That is around about $87,000, if it was based on the full time wage it would be $112,000ish.

02:27pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Vash
4463 posts
something like this toll for budget repair

http://i.imgur.com/xx2douQ.jpg

also a combined household income of over 200k would seem reasonable to not be eligible for welfare. And pensions, multi millions in assets.
04:31pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17361 posts
FFS. Look at that piece of trash:

'Liberals Cruel Budget cuts'
'free ride for to Big Business'
'Abbott brutal budget cuts'
'Abbott's most brutal budget cuts'


Use emotive words more, maybe that will make your argument more valid. Liberals are just as bad for it, as are Labor.
05:02pm 02/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1227 posts
Sorry, your comment didn't make sense to me.
What are the 'so called poor'?

If you mean the people who are living under the international recognized poverty line of 50% of median income for Australia. Then consider this: In 2012 this line for a single adult was $400/week. Which is $20800 anually. The current Tax Free Threshold is $18,200, So the remaining $2600 is taxed, a total of $494.

I agree with you, people under the Poverty Line shouldn't be taxed, so to keep it fair for everyone increase the Tax Free Threshold to $20800, reviewed every 3 years to match the poverty line.

Of course it is made more complicated when including house hold income, etc, instead of just a single adult.



last edited by Tollaz0r! at 12:43:44 02/Apr/15


Well according to the Greens and Labor rhetoric, the majority of Australians are desperately poor but in reality it's a very very small minority who would earn only $20000 a year or less, but the Greens/labor still pretend that people earning between 20,000 - 40,000 are poor hence why I said "the so called poor"

I agree though, tax free threshold should be raised to atleast $30,000. People will be better off and won't need handouts if they get to keep their own money.
You guys reckon that if nobody spoke to it for a month would it just f*** off?


I haven't posted on herein a month until yesterday, so no, it won't f*** off ;)

FFS. Look at that piece of trash:

'Liberals Cruel Budget cuts'
'free ride for to Big Business'
'Abbott brutal budget cuts'
'Abbott's most brutal budget cuts'


Use emotive words more, maybe that will make your argument more valid. Liberals are just as bad for it, as are Labor.


It's a classic Greens hyperbolic rhetoric tactic. Reducing over spending and cutting hand outs is apparently "brutal" and "cruel" yet attacking business and making them less competitive resulting in less jobs and less investment thus ruining people's livelyhoods ISNT lol.
05:02pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Vash
4464 posts
except those are handouts to already rich business... take from people who can't afford it, or take from people who can?
05:29pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17362 posts
O no no, it's not just a classic Green hyperbole, all the parties partake in it. Liberals are certainly no exception. It is behaviour that should be utterly stricken from political debate both in these memes and in parliament.
05:33pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Vash
4465 posts
Also, allowing more wealth into the hands of the poor is a far greater benefit to the economy & jobs creation than cutting taxes & giving money to big business.
05:39pm 02/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1228 posts
Government spending DOESNT create new jobs. Once the spending stops, the jobs go.

On the other hand, business being able to thrive without high taxation creats long term stable jobs.
05:43pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Vash
4466 posts
except a business can only thrive when more people have money. cut taxes to business, and that just gives them a better bottom line, it doesn't create jobs.
Give more wealth to consumers, and they will buy more services/products from business, creating demand for more job creation.

Right now consumer confidence is at an all time low thanks to the government cutting. That's what austerity does.
05:55pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1980 posts
Government spending DOESNT create new jobs. Once the spending stops, the jobs go.

On the other hand, business being able to thrive without high taxation creats long term stable jobs.
Tell that to the Japanese, South Koreans, taiwanese, Singaporeans, Malaysians, Chinese,Indians you'll be laughed at. Where do you think the majority of their successful businesses began or were funded and are still here today as megacorporations. Seems you again are showing little in having a clue especially in world affairs and the way an economy can operate.
06:05pm 02/04/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2190 posts
Tell that to the Japanese, South Koreans, taiwanese, Singaporeans, Malaysians, Chinese,Indians you'll be laughed at. Where do you think the majority of their successful businesses began or were funded and are still here today as megacorporations. Seems you again are showing little in having a clue especially in world affairs and the way an economy can operate.


He equates "Government spending" with "building roads".

and a meme for easter;

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/11120084_764161483680906_6786821214470246934_n.jpg?oh=631bd25adacf711462c26a3b0f46ba2c&oe=55BC03D5&__gda__=1436228323_bb1c4f2714845291205a1b3e1703619a
06:20pm 02/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1229 posts
except a business can only thrive when more people have money. cut taxes to business, and that just gives them a better bottom line, it doesn't create jobs.
Give more wealth to consumers, and they will buy more services/products from business, creating demand for more job creation.

Right now consumer confidence is at an all time low thanks to the government cutting. That's what austerity does.


And how do people have more money? By being employed by a business that is healthy and doing well. It's a circle. If business does well, everyone does well, if everyone does well, business does well.

Your problem is you have a warped reality where you think government creates economic activity and creates wealth - it doesn't.



He equates "Government spending" with "building roads".


No? I haven't posted that before.

You, and other Vash types equate government spending with creating jobs and wealth however.
08:51pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17363 posts

On the other hand, business being able to thrive without high taxation creats long term stable jobs.


You could also say business able to thrive with high taxation create long term, even more stable jobs. So going by that logic, we should be taxing high!

Making new extra taxes for business is not the answer and neither is taxing the less well off more. Not until various tax breaks and dodges are fixed up at least.

GST increases, along with an increase to the Tax Free Threshold should seriously be considered, a slight bump up in welfare, of the same rate as the increase of GST should be considered too. A possible steeper drop off for welfare should be considered to balance with these changes too. Whilst they are at it feminine hygiene products such as Tampons and Pads should be GST free or greatly reduced, the UK has them at 5% whilst their VAT is at 17.5%.

Tax Smarter, not more.

08:52pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39246 posts
i think we should jsut tax poor people, up the gst!!!!!
09:00pm 02/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22514 posts
Poor people dont pay any tax. 80% of Australian households pay zero net tax after chunky handouts and rebates.
09:32pm 02/04/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2191 posts


No? I haven't posted that before.


Yes, you have. You cheered loudly when Abbott got elected meaning that road would get built.

You, and other Vash types equate government spending with creating jobs and wealth however.


No, government spending creates demand, demand creates jobs, jobs create wealth.

And yes the more low paying jobs there are the more money I make because they all buy what my investments sell. Giving money to the rich doesn't make me wealthier.
09:43pm 02/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17364 posts

80% of Australian households pay zero net tax after chunky handouts and rebates.


80% that seems a bit high?
01:07am 03/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22515 posts

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/no-the-rich-dont-pay-a-fair-share-of-tax-they-pay-all-of-it/story-e6frgd0x-1226841174461

Put simply, only the top fifth of households paid any tax. The bottom 6.9 million households, while often incurring income tax liabilities and regularly paying GST, received more in cash welfare and services than they paid in tax.



That's a bit of a f*** you, haven't got mine. Just jack up the tax on the rich so I can enjoy my lifestyle.
09:23am 03/04/15 Permalink
taggs
6381 posts
No, government spending creates demand, demand creates jobs, jobs create wealth.


If this were correct then the logical thing to do would be to raise government spending to 100% of gdp because in HJ's fantasy world where real world macreconomics doesn't apply this would create more wealth.
12:13pm 03/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1671 posts
12:21pm 03/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22516 posts
When you have high marginal tax rates people will go to amazing lengths to LEGALLY reduce their tax bill. If a person gets robbed multiple times of course they will increase their home security.

The government is the biggest thief going around.
12:42pm 03/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1230 posts
i think we should jsut tax poor people, up the gst!!!!!


It's funny because so called "poor" people would actually be better off with a higher GST and a lower income tax. They would have more control over how much they are taxed via their spending decisions.
01:53pm 03/04/15 Permalink
Vash
4467 posts
except the silliness of this system is that you need to increase incentive for people to buy useless s***. increasing GST will hurt consumer confidence more so.

Heh taxation is theft now. keep the lols coming infi.
01:57pm 03/04/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1982 posts


It's funny because so called "poor" people would actually be better off with a higher GST and a lower income tax. They would have more control over how much they are taxed via their spending decisions.
Yeah, cause when the fridge breaks down or the washing machine or the hot water system or they can't afford the utilities bill due to higher costs is certainly being better off. You seem to have the most dumbfounding idea that poor people actually have choices on where they spend their money. Here's a clue, they don't, necessities are called necessities for a reason drongo and even poor people need them to maintain a home and family (something you obviously have no clue as to what that entails). You also seem to think living off Mum &/or Dad in a privileged area gives you some insight into how others on the opposite divide live or should live. Here's another revelation, you don't.
02:30pm 03/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24970 posts
Watching our precious little basement boy come back from his one month shame break with a renewed vigour is kind of inspiring to me. Looking forward to listening to his desperate flailings until his father figure is booted out of parliament and then we have three years of brool tears to look forward to. Gonna be awesome.
02:43pm 03/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22518 posts
Yeah, cause when the fridge breaks down or the washing machine or the hot water system or they can't afford the utilities bill due to higher costs is certainly being better off. You seem to have the most dumbfounding idea that poor people actually have choices on where they spend their money. Here's a clue, they don't, necessities are called necessities for a reason drongo and even poor people need them to maintain a home and family (something you obviously have no clue as to what that entails). You also seem to think living off Mum &/or Dad in a privileged area gives you some insight into how others on the opposite divide live or should live. Here's another revelation, you don't.


Only problem with your rant is that Australia's consumption tax is pretty much the lowest in the OECD. So that's a big fail.
03:42pm 03/04/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1983 posts


Only problem with your rant is that Australia's consumption tax is pretty much the lowest in the OECD. So that's a big fail.
Wow, that's really critical thinking there. I'll give you a F-.
04:15pm 03/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17366 posts

Only problem with your rant is that Australia's consumption tax is pretty much the lowest in the OECD. So that's a big fail.


That doesn't change the assumed facts of SFB's statement. To paraphrase, he said that in Australia the 'poor' ('they') are already struggling to pay their day-to-day expenses. Regardless that our consumption tax is close to the lowest in the OECD. To increase GST will most certainly affect the poor far more substantially than you or I.

This is why I stated above, that it is only fair that if the GST is raised, than welfare has to be raised to compensate. At the same time Tax Free Threshold (TFT)should be increased, so both work in conjunction to help relieve pressure from the poor. Unfortunately raising the TFT will only benefit those that are currently working and earning a little above the TFT. TFT should be raised to the International Standard Poverty Line (50% median income of a population). All welfare should cease for those earning 150% median income.

Hopefully the raise in GST, with a welfare and TFT offset will be a net gain for tax revenue, which I'm sure it would.

edit: To support SFB's claim. I am a member of a Facebook page for people 'surviving' on centrelink. Every couple of days there is a new post about how X person is having a real hard time doing what they do. There are plenty of people trying to help others with discussion and ideas of how to save/best spend their money. Not one of them has been a discussion on how to get the latest phone or new Big Screen TV.
These people literally have no left over money to spend, sadly there are stories were people are forced to use credit to pay for electricity or other essential service, further complicating their position. They know that using credit will make it worse, but at the time they do it they feel they have no other choice.

A lot of those ideas would no longer work with a BasicsCard and these people would end up having to spend more for a similar level of living if forced to use a BasicsCard.
I wonder how many MP's, those that make these policies, spend time reading stories these people write.

It's not all roses on centrelink, and not everyone of those 600,000 odd people on centrelink paymetns can get 1 of those 140,000 available jobs (those numbers are old now).

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 16:59:37 03/Apr/15
04:52pm 03/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1231 posts
I think it all goes back to the hyperbolic rhetoric that there are large amounts of "poor" in Australia that are struggling to survive while in reality Australians per capita are some of the richest people in the world and I doubt that these mystical desperately "poor" people would even make up 2% of the population.

The "WONT SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE POOR" froth from Labor/Greensabiut everything is just ridiculous.
05:08pm 03/04/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11638 posts
05:37pm 03/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17367 posts
I would argue that every independent or family living solely on centrelink is most certainly poor and struggling to survive, survive being the ability to pay for all necessities.

Also, even if the amount of people struggling were low, that is no excuse to ignore them.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 17:42:29 03/Apr/15
05:38pm 03/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17368 posts
The S.A changes to penalty rates were fair imo. A reduction in weekend penalty rates, in exchange for an increase in minimum wage and guaranteed 3% / annum pay rise. That's how you compromise.
05:44pm 03/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1232 posts
It really sucks that nothing is open on public holidays like Good Friday because businesses simply can't afford to open due to over the top penalty rates...
12:23am 04/04/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1984 posts
It really sucks that nothing is open on public holidays like Good Friday because businesses simply can't afford to open due to over the top penalty rates...
They don't open on Good Friday cause it's an observed religious public holiday and has been legislated as such barring nearly all businesses except essential services from opening, not because of penalty rates.
12:57am 04/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24976 posts
It really sucks that nothing is open on public holidays like Good Friday because businesses simply can't afford to open due to over the top penalty rates...
When you get a job you'll find out why penalty rates exist bro. Public holidays are a good chance to catch up with mates and socialise.... oh wait, you've never done that and never will because you're a pathetic little cretin whiling away his days till he dies cold and alone.
01:04am 04/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1233 posts
They don't open on Good Friday cause it's an observed religious public holiday and has been legislated as such barring nearly all businesses except essential services from opening, not because of penalty rates.


Not true at all. I drove all the way to Carnegie today in inner-city Melbourne and there were a lot of shops open due to it being a very multi-cultural area thus not observing the holiday, but a lot of other shops still closed because they simply can't afford to open.

It's the same story with any public holiday. Businesses want to open, but simply can't. Greedy unions would rather their workers get nothing than get a decent, fair pay for public holiday work.
01:14am 04/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24977 posts
Holy s***, literally nothing but bulls*** comes out of your mouth you know that?

edit: like, you contradict yourself really badly because you're just so dumb

It really sucks that nothing is open on public holidays like Good Friday because businesses simply can't afford to open due to over the top penalty rates...


and then

I drove all the way to Carnegie today in inner-city Melbourne and there were a lot of shops open


These are the sort of mistakes a really dumb and ineffective liar makes. It also reminds me of the time you proudly proclaimed you don't have a license or a car but I guess you got your s*** together and obtained both because you just have so many places to go don't you?
01:18am 04/04/15 Permalink
Dazhel
Gold Coast, Queensland
6701 posts
Not true at all. I drove all the way to Carnegie today in inner-city Melbourne and there were a lot of shops open due to it being a very multi-cultural area thus not observing the holiday, but a lot of other shops still closed because they simply can't afford to open.


Perhaps those that own the closed shops should ask those that own the shops that are open how they can possibly manage to open on the days with such oppressive penalty rates.

edit: yeah...heh what fpot's edit says.

If I saw one of those signs that Faceman posted in the window of an actual business it'd make me feel sorry for the staff that would have to put up with such a passive aggressive a******* of a boss.
01:33am 04/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1672 posts
All my local cafes were open yesterday. They must have been going bankrupt having to pay their staff so much.

Actually no because they were packed out because it was a public holiday and other people weren't working so their turnover was higher.
09:13am 04/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1234 posts


Perhaps those that own the closed shops should ask those that own the shops that are open how they can possibly manage to open on the days with such oppressive penalty rates.


I did ask at the sushi shop i was at, the guy told me that they just get their family to work so that they can pay them a lower amount or nothing under the table which was what he was doing as well.

Seems like the logical thing to do when you are facing up to $50 an hour.
09:45am 04/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22521 posts
The small businesses that open are paying their staff cash in hand and most certainly not double time.
09:58am 04/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1673 posts
If penalty rates are such a problem for the food service industry, why is their sector growing faster than other businesses?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CBsu7X6UoAAyaUf.jpg
11:20am 04/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22522 posts
1. Because the employers are not actually paying the penalty rates.

2. They are employing family members or other people happy to receive cash.

3. A business can open and trade 5 days a week.
11:45am 04/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17371 posts

The small businesses that open are paying their staff cash in hand and most certainly not double time.


How do you know this? You may know of 1 or 2 businesses are doing that. You don't they all are, you are assuming. So your sentence should say "I assume the small business..."
12:02pm 04/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1235 posts
except the silliness of this system is that you need to increase incentive for people to buy useless s***. increasing GST will hurt consumer confidence more so.

Heh taxation is theft now. keep the lols coming infi.


I think the best way to reduce Australians tax burden would be to shrink the size of government. A smaller more lean government means less tax everyone has to pay which means more money people get to keep in their pockets.

You are under an illusion that bigger governments means wealth creation when in reality the government is stripping the wealth from tax payers, not creating it.

If penalty rates are such a problem for the food service industry, why is their sector growing faster than other businesses?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CBsu7X6UoAAyaUf.jpg


We don't have public holidays every week..... The argument isn't "Businesses are going bankrupt because of penalty rates" Please read carefully.
01:03pm 04/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17372 posts

The Reclaim Australia group said its rallies are a public response to Islamic extremism and a protest against minority groups who want to change the Australian cultural identity.


I don't see these people having a massive whinge about NetFlix and Australia being hammered by American Culture through music, video, literature, etc.

This is quite clearly against Islam.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 15:13:55 04/Apr/15
03:05pm 04/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1236 posts
Was just reading about this protest before, it's absolute comedy gold.

You have far-left wing Marxists, defending Islamic Fascism which is being attacked by far-right Ultra-nationalists all of which are authoritarian ideologies.

Many lulz to be had here.
03:18pm 04/04/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7130 posts
^ Yeah I was thinking the same thing!

Crazy world we live in.
05:04pm 04/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24978 posts
Watching infi and brool bumble through their own lies and cheerlead for each other is a particularly tasty vintage of schadenfreude.
05:13pm 04/04/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2192 posts
Was just reading about this protest before, it's absolute comedy gold.

You have far-left wing Marxists, defending Islamic Fascism which is being attacked by far-right Ultra-nationalists all of which are authoritarian ideologies.

Many lulz to be had here.
https://scontent-nrt.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/s480x480/10007010_806826062733391_3074170546759786879_n.jpg?oh=378fa57007ac2295f0a34d35524bdf8a&oe=55AFB9AB


and a meme that is more political;

https://scontent-nrt.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtf1/v/t1.0-9/11112850_10205974331893414_7164370387701548019_n.jpg?oh=a3e6df0c29a92d7ec77ee41f23575941&oe=55B71A67
05:45pm 04/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1237 posts
Just saw on channel 7 news Marxists burning the aussie flag. That will teach those racists!
06:05pm 04/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22523 posts
If you did that in ISIL land you would be shot or hung or blown up with an RPG or forced to wear an IED on a bus or in a mosque.

The religion of peace.
06:12pm 04/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17375 posts
Went to look at a news article:

Racism Australia clashes with opposing Socialist Party.


I did a double take of that and it is actually Reclaim Australia. Seems I'm now automatically translating Reclaim Australia as Racism Australia. I'm probably not far off lol.

Section 116 of our Constitution:


Commonwealth not to legislate in respect of religion

The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.



Seems that those people wanting the Burka banned whilst protesting against Islam are wanting legislation created to repress a religion.

I would argue that going against our Constitution is very much Un-Australian.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 18:18:54 04/Apr/15
06:14pm 04/04/15 Permalink
Eorl
AusGamers Editor
Brisbane, Queensland
14607 posts
Probably time to make a new thread, though this time include some useful links/info for both sides of the field.
06:24pm 04/04/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16009 posts
http://i.imgur.com/q0ZgrcR.png

These people all look SO F*****G HAPPY

Probably time to make a new thread, though this time include some useful links/info for both sides of the field.


Hahah you must be new
06:31pm 04/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1238 posts
Probably time to make a new thread, though this time include some useful links/info for both sides of the field.


Both sides of the field? There isn't "two sides" here lol.
06:34pm 04/04/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7131 posts
Is Islam technically a religion or is it a medieval fascist ideology (sharia) wrapped up in a religion?

I mean it is ok to oppose most "ism's" like Fascism, Communism, Capitalism etc etc but because Islamism(Sharia) is associated with a "religion" known as Islam apparently it is bad to oppose it? And are you a bigot to oppose Sharia?

I'm confused?
06:52pm 04/04/15 Permalink
Eorl
AusGamers Editor
Brisbane, Queensland
14609 posts
http://i.imgur.com/q0ZgrcR.png

These people all look SO F*****G HAPPY



Hahah you must be new


Both sides of the field? There isn't "two sides" here lol.

Equality when discussing both sides isn't too much to ask, is it? I hate most of the things coming out of our current government but I'll give them the time of the day to say their piece. It'll typically be a bad piece but nonetheless courtesy is nice.
07:16pm 04/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24980 posts
The problem with this is that the conservative side of politics on this forum don't bring anything to the table. It's true, I personally don't either but that's because about two or so years ago I realised that I'm pretty much dealing with children here. They don't know how to think critically, they don't know how to think independently, they don't understand what constitutes credible evidence when presenting an argument, they don't know how to argue against credible evidence when confronted with it. Their entire thought process when presented with any sort of information is - does this conform with my predetermined world view, or does it go against it? If it's the former it is gospel and anyone who goes against it is a fool. If it's the latter then it's propaganda and part of some sort of left-wing conspiracy.

When someone finally arrives on this olde forum with conservative views who can actually form an argument and think for themselves a bit we might have something. For now we have nothing but a couple of insult pinatas who are dumb beyond belief.
04:54am 05/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22524 posts
^^wrapped up in a superiority complex where if the majority do not agree with him, they must be wrong.
09:12am 05/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1239 posts
So the campaign is successful, they sit on weekends and public holidays and then we have to pay them extra and they run out of things to discuss in parliament during the week.

Good work.


Equality when discussing both sides isn't too much to ask, is it? I hate most of the things coming out of our current government but I'll give them the time of the day to say their piece. It'll typically be a bad piece but nonetheless courtesy is nice.


But this isn't a Labor vs Liberal discussion. There isn't two sides. You have greens supporters, labor supporters, liberal supporters, people who support none of them, full blown communist Vash types.
12:28pm 05/04/15 Permalink
slyin
Brisbane, Queensland
157 posts
they run out of things to discuss in parliament during the week.


if they ever ran out of things to talk about, then Australia would just be a perfect f*****g country wouldnt it??? so thats a good thing.

STOP POSTING
05:00pm 05/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39249 posts
as a rich person, im angry that poor people ask for moar money for their menial jobs, its an outrage!!!!! (to a rich person)
05:36pm 05/04/15 Permalink
koopz
Brisbane, Queensland
10684 posts
sorry... I only just replied here as I noticed that Spook made the last comment.

Spook - you've no doubt tested the network that Computer Alliance has in place. or not... maybe it was just another ramp my little brother loves to do.


shall I announce the job now Geoffrey?



if you don't mind - we're focussing on David Broughty currenty

last edited by koopz at 01:21:10 07/Apr/15
01:17am 07/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39254 posts
oh koopz :(
06:31am 07/04/15 Permalink
Persay
Brisbane, Queensland
7830 posts
Politicians work errrday doing community events etc anyway
06:39am 07/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17385 posts
I swear Koopz has read too many cryptic crosswords and now that is the only way he talks.
08:57am 07/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24990 posts

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/07/nauru-staff-call-for-closure-of-asylum-centre-and-royal-commission-into-abuse

The federal government has been aware of physical and sexual abuse of asylum seekers on Nauru for more than a year but failed to take appropriate action, workers from the detention centre have alleged.


Scott Morrison belongs in jail. Really.
06:16pm 07/04/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2194 posts
08:34pm 07/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1244 posts
I support a Royal Commission into the rampant physical/sexual abuse in detention. I would love to know why large numbers of detainees who are apparently just "poor" "innocent" and "desperate" people looking for a break are engaging in such activities
01:08am 08/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1640 posts
I love how Brool can "read" and isn't a complete "dolt" or "moron"

from the article

The incidents it highlights include one from November 2013 in which a boy was sexually assaulted by a detention centre employee

Just like when you said that save the children were coaching self harm, you are now silent on the fact that they have been completely cleared of the allegations.

It was so nice when he couldn't post.

You seriously don't have a brain do you, your just a computer simulation of an LNP (complete with realistic "I don't vote LNP" sub routines).
07:59am 08/04/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7132 posts
The Greens really need to get their s*** together if they want the average Australian to take them seriously.
08:18am 08/04/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7133 posts
08:57am 08/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24992 posts
I support a Royal Commission into the rampant physical/sexual abuse in detention. I would love to know why large numbers of detainees who are apparently just "poor" "innocent" and "desperate" people looking for a break are engaging in such activities
A normal person would feel shame after saying something this dumb but you're well beyond shame aren't you brool?
10:50am 08/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1246 posts
The Greens really need to get their s*** together if they want the average Australian to take them seriously.


God help us all if they do. The Greens are good at campaigning, but voters have seen through their bulls*** to what they really are. A bunch of far-left wing extremists with backward and failed economic policies

I love how Brool can "read" and isn't a complete "dolt" or "moron"

from the article


Just like when you said that save the children were coaching self harm, you are now silent on the fact that they have been completely cleared of the allegations.



Some cases involving employees, but mostly detainees abusing detainees. Then they complain about their living conditions after having burnt down their accommodation.


It was so nice when he couldn't post.


When was this? I have always been able to post.

You seriously don't have a brain do you, your just a computer simulation of an LNP (complete with realistic "I don't vote LNP" sub routines).


I never said "i don't vote LNP" i voted for them last election, but won't be voting for them in the next election.
12:55pm 08/04/15 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
8948 posts
We really do urgently need a third, serious political party, but the Greens aren't it.

Sadly everyone gets an idea and decides to set up a tiny one-man or single issue party. We need to get people to come together and stop forming one-issue parties that will never take away power from the Labour and Liberal dominance that will never allow real improvement and are, for the most part, largely the same ideology.
01:44pm 08/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1641 posts
Some cases involving employees, but mostly detainees abusing detainees.


On what basis do you make this claim? I'm guessing something the lines of "no basis" or "talking out your ass".

Both the Human Rights Commissioner and the moss report identify staff 4 times and a detainee once under the "rape and sexual assault" category. Same goes for sexual assault of minors.

However, putting that aside, even if some detainees were guilty of rape, that would say exactly zero about the population in general, so the idea that because some detainees have committed sexual assault is a meaningful reason to suggest people aren't legitimate refugees is about as sensible as saying all males living in Melbourne are "innocent" because of the Jill Meagher incident.

Moreover, if a large number of detainees are raping people as you suggest why does the minister for immigration, who is the legal guardian of any unaccompanied minors, keep sending children to a den of rape?

You keep spouting s*** on virtually any subject that pops up. I happen to know a bit about this one, and I can most assuredly state you know nothing of the issues surrounding the subject.

but won't be voting for them in the next election.

Yes you will
02:10pm 08/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17401 posts


You keep spouting s*** on virtually any subject that pops up. I happen to know a bit about this one, and I can most assuredly state you know nothing of the issues surrounding the subject.


Since when has that stopped people pretending that they do on the internets?
02:23pm 08/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24995 posts
Hey brool, it's almost as though you're universally dumb. There doesn't seem to be one thing or one area where you show any kind of aptitude at all. Yet, you suffer from a disorder that fools you into thinking you are in fact competent if not skilled at things and to also say this as loudly as possible. Creates some pretty interesting little scenarios which I didn't think were possible.
02:32pm 08/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1678 posts
02:40pm 08/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1247 posts
He should have named it Greens 2.0 Party

Full of hyperbole, feel good plattitudes, pie in the skyness.

It's staggering that this document was written by a former Liberal Prime Minister, its basically completely against liberal values "A robust public service" LOL.

Malcolm Fraser Liberal PM was completely different to the Malcolm Fraser Greens cheerleader. It reaffirms my opinion that he had a change of heart so he would have something to be remembered by.
02:42pm 08/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24996 posts
Look at the clever little doggy, saying what he's been trained to say.
02:46pm 08/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17404 posts

People should pay more for power used at peak times and should be better able to take advantage of off-peak rates to reduce electricity bills, the Federal Government's energy white paper says.

...

"So in the end, even with a smart meter, a consumer can use electricity whenever they feel like it, but they will pay more at certain times and less at certain times and on the swings and roundabouts they'll pay less overall."


Get f***ed Mr Macfarlane, I would end up paying more for this brain fart of yours.
05:30pm 08/04/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11643 posts
You would have to be some kind of mentally challenged person to believe Electricity Companies and there profit sharing pals the Government want to give you something that will make you spend less.



05:52pm 08/04/15 Permalink
taggs
6382 posts
Get f***ed Mr Macfarlane, I would end up paying more for this brain fart of yours.


If the majority of your power use was during peak times you likely would. If you responded to the price signals and changed your usage patterns you might save money. It's impossible to tell from the text of that article.

Demand management could very well result in lower transmission and distribution costs for users on an aggregate basis relative to investment in infrastructure that is only used for a fraction of the year due to peak demand. Of course the infrastructure to enable demand management isn't free either. Electricity markets in Australia are actually pretty complicated and from the quick glance at the white paper in question the stance on demand management seems pretty reasonable to me.

Investment in infrastructure that is only used during periods of peak demand is essentially a hidden subsidy from lower consumers of electricity (i.e. usually poorer people with less appliances) to higher consumers of electricity (i.e. usually richer people with lots of appliances, aircon, etc) because they share the transmission and distribution costs but not in proportion to usage.

You would have to be some kind of mentally challenged person to believe Electricity Companies and there profit sharing pals the Government want to give you something that will make you spend less.


You realise that transmission and distribution companies in Australia are regulated businesses, yeah? So the rate of return they are allowed to earn is based on their regulated asset base and what the relevant regulator determines is a fair rate of return relative to the risk of the business, yeah?

So smart metering/demand management wouldn't earn them any more or less money on a risk-adjusted basis relative to the capital invested in the business. And for the electricity retailers (i.e. the guys you pay your bill to) if you're paying lower transmission and distribution costs (relative to a world with no demand management requiring further investment in peak demand infrastructure) and the wholesale price of electricity doesn't change then your overall power bill should be lower than it otherwise would be.

So nah you wouldn't have to be any kind of mentally challenged person to believe that the Government could see a social benefit in avoiding unnecessary investment in transmission and distribution infrastructure that is ultimately borne by users.
07:09pm 08/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1248 posts
12:09am 09/04/15 Permalink
Jim
UK
13648 posts
it's mind-boggling that you consider anyone to have gotten smashed in that article, and that you would even consider sourcing your point of view with the daily mail

rational wiki sums it up nicely:

The Daily Mail (aka, Hate Mail, Daily Fail, Daily Heil, Daily Moan and so on), is a reactionary tabloid rag masquerading as a "traditional values," middle-class newspaper that is, in many ways, the worst of the British gutter press (only Rupert Murdoch's Sun is worse). Its weighty Sunday counterpart is the Mail on Sunday.
The Daily Mail is to the U.K. what the New York Post is to the United States, and what the Drudge Report is to the Internet: to wit, gossipy tabloid "journalism" for those who cannot digest serious news, with a flippantly wingnut editorial stance. The Daily Mail is notable among British tabloids for rejecting the standard red-top banner in order to try to appear more upmarket and respectable, although it does sometimes go in for the full front-page picture or headline characteristic of the populist rags. It is also notorious for its frequent harassment of individuals, campaigns of hate directed at various minorities, and willfully deceiving and lying to its readers.



and http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong
12:57am 09/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24997 posts
Remember the brool and infi thought process policy though Jim

Their entire thought process when presented with any sort of information is - does this conform with my predetermined world view, or does it go against it? If it's the former it is gospel and anyone who goes against it is a fool. If it's the latter then it's propaganda and part of some sort of left-wing conspiracy.
04:31am 09/04/15 Permalink
Jim
UK
13649 posts
yah

I thought it was a bit dopey of christine milne to get drawn into that level of back and forth where she'd take a swipe at the number of sales without apparently knowing the figures, but that hardly constitutes getting smashed - it was a minor back-pedal to bring things back on topic again. I thought more relevant to anyone getting 'smashed' was the amount of stammering and hesitation throughout the process from julian clarke, as he tried walking the tightrope between justifying continuing to run at a loss for reasons other than tax avoidance, and acting as a propaganda outlet
05:49am 09/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17405 posts

Demand management could very well result in lower transmission and distribution costs for users on an aggregate basis relative to investment in infrastructure that is only used for a fraction of the year due to peak demand. Of course the infrastructure to enable demand management isn't free either. Electricity markets in Australia are actually pretty complicated and from the quick glance at the white paper in question the stance on demand management seems pretty reasonable to me.

Investment in infrastructure that is only used during periods of peak demand is essentially a hidden subsidy from lower consumers of electricity (i.e. usually poorer people with less appliances) to higher consumers of electricity (i.e. usually richer people with lots of appliances, aircon, etc) because they share the transmission and distribution costs but not in proportion to usage.


Whilst that is true, I already reduce my electricity usage as much as possible. I can't move any more away from peak. To increase peak usage will make my bills higher and there is very little I can do about it. I'm not going to go home at 2:00pm so I can cook meals for the family.
There is already a tariff structure available for people to move away from peak and use other times, tariff 12 I think.
08:20am 09/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17406 posts
In order for people to use tariff 12 they need a smart meter.

The Minister should be saying 'By increasing peak power fees we can put downward pressure on the rise in electricity costs in the long term, resulting in lower power bills than they otherwise would be. Short term pain, for long term gain'. Why use retarded language like 'and on the swings and roundabouts'?

Perhaps the government should subsidies smart meters to low income families and to owners of rentals in low socio-economic areas, run the program for 2 years all new houses should require smart meters (if they already don't).

The people who could benefit with the most impact on their bills are those who have the time available to move their heavy power usage outside of peak hour. So unemployed may be able to use it, however requiring smart-meters to access tariff 12 would be a barrier for them. So, let the government help.

08:40am 09/04/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7135 posts
http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2015/04/treasury-head-slams-grey-gouge/

If Joe doesn't fix this by next budget he needs to be sacked immediately.


For example:
• Kathleen and Steve are 68, own their home and have $1.1 million in superannuation, shares and bank accounts. They have no other income. They will receive a part-rate pension.

• Liam is 75 is single and has superannuation, an investment property and shares valued at $910,000. He does not own a home and has no other income. He also receives a part-rate pension.

• Lillian is 85, single and lives in her own home worth $1.5 million. She has bank accounts valued at $50,000 but has no other income. Lillian receives a full-rate pension.
09:01am 09/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22529 posts
yah

I thought it was a bit dopey of christine milne to get drawn into that level of back and forth where she'd take a swipe at the number of sales without apparently knowing the figures, but that hardly constitutes getting smashed - it was a minor back-pedal to bring things back on topic again. I thought more relevant to anyone getting 'smashed' was the amount of stammering and hesitation throughout the process from julian clarke, as he tried walking the tightrope between justifying continuing to run at a loss for reasons other than tax avoidance, and acting as a propaganda outlet


Christine Milne is a dips***. She and her idiot party even voted against a fuel tax increase which you would think should be their core policy, just to oppose the Government. Milne has zero credibility and is ignored in Australian politics.

Whilst that is true, I already reduce my electricity usage as much as possible. I can't move any more away from peak. To increase peak usage will make my bills higher and there is very little I can do about it. I'm not going to go home at 2:00pm so I can cook meals for the family.


once the affordable batteries for storage come to market, the whole electricity cartel will be f***ed. even if you dont own solar you could buy all of your peak energy needs by charging batteries from off-peak power.
10:08am 09/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17410 posts
Paging infi to the movie studios wins thread.

edit: Also, yes Affordable batteries will certainly change my on-grid usage. Until then I assume I'm going to get maximally gouged by [insert power company here]. Come on Tesla pump out 'cheap' batteries!

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 10:51:52 09/Apr/15
10:49am 09/04/15 Permalink
danthepirate
Brisbane, Queensland
163 posts
once the affordable batteries for storage come to market, the whole electricity cartel will be f***ed. even if you dont own solar you could buy all of your peak energy needs by charging batteries from off-peak power.


I doubt they will allow this for normal households. With solar, they are already quite restrictive in what you can and can't do. If you have a solar/battery hybrid system currently, I am pretty sure you are not allowed to export at all. It also sounds like they are going to start restricting exports from systems over 3kw. It seems they aren't stupid when it comes to protecting their bottom line. Though, you could get around it with a ups style system which for some unknown reason is treated completely differently.

It sounds like it is currently cost effective to build peaking stations which use the same principle.

11:22am 09/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1250 posts

it's mind-boggling that you consider anyone to have gotten smashed in that article, and that you would even consider sourcing your point of view with the daily mail

rational wiki sums it up nicely:




and http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong


I linked to the dailymail because it had the video of it that i wanted, but i watched it live on TV. She definitely got smashed. Lets not play the "oh, you posted a link from this news organization, therefore its wrong" game. It's sad and old.

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2015/04/treasury-head-slams-grey-gouge/

If Joe doesn't fix this by next budget he needs to be sacked immediately.



Even if he wanted to, it will simply be blocked by the senate like everything else. Labor/Greens don't want any budget savings, and tbh, i don't think the Liberals do either.
12:08pm 09/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24998 posts
So your tactic brool is to keep saying and doing really dumb things, have people call you out on it again and again and instead of adjusting your behaviour you just keep on doing the dumb things and start saying that it's sad and old when people point it out. The LNP were able to train you like a little doggy how come you can't learn other things?
12:44pm 09/04/15 Permalink
Jim
UK
13650 posts
I linked to the dailymail because it had the video of it that i wanted, but i watched it live on TV. She definitely got smashed. Lets not play the "oh, you posted a link from this news organization, therefore its wrong" game. It's sad and old.


it would've made sense to used a video that actually showed her getting smashed then, or mention prior to being called out that you saw it happen elsewhere and that your link doesn't actually demonstrate what you're talking about

the fact you used daily mail is just additional amusement and clearly wasn't suggested as the basis of your being wrong as demonstrated by the use of the conjunction 'and'
12:54pm 09/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1251 posts
My link does demonstrate her being smashed though. As previously mentioned, i used that particular link because of the video of it.

I'll remember next time to only use the guardian ;)

P.S Jim, are you ever going to nuke Fpot's off topic person personal attacks/s***posts, or is nuking only reserved for when i post something you dont agree with?
01:12pm 09/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1644 posts
What exactly do you mean by 'smashed'.

The exchange you seem to be talking about is Milne commenting on The Australian's declining readership. Not knowing the precise figures of how a major operating loss came about, while pointing out that continuing operating losses aren't sustainable doesn't come across very smashy to me.
01:23pm 09/04/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2195 posts
02:21pm 09/04/15 Permalink
Jim
UK
13651 posts
My link does demonstrate her being smashed though.
nah there's nothing in the text to even suggest that nor in the video

P.S Jim, are you ever going to nuke Fpot's off topic person personal attacks/s***posts, or is nuking only reserved for when i post something you dont agree with?
another worthless troll, it's pretty clear I don't agree with you here for example yet your posts haven't been nuked
03:35pm 09/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1679 posts
Bwahahaha this is the best ever.

http://thesauce.co/telegraph_generator/
03:37pm 09/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
24999 posts

The only person being smashed is you brool.

I linked to the dailymail because it had the video of it that i wanted, but i watched it live on TV.
You watched it live on TV? Interesting that you'd wait till 12:09am to post about it. I guess you saw it happen, waited at least eight hours, and then put your excited post about it up on the internet for all to see.

I think you're lying brool and didn't watch it live on TV.

Today's LNP hilarity

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/09/tony-abbott-declares-only-the-coalition-strong-enough-to-stop-the-boats?CMP=soc_567

Tony Abbott has said that only the Coalition could stem the flow of asylum seeker boats because other governments would “succumb to the cries of the human rights lawyers”.

The prime minister admitted that vessels continue to depart for Australia, saying that the government has “largely stopped the boats”, a step back from previous comments indicating they have been stopped altogether.

“I’m also confident that only this government can keep them stopped because any other government, I suspect, would quickly succumb to the cries of the human rights lawyers and others and what that would mean, very quickly, is that the people smugglers would be back in business,” Abbott told reporters in Gympie in Queensland.
Anyone still falling for their bulls***?


06:45pm 09/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17414 posts
Wait.. The Prime Minister admitted that vessels contineu to depart for Australia.


These evil people smugglers, they must be evil as government says so, are either giving people free trips on the boats and asking for payment on arrival... ORRRR they are continuing their business.. So when the Prime Minister says by giving people acceptable human rights people smugglers would be back in business is he flat out lying?

There is NO spin to get out of that one. Boats are still departing for Australia, by the Prime Ministers admittance. Therefor people smugglers must still be in business. You can't have boats leaving and people smugglers not being in business. After all the government was all about the people smugglers.

So since they are still in business, is the Prime Minister just denying people Human Rights because he is a massive f*****g dooche? I think so. What's worse is that there are plenty of dooches who voted for this to happen, a good 35% or something like that.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 19:15:54 09/Apr/15
07:14pm 09/04/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
250 posts
I thought Clarke's admission that The Australian "is absolutely involved in policy" was an interesting admission... but I guess always denying this fact tended to have a negative impact on the paper's credibility.
07:22pm 09/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25001 posts
I'm sure you're aware, but the whole people smugglers angle is a red herring racist people use so they don't have to say "I don't want dem browns coming here because I am a dumb racist". They use the people smugglers red herring to make people think their views are somewhat sensible, noble and borne out of a respect for law and order. A few people smugglers exploiting the situation to make a bit of money out of extreme human misery is a drop in the boat compared to the LNP which exploits the human misery to help themselves stay in power. Labor did it too, or tried. This is why I can't fight off the somewhat hyperbolic notion that our nation is a slobbering joke.
07:24pm 09/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17415 posts
So I had some waterworks done to my street. The letter drop said it will increase water pressure and only take a short time to clear the mud from the water after the works are finished.

So the works are completed and my water pressure is noticeably reduced and there is still mud in my water after running for ages.

I sent a letter to Unitywater asking why my pressure was reduced and what options I had to have it restored to its original level. I then asked if they will compensate me with a permanent discount for my reduced service, particularly when I never asked for it to be 'improved' , also to be compensated for the amount water I must run to clear it.

What's the bet they tell me to f*** off in a polite way, and I'm forced to have to pay for their service.
07:36pm 09/04/15 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
20636 posts
regarding pressure, as long as it is still at the minimum pressure required for fire fighting which i think is 25L/s then unitywater are 100% fine, tough luck

Hassle them about the water you used to flush your line, they might refund you the $2 in extra water usage you used. You would know that the actual cost of water is f*** all, it is the bulls*** connection fee they charge that makes up the bulk of their bills
07:48pm 09/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17416 posts
Oh I know. It's the principal of the matter. There is an off-chance they'll be all, 'OK 5% off'.

It just s**** me they reduce the quality of my service and expect me to pay the same, and that we are forced to pay it. How many other commercial companies are allowed to force people to be customers.



07:52pm 09/04/15 Permalink
Dazhel
Gold Coast, Queensland
6705 posts
Christine Milne is a dips***.


Oh hey, something I agree with infi on. I despair for the alternative vote if Milne is the best leader of the bunch.
Milne is so far left she's looped around into the bats*** crazy territory commonly shared by those on the far right.

That said though, she hardly got 'smashed'. This is probably the more accurate assessment:
the amount of stammering and hesitation throughout the process from julian clarke, as he tried walking the tightrope between justifying continuing to run at a loss for reasons other than tax avoidance, and acting as a propaganda outlet
07:54pm 09/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17417 posts
Hockey wants to make international streaming companies like Netflix to pay GST. Which is totally fair until you view as this:
What he means is that he wants All Australians using a Netflix-like service to pay 10% extra as a tax.

In which case it kind of sucks.

08:24pm 09/04/15 Permalink
Dazhel
Gold Coast, Queensland
6706 posts
^ is that the solution to the Western Australia problem?

Iron ore price falling? Tax Netflix!
08:41pm 09/04/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2196 posts
^ is that the solution to the Western Australia problem?

Iron ore price falling? Tax Netflix!


Well it's better than tony declaring war on ice;

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/11102646_767554603341594_5106992990647297728_n.jpg?oh=54fcbf9c4bc181582daa5458b633af72&oe=55E188C0&__gda__=1436237302_71a423eeed0e79311d3ff9068b5e5804

but not by much.
08:42pm 09/04/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11644 posts
The greens arent environmentalists anymore.
They are full on Commies that want to collapse Capitalism.
They are not really all that different to ISIS.
Both want to take civilization back to the Middle Ages.

What have the Greens accomplished in the last ten years ?
From 2004:



Middle Class guilt
Still the only policy the greens can deliver on.






09:03pm 09/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1645 posts
The Greens do milk that bourgeois guilt with the artisanal skill of a bearded, skinny jeans wearing barista.

but this
They are not really all that different to ISIS.


is a fairly epically dumb statement. Last I checked their election campaign wasn't old growth Tasmanian forest OR DEATH.
09:21pm 09/04/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10448 posts
heh faceman.

I am not sure if you are a parody alt or 'alternatively' intelligent human.

But there is exactly one country in the G20 that says "global warming? what global warming?" and that would be Australia land of the Rhodes scholar PM (how the f*** did he get one one seriously ... needs a review of process) who got the exact same degree he walked in with (yeah thoise folk down under got it right got it right) but a blue in boxing, whatever that means (he beat up people who were actually smart?).
10:43pm 09/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17419 posts
Tonz bullies his way to the top, it's what he does. I want to see Tonez Boxing vs Putins Judo, I'd bet my house Putin would win.
11:23pm 09/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1252 posts
The federal government has commissioned a $4.1-million telemovie designed to dissuade asylum seekers from coming to Australia by boat.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/australian-government-spends-4-million-on-stoptheboats-telemovie-20150409-1mhwlb.html

Telemovie! Awesome! Lmao this is fantastic.




F*** that is hilarious because its so true. Middle class guilt, it makes you feel good about yourself voting for Greens.

another worthless troll, it's pretty clear I don't agree with you here for example yet your posts haven't been nuked


And im really surprised considering previous incidents. Thanks i guess. Not trolling at all.

last edited by Jim at 09:27:22 10/Apr/15
12:33am 10/04/15 Permalink
Jim
UK
13652 posts
there's no reason to be surprised, claiming that you are is just another s***heel troll - I've never removed your posts on the grounds I don't agree with them
03:51am 10/04/15 Permalink
ravn0s
Brisbane, Queensland
18551 posts
yay!

Australian consumers could soon be charged goods and service tax (GST) for music, movies and games downloaded from overseas service providers, the treasurer, Joe Hockey, has announced.


f*** this government.
08:20am 10/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1253 posts
Labor or Liberal - "look! There's something new! Tax it!"
08:24am 10/04/15 Permalink
Tremble
Brisbane, Queensland
456 posts
Queensland LNP blames Labor for Easter 2015 road deaths

Labor gets voted in and people die, great job everyone.

The LNP has blamed the Labor government for the state's horrendous Easter road toll.

Eight people died in five crashes across the four-day Easter long weekend in Queensland, the worst of any state.

Transport minister turned shadow transport minister Scott Emerson blamed Labor for "dropping the ball on road safety".
03:04pm 10/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17421 posts
Oh ffs. Liberal government will blame the previous government for anything that could be viewed as bad. What pissants.
04:25pm 10/04/15 Permalink
Scooter
Brisbane, Queensland
6519 posts
State government there Toll, The QLD LNP, not currently in power, are blaming the QLD ALP, currently in power, for the deaths.
Still bulls***. but if you're going to be outraged, you should probably at least appear to know what's going on.
05:00pm 10/04/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1986 posts
F***! what a knob Scott Emerson is.
05:44pm 10/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1255 posts
And here is SFB here to croak out a classic pensioner "GIT OFF ME LAWN" style post.
07:48pm 10/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
8590 posts
This post has been removed.
Reason: Abusive
Send Private Message
09:33pm 10/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17425 posts

State government there Toll, The QLD LNP, not currently in power, are blaming the QLD ALP, currently in power, for the deaths.
Still bulls***. but if you're going to be outraged, you should probably at least appear to know what's going on.


I was, I didn't specify state or federal. My comment applies equally to both though.
09:42am 11/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1680 posts
04:56pm 11/04/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1987 posts
^^ The best part were the comments. There are really braindead people masquerading as intelligent life forms subscribing to the Australian.
05:44pm 11/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25007 posts
It's paywalled for me.
06:40pm 11/04/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1988 posts
^ Put the article heading into Google and then click on the link that comes up. That's how i did it. If you go straight to the link it comes up pay walled for me too.
06:42pm 11/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25008 posts
Ahh thanks.
06:58pm 11/04/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11647 posts
Those Iranians should stay here.
Considering the threats made by Israel towards Iran and the Republican Congress' view on the Nuke Deal I wouldnt want to be going back to Iran, its certainly not a safe Country.



10:56pm 11/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1257 posts
It's strange that the Iranian government doesn't want the citizens who have proven to be bogus asylum seekers, back.

No doubt the bogus refugee lobby will be kicking up a storm about it.
12:25am 12/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1649 posts
What's strange about it Brool? Please enlighten us with something you know nothing about, again.

Actually before you do, quickly google Iran exit visa, and then, and I know you struggle with this, think before you type.
09:36am 12/04/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11648 posts
12:42pm 12/04/15 Permalink
Vash
4474 posts
02:52pm 12/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22533 posts
in a global economy if you have s***** tax rates you will lose out. sounds like aus gov is a bad sport.

"So [global company], why did you choose to legally pay lower tax somewhere else?" Really, that's the where the debate is headed? Next the government will be challenging these businesses to leave Australia so that we stop getting access to the fantastic products they offer and the jobs they create. The international taxation enquiry is a complete beat up and the Senators have no idea it was their own government's s***** laws and s***** tax rates that caused the problem.
03:18pm 12/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17427 posts

Next the government will be challenging these business to leave Australia so that we stop getting access to the fantastic products they offer and the jobs they create


That's bulls***, you know full well there is a pretty hefty 'Australia Tax' on plenty of international items sold here. Companies will still sell products here if they get 5% profit margin as opposed to 10%, asif they will just leave the market because when they still run at a profit.
03:57pm 12/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22534 posts


That's bulls***, you know full well there is a pretty hefty 'Australia Tax' on plenty of international items sold here. Companies will still sell products here if they get 5% profit margin as opposed to 10%, asif they will just leave the market because when they still run at a profit.


you completely misread what i said. the government if they are bad sports because they can't get their hands on a fat uncompetitive rate, will they just drive the business out of australia? they will never be able to create tax laws which combat the strategies being used by the multi-nationals. the multi-nationals will never leave voluntarily, but they will not pay the sloppy tax rates being charged by the aus govt. so will australia just ban them from trading?
04:01pm 12/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17428 posts
That's why we need to shift more taxes towards a GST system, with balanced welfare to offset the extra costs.
04:21pm 12/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1681 posts
So it's OK for them to make money in Australia but not pay the australian tax rate?

Really?
05:53pm 12/04/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1989 posts
So it's OK for them to make money in Australia but not pay the australian tax rate?

Really?
Mate, you know we're dealing with a kid who thinks inheriting a job is making is own way in life. No use debating with a mindset hell bent on securing a privileged lifestyle over the bones of his fellow man.
06:01pm 12/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1682 posts

At least his leader's family sets a good example and pays it's fair share.
http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/prime-minister-tony-abbott-paying-for-daughter-bridget-to-live-at-kirribilli-house/story-fnpn118l-1227299808371

$250 a week for a house with a pool a stones throw from the Opera house seems fair board to me with sydney prices.

The abbots are true lifters.


06:14pm 12/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22535 posts
So it's OK for them to make money in Australia but not pay the australian tax rate?

Really?


They are paying the Australian tax rate....and yet the government complains. That's the problem. Every tax payer is entitled to do what they legally can to minimise their tax bill.

What is the persistent attitude to deriding someone willing to take over the family business? Does that invalidate the opinion of anyone who has ever taken over a family business?

I would be earning more by staying in government yet that is honorable? I dunno....
06:40pm 12/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1683 posts

They are paying the Australian tax rate....and yet the government complains. That's the problem. Every tax payer is entitled to do what they legally can to minimise their tax bill.


I don't think it's "the government", I think the senators at the inquiry are humans like the rest of us and like the rest of us they are astonished at how much tax they have actually been siphoning out of the country.
06:51pm 12/04/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7136 posts
06:58pm 12/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39273 posts
gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme
06:58pm 12/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25009 posts
I would be earning more by staying in government yet that is honorable? I dunno....
Too bad you're really dumb and can't make it there in the real world hey? Instead you've parachuted into the impossible to fail confines of daddy's office. Yet you still have the audacity to falsely portray yourself as a tenacious businessman.
07:14pm 12/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22536 posts


I don't think it's "the government", I think the senators at the inquiry are humans like the rest of us and like the rest of us they are astonished at how much tax they have actually been siphoning out of the country.


By "siphoning", do you mean acting entirely within the tax legislation? The problem is that not one of those Senators has made an accusation of illegality - in fact I don't even really know the point of their enquiry. The only thing they achieved is reinforcing Australia's uncompetitive tax rate and extremely complex legislation.

In essence the Senators are accusing multi-national companies of failing to donate money to the Australian government. The problem with Senators and voters is that they are not versed in either a) the labyrinthine Australian tax legislation b) the concept of reciprocal tax agreements or c) the consolidated operating structures of multi-nationals.
07:46pm 12/04/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10452 posts
By "siphoning", do you mean acting entirely within the tax legislation?

Unless of course the sole purpose of the arrangement was to avoid tax. Sole purpose clause, tax avoidance ... oh that ...
01:08am 13/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1258 posts
http://i.imgur.com/Vb6l9Sv.jpg


And? His businesses earnt that money. Welfare scrounges don't earn their money, it is handed to them.
01:23am 13/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17430 posts

By "siphoning", do you mean acting entirely within the tax legislation?


Infi's getting his back up when people use emotionally charged words to get their points across when it doesn't suit his agenda, but is totally OK to do it when it does.
08:42am 13/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1684 posts

Infi's getting his back up when people use emotionally charged words to get their points across when it doesn't suit his agenda, but is totally OK to do it when it does.


ITT: Liberal voters defending tax rorts.

Seriously have you even been keeping up with how retarded these setups are?

https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8&client=ubuntu#q=How+BHP+and+Rio+Tinto+channelled+billions+through+Singapore

First link, stupid paywalls.
09:06am 13/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17431 posts
No no no, it was the Labor governments fault to not reign in those taxes. Now that it's Liberals turn, it's totally legit for a company to do that, not Liberals fault at all.
09:08am 13/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22539 posts
ITT: Liberal voters defending tax rorts.

Seriously have you even been keeping up with how retarded these setups are?
are you suggesting illegality? if this is correct then they will be prosecuted.

if petrol is too dear at one servo, how far will you travel to another get cheaper fuel?
12:49pm 13/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1685 posts
I am sure it is all legal, but it is still f***ed.

I don't have the option of buying my petrol in the US because it's taxed lower from my subsidiary company then shipping it via Singapore under another shell company, before selling it to myself at a lower rate in Australia there by making the % excise super low.

I'm sorry but the whole "oh our tax is too high so we're taking it somewhere else to be taxed" argument doesn't fly.

If the cost of doing manufacturing in Australia was too high, so we're going to make that stuff somewhere else, then yes that is a valid point, but they are making money here, they should be taxed here.
01:36pm 13/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1260 posts
It's amazing that in 2015, you are corrupt, dodgy, selfish and "rorting" the system if you try to keep more of the money that you earned, but you aren't if you receive the money without actually earning it.
02:05pm 13/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22541 posts
I don't have the option of buying my petrol in the US because it's taxed lower from my subsidiary company then shipping it via Singapore under another shell company, before selling it to myself at a lower rate in Australia there by making the % excise super low.


you miss the point. money is weightless and transferring it happens in an instant. therefore the "logistics" of moving money is irrelevant. so it is exponentially more worthwhile to shop around for superior tax rates and to structure ones tax affairs optimally. The petrol analogy illustrates that when it is a physical good the effort a consumer is prepared to invest will be modest. When the gain can be hundreds of millions of dollars and achieved with some paperwork and electronic transaction, it makes far more sense to explore every possible avenue no matter how complex.

There is no ethics in taxation. it is a compliance issue - Theft minimisation.
02:42pm 13/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1686 posts
you miss the point. money is weightless and transferring it happens in an instant. therefore the "logistics" of moving money is irrelevant. so it is exponentially more worthwhile to shop around for superior tax rates and to structure ones tax affairs optimally. The petrol analogy illustrates that when it is a physical good the effort a consumer is prepared to invest will be modest. When the gain can be hundreds of millions of dollars and achieved with some paperwork and electronic transaction, it makes far more sense to explore every possible avenue no matter how complex.

There is no ethics in taxation. it is a compliance issue - Theft minimisation.


Did you read the AFR article?
02:46pm 13/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22542 posts
Yes. It would be foolish and a waste of shareholders funds to do any different. If the government wants hassle free extra revenue then they should increase royalties or the mining tax or find some other way to drag the mining industry down.

Taxpayers don't have a moral obligation to pay tax. You seem to struggle with this very basic and fundamental concept.

Alternatively, the government could cut spending because the reality is they are swimming in revenue.
02:56pm 13/04/15 Permalink
Vash
4477 posts
Heh again, taxation is theft.. which is absolutely necessary for the country to run.
Pay your share. These ways of avoiding taxation are merely exploiting loopholes. Ones that will not be closed while the libs are in power.
03:01pm 13/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1261 posts
Remember folks, Vash thinks high taxation "creates wealth" LOL.

Classic Vash type.
03:22pm 13/04/15 Permalink
Vash
4478 posts
I never said such a thing. I said fair taxation allows more people to become more wealthy. It doesn't create wealth, it merely transfers it.
03:28pm 13/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1262 posts
You've said it multiple times earlier on in this thread.

You've said that high taxation "creates wealth"
03:34pm 13/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1687 posts
Yes. It would be foolish and a waste of shareholders funds to do any different. If the government wants hassle free extra revenue then they should increase royalties or the mining tax or find some other way to drag the mining industry down.

Taxpayers don't have a moral obligation to pay tax. You seem to struggle with this very basic and fundamental concept.

Alternatively, the government could cut spending because the reality is they are swimming in revenue.


If you read the article it is that they are transferring goods. They're selling the minerals to a company in Singapore then selling it back to themselves in another country at a higher price, like my petrol analogy but in reverse coming back to Australia.

Public outrage and damage to brands can force companies hands to pay tax. Like Starbucks in the UK. This is why it's been discussed. Taxpayers don't have the means to funnel their money around the world in shell corporations to minimise tax. I think you are missing the point that most people want an even playing field.

The laws won't change if the public doesn't want them to and that is why this is being brought to light by some great journalism, which is a good thing.

Meanwhile Brool thinks it's a good thing for Australia for profits to go offshore and not be taxed on the way creates wealth. Classic brool.
03:35pm 13/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1263 posts

Meanwhile Brool thinks it's a good thing for Australia for profits to go offshore and not be taxed on the way creates wealth. Classic brool.


I didn't say that at all. You should read carefully.

At the end of the day, if Australias taxation wasn't so high, more companies wouldn't try to minimize tax because it just wouldn't be worth it.
03:48pm 13/04/15 Permalink
Taipan
USA
4921 posts


I didn't say that at all. You should read carefully.

At the end of the day, if Australias taxation wasn't so high, more companies wouldn't try to minimize tax because it just wouldn't be worth it.


You really cant help yourself when it comes to setting new standards of dumb can you.
04:36pm 13/04/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11651 posts
I said fair taxation allows more people to become more wealthy. It doesn't create wealth, it merely transfers it.


Thats not generating wealth thats diluting wealth.
That is rewarding failure and punishing success.

If the poor can subsist on Welfare then why would they bother to better themselves ? why would they bother becoming Taxpayers ?
Redistributing wealth creates Government dependents thats will always vote to keep their entitlements.

Too much wealth redistribution destabilises Democracies and forces Partys to be more like the other because neither can afford to lose the Government dependents.

05:33pm 13/04/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1991 posts
Heh again, taxation is theft.. which is absolutely necessary for the country to run.
Vash, I wouldn't bother arguing with the f***wit. His ability to think is limited to about the same level as an amoebae. Why waste your breathe on the f***wit.
07:28pm 13/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22543 posts
If you read the article it is that they are transferring goods.


they are not physically moving anything. it is all numbers on ledgers. due to our high tax rates they are required to do more paper shuffling.

i am loving this indignant outrage that is bubbling up, except if you were in the same boat you would do the same thing. imagine being able to save thousands on stamp duty when buying a new house, or finding an easy way to split your income with your spouse, or finding a way to offset your taxable income in an investment property... oh wait....

f*****g hypocrticial, and the politicians complaining are the worst offenders! at least the multi-nationals produce stuff worthwhile and create jobs! it is sick that goverrrnment keeps expanding the net of taxation wider and wider and then they cry when taxpayers beat them at their own game.

Vash types salivate at the thought of getting their claws into other people's money (especially those filthy multi-nationals), all the grand plans for spending that free easy money. all power to the taxpayer.
07:50pm 13/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1264 posts

Incase Vash and other Vash types needs any confirmation of what i have been saying for the past 2 pages -

He said using the tax system to redistribute income would trap Australians in poverty. “The welfare system is the way to redistribute income...The tax system is there to raise government revenue at the lowest cost in the most ­efficient way doing the least damage to the economy. “If you try to use both the tax and the welfare system to redistribute income you get punishing rates of income withdrawal as a person’s income rises. “This creates a huge disincentive to work. It creates poverty traps. And, of course, it heightens the incentive to ‘hide’ additional income.
http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/peter-costello-slams-abbott-tax-plan-as-a-morbid-joke/story-fn84fgcm-1227302770409

Who would have thought that taxing people/businesses to oblivion would give them an incentive to dodge tax :o


12:26pm 14/04/15 Permalink
zaraq
Adelaide, South Australia
483 posts
http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2015/04/14/1227303/222513-6cc0a626-e233-11e4-b60a-424ceb2f883c.jpg
BroolStoryCo:Who would have thought that taxing people would give them an incentive to dodge tax
01:45pm 14/04/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
252 posts
axpayers don't have a moral obligation to pay tax. You seem to struggle with this very basic and fundamental concept.


Maybe "moral" is not the best word, but the only justification for an economic system of private investment is economic growth, which entails the increased wealth of all. Taxation is used to convert that growth into that wealth.

Interest, dividends, appreciation, rent income, and profits in general are all wealth that is accumulated without 'working for it', by any definition - it's simply receiving wealth because one already has wealth. But all wealth is created by work - without people working, we'd have nothing. Period. So any wealth received because one already has wealth must be due to someone else's work.

The only thing that validates this system of overt theft is taxation. If a marketeer has half a brain and isn't confused by how things work, they wouldn't be bagging taxation... quite the opposite.
08:47pm 14/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1265 posts

Just whack it on the credit card, she'll be right mate, it's free money mate.

The government will have more than $70 billion in unpaid university student loans on its books in another two years, double the figure owed in 2013-14. Yet new research shows nearly 25 per cent — or $17bn — will never be repaid, a figure that would escalate under government plans to deregulate university fees. Researchers Richard Highfield and Neil Warren say about 2.1 million people currently have a HECS debt. But many of them are avoiding their repayment obligations by either going overseas, non-lodgement of tax returns or by exploiting tax deductions for gifts or self-education expenses to keep their incomes below the repayment threshold.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/runaway-loans-students-set-to-owe-70bn/story-e6frgcjx-1227304117090

F*** YOU, HAVENT GOT MINE.
02:33am 15/04/15 Permalink
funky
Canada
1876 posts
yeah brool, that's why i went overseas, it was purely to avoid paying HECS
03:26am 15/04/15 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
20648 posts
Brool just angry he never got grades good enough to get in to uni
06:25am 15/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1650 posts
Gees you have to be the least self aware person I know.
Just whack it on the credit card, she'll be right mate, it's free money mate.


It's totally legal to move overseas and not repay your HECS. A bit like:
Who would have thought that taxing people/businesses to oblivion would give them an incentive to dodge tax :o


By pushing up uni fees, don't we, in the exact same way with corporate tax, incentivize repayment minimization.

If someone lends you money and then says you only have to repay it if you earn money in a particular geographic region, why should anyone care if people exploit the loophole? The government has all the tools it needs to close it.

The loan money funds thousands of jobs, and keeps the education services sector (our third biggest export) ticking along nicely.

plus this:
Brool just angry he never got grades good enough to get in to uni
07:27am 15/04/15 Permalink
taggs
6383 posts
Maybe "moral" is not the best word, but the only justification for an economic system of private investment is economic growth, which entails the increased wealth of all. Taxation is used to convert that growth into that wealth.

Interest, dividends, appreciation, rent income, and profits in general are all wealth that is accumulated without 'working for it', by any definition - it's simply receiving wealth because one already has wealth. But all wealth is created by work - without people working, we'd have nothing. Period. So any wealth received because one already has wealth must be due to someone else's work.

The only thing that validates this system of overt theft is taxation. If a marketeer has half a brain and isn't confused by how things work, they wouldn't be bagging taxation... quite the opposite.


wow you seem to know lots about economics. tax converts growth into wealth. all wealth is created by labour (lolmarx). taxation is theft but tax totes 'validates' the system.

please tell me more about your super insightful view of macroeconomics and where you gained this wisdom.
07:47am 15/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1690 posts

Finally, politicians working together for a decent cause.

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/refusing-to-vaccinate-children-is-not-a-conscience-issue-20150415-1mkke0.html

There's something else we should do too. Again, when I was health minister, I instructed the language used by government should change from "conscientious objector" to "vaccine refuser". There is nothing conscientious about parents irresponsibly denying their children, and other children, the protection vaccination brings.


11:33am 15/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17436 posts
Government coercion to make people take medication is wrong.
11:41am 15/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39285 posts
nah, people opting not to vaccinate is wrong.
11:48am 15/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1691 posts
F*** them.

They are living in a society, if they want a payment from society they can participate.

Anti-vaxxers are nearly as bad as gun nuts. Their "rights" impinge on others in society.
11:51am 15/04/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11653 posts
how many ppl were murdered by their own Governments last century ?
Do you really think its a good idea to have Government and its honest friend Big Pharma armed with medication that will make you a good citizen ?

There needs to be a Legal Challenge to this.

12:16pm 15/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1651 posts
Anti-vaxxers are nearly as bad as gun nuts. Their "rights" impinge on others in society.

That is a terrible analogy.
12:40pm 15/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17437 posts
Well, hopefully you remember that when the government decides it needs to force a medication on you in the future.
12:40pm 15/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1266 posts
I think the governments policy is a good middle ground. You are free to decide not to vax your kid, but you won't be allowed to put other members of the public at risk nor will the taxpayer subsidize you.
01:51pm 15/04/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10460 posts
The government is not forcing you to vaccinate.
Stop pretending they are.

Child care rebates and family tax benefits are not a human rights issue. If you want them, then you have to meet the governments requirements. It's your choice!

It's one of the best things any government has done in over a decade.
02:01pm 15/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17439 posts
Don't pretend that financial coercion isn't happening obes. You are OK with the government bullying people into doing something that you agree with, what happens when it is something you don't agree with?
02:14pm 15/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1692 posts
Don't pretend that financial coercion isn't happening obes. You are OK with the government bullying people into doing something that you agree with, what happens when it is something you don't agree with?


Like wearing seatbelts?
02:18pm 15/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17440 posts
The government doesn't take away your family/centerlink payments for not wearing seatbelts. You get fined. So not, not like wearing seatbelts.


If you are rich, you get to make the choice. If you are poor and centrelink payments aren't enough, then you are practically forced to medicate against your wishes. This is my main issue with it, it is forcing the choice on poor people whilst the rich can remain making their choice.

Apparently not even that many people who are on centrelink payments don't vaccinate anyway, so this policy wont really change anything except diminish the rights of the poor. So it's a s*** policy from that point of view.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 14:26:36 15/Apr/15
02:23pm 15/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25014 posts
Problem I see with this is that parents who refuse to vaccinate their children do so because they believe they're doing the right thing. They think that vaccinations cause autism, or have a high chance of bad side effects, or that they're implanting government tracking devices or any of the other myriad of reasons. How is taking money away from these people going to help? There may be some who'd change their stance but aren't they essentially being bribed to (from their point of view) put their children in harm's way?

The answer, as always, is more education and for it to be delivered in the right way. Getting through to anti-vaxxers is kind of like getting through to 9/11 truthers though. It's impossible to reason someone out of something they weren't reasoned into in the first place. Is there some sort of phase 2 to this plan? Once the phone calls start coming in about the missing money the staffers say sure your money is gone, but if you attend this seminar we can start you on the process of earning it back. That seminar would be a good and proper 'Why Vaccination is a Good A Thing' session designed for an audience of complete numbskulls taking them through all the bulls*** they've been fed and answering all questions they might have. That's the only way I can see this plan actually helping people and not just being some cost-cutting exercise wrapped up in a faux save the children bow and ribbon.
02:23pm 15/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1652 posts
Like wearing seatbelts?


Dude it's enough already with the terrible analogies. Arguing from analogy requires the proposed objects of comparison to be relevantly similar.

*edit* fixed, double phrase.
02:42pm 15/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25015 posts
Arguing from analogy requires the proposed requires the proposed objects of comparison to be relevantly similar.
what

An extra the proposed and that was meant to say relatively right? :)
02:58pm 15/04/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10461 posts
Don't pretend that financial coercion isn't happening obes. You are OK with the government bullying people into doing something that you agree with, what happens when it is something you don't agree with?

If it is something I don't agree with, and every reputable scientist and doctor on the planet agrees with it... I am having a hard time picturing what exactly this is ... I tell you what, you come with the scenario because I deadset can not think of one.

But even so that is a Red Herring. Immunisation is a good thing.

What if instead of tying those things into getting immunised we instead abolished those things i.e. Family Tax Benefits and Child care rebates. And then created new ones called Immunised Child Tax Benefits and Immunised Child Care rebates... would that be ok?
03:20pm 15/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1653 posts
If it is something I don't agree with


Drinking alcohol?
03:25pm 15/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17441 posts
You know as well as I it wouldn't. You a skirting around my point. By making this policy happen, it is effectively forcing the poor into medicating against their will (if they so choose to not want to immunize) whilst having no effect on the rich.
I'm not debating the effectiveness of immunization. I have issue with the government coercing people into medication that they may otherwise not want. Eroding peoples rights is not my idea of good government, particularly when it targets one demographic over another.

I said it before, I'm OK with the government giving a BONUS to people who immunize, not take away with their welfare as punishment for not doing what the government says. It effectively achieves the same result, a slight increase in immunization compliance and doesn't punish people by taking something away. It just doesn't give extra.

Now before you say, oh why don't we just reduce their pay overall and give a new bonus to those that immunize. The answer is because the current payment is already in place.
03:29pm 15/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22546 posts
Don't pretend that financial coercion isn't happening obes. You are OK with the government bullying people into doing something that you agree with, what happens when it is something you don't agree with?


There is no threat of imprisonment. If one wants to collect government benefits, they comply with government rules.
04:15pm 15/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25016 posts
Good thing prison is the only way a government could coerce a person otherwise we'd have a problem here.
04:34pm 15/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1693 posts
They also have a monopoly on violence.

So many options to get the people to just have a vaccine!
04:44pm 15/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17443 posts

There is no threat of imprisonment. If one wants to collect government benefits, they comply with government rules.


Coercion means imprisonment now? Good old infi, all for the rights of the individual, but not for the poor, they don't count as people.
04:46pm 15/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1267 posts
Coercion wouldn't even work on anti-vaxxers. They already hold an irrational position and wouldn't be swayed by a rational response.
04:53pm 15/04/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11654 posts
If one wants to collect government benefits, they comply with government rules.


Welfare is a a Right for all Australians.
It doesnt rely on the Medical history of their children, which is Private.
This will inflict deeper Poverty on people who are already fearful of Government and could lead to ugly outcomes.

Bit surprised you support this Infi arent you Libertarian ?
This is Government financially pressuring Parents to introduce Medical Treatment to kids who are not Ill.

05:15pm 15/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22547 posts
Good thing prison is the only way a government could coerce a person otherwise we'd have a problem here.


And violence.
06:43pm 15/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25019 posts
Jesus you're dumb.
07:02pm 15/04/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10462 posts
Drinking alcohol?

Explain your scenario.

They already heavily tax alcohol.
What are they not giving me? And how are they proving I drink alcohol?

See vaccination it is up to me to record it (choice), it is up to me get it done (choice), and it is up to me to claim the benefits(choice).

Welfare is a a Right for all Australians.

Well I can't get Family Tax benefits... because I don't meet their criteria ... Am I being denied a right?
07:03pm 15/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17444 posts
Thankfully Infi wasn't in control for robotic laws, he would totally miss the 'or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. Leading to rather awkward human-robot interactions hehehe
07:05pm 15/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22548 posts
Welfare is a a Right for all Australians.


It is provided on the basis of compliance. E.g. Newstart has Work for the Dole.

The vaccination condition applies to childcare rebate which is not welfare in the strict sense i.e. a payment to help buy the necessities of life. CCR is just another handout that need never have existed.
08:23pm 15/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39287 posts
Like wearing seatbelts?


or wearing helmets on your biek!
09:50pm 15/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1654 posts
Well Drinking Alcohol, so far as I understand is drinking a carcinogen. here for cancer

Your ability to operate equipment is degraded after any amount of alcohol, the .05 limit is what we have determined to be a socially acceptable risk to take.

There is no suggestion that the tax rate on Alcohol comes close to paying for the societal damage it causes.

So if you have ever driven with alcohol in your system, for example, even under the limit, you have failed to minimize the risk to people around you. You c***. The only reasonable explanation for such behavior is that you are actively attempting to cause serious injury to all those around you. Not that you have different and reasonable assessment of the risks.

Would you as a result support in essence fining people at least $7000 per child per year, for engaging in such risky behavior, with a complete disregard for their own health?

If not, how would you couch why you should be able drink something which has uncontested negative health effects, which has a substantial social toll, not covered by its tax. Society has demonstrated fairly clearly it isn't able to self regulate out of the damage.

See vaccination it is up to me to record it (choice), it is up to me get it done (choice), and it is up to me to claim the benefits(choice).


The final step of that is the part where it falls down Obes. The concern which toll is expressing pretty f*****g obviously i might say, is that for lower income families who need the benefits, the first two are no longer choices, because the final one isn't a choice.

in other news, the Christian Science Church has been exempted. Good to see nobody is making a mockery of a well designed policy. Kicking policy goals with both feet. Just to get that straight, the only people likely to be actually swayed by this policy already have among the highest vaccination rates in the country will be penalized, but peddlers of unscientific misinformation from a 'religion' aren't.

It's one of the best things any government has done in over a decade.


For reals.
07:30am 16/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22549 posts
Low income families don't "need" the childcare benefit. It makes childcare cheaper. If you want cheaper childcare, get your kids vaccinated. Many centres refuse entry anyway. I am surprised there are centres that still accept unvaccinated kids. If you don't vaccinate your kids look after them yourself.
08:13am 16/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1655 posts
infi for some families this should read:

It makes childcare affordable.
08:18am 16/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17445 posts
Most of this is a moot point when it comes to vaccination. Most low income families DO vaccinate their children. This policy wont actually do much to change that.

I thought infi was all about stopping the wastage. A slight increase in low income family vaccination rates will probably be a really inefficient and relatively expensive avenue that doesn't actually target the demographic that is responsible for the lower than acceptable vaccination rates.. So from that point of view it's a failed policy from the start.

Also by adding a condition to welfare, one that is heavily pushing medical intervention on healthy individuals, it lowers the public view towards the rights of the poor. It may not be that much of an issue for this policy, but it adds weight to the next. A potential, slippery slope. An unneeded one at that.

BasicsCard is another step in that direction. What's next?
09:09am 16/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1694 posts
People who don't immunise probably need their money managed for them because they're f*****g idiots.
11:04am 16/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25020 posts
Low income families don't "need" the childcare benefit.
I sure am glad we have a man inside daddy's impossible to fail office who is qualified to make statements on behalf of low income families like this.
11:13am 16/04/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16045 posts
Low income families don't "need" the childcare benefit

OK. You need to stop making declarative statements about what poor people need.

It makes you sound like a silver spoon f***wit given your established and largely inherited well-off position, which undermines your credibility.

This assumes you actually want to sway people to your opinion and not use the forum as a place to yell about things with your fingers in your ears the way old mate Brool does.
11:24am 16/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17446 posts
Hoggy. mate. Low income familes don't need childcare benefits because they are living the dream of living off the dole and not having to work at all!
11:29am 16/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1268 posts

They seem like decent people who are in need of a lucky break..........

https://twitter.com/abcnewsNT/status/588522610339684352



Also this.

http://i.imgur.com/7zjHQlb.jpg
12:30pm 16/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25021 posts
That's an obvious parody account made by a dumb racist that hasn't been active since christmas time. You've really blown the lid open on this while refugee thing brool. Thanks for that.

Also when you lock people up indefinitely for no crime in s***** conditions these sort of things happen brool. Imagine if they locked up a bunch of white people for no reason. How long do you think it would be before they rioted? At soonest hours, at latest days. I know you've been locked in your basement a long time now so confinement seems normal to you, but actual people enjoy their freedom to go outside and stuff. It can send them kind of crazy when that's taken away for no reason.
12:45pm 16/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22550 posts

OK. You need to stop making declarative statements about what poor people need.

It makes you sound like a silver spoon f***wit given your established and largely inherited well-off position, which undermines your credibility.

This assumes you actually want to sway people to your opinion and not use the forum as a place to yell about things with your fingers in your ears the way old mate Brool does.


Wrong again. Childcare benefit is not used to buy food or the necessities of life. It is used to make childcare affordable. Childcare is not a necessity of life. A lot of this is wealth redistribution dressed up as life saving welfare. Before childcare exploded in the 90s with the government rebates it was a cottage industry.

Whatever the government funds is guaranteed to explode in popularity. Placing the vaccination condition is completely reasonable.
01:56pm 16/04/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16046 posts
Wrong again. Childcare benefit is not used to buy food or the necessities of life. It is used to make childcare affordable. Childcare is not a necessity of life. A lot of this is wealth redistribution dressed up as life saving welfare. Before childcare exploded in the 90s with the government rebates it was a cottage industry.

Whatever the government funds is guaranteed to explode in popularity. Placing the vaccination condition is completely reasonable.

Wrong again.

Childcare is necessary for many lower middle income homes to meet their essential living requirements. A single median or (god forbid!) minimum wage income cannot properly support a family, believe it or not infi. The situation 20 years ago (what the f***, you're a goddamn moron sometimes) is irrelevant.

You are so f*****g out of touch its astonishing.

I've said befoe
02:09pm 16/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1269 posts
Why do people have children if they know they can't afford it and know they will require hand outs. It's silly.

The best way to make childcare cheaper is less regulation. Childcare is heavily regulated and that's to ensure prices remain high.
02:12pm 16/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22551 posts
So without childcare benefit which has only been in 25 years, society as we know it collapses?

Talk about being out of touch. This is the welfare dependent state in full flight.
02:12pm 16/04/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16047 posts
So without childcare benefit which has only been in 25 years, society as we know it collapses?

Talk about being out of touch. This is the welfare dependent state in full flight.

Society as we know it? No. I didn't say that. Did I say that somewhere, you f*****g c****tain?

I did say that it would be astonishingly difficult for many people to get by. How can a family of 5 survive on a $575 per week net income?

The 90s saw the rise of the second household family income as the norm, and cost of living adjusted aroudn that. CCB played a part in that, but you can't seriously and HONESTLY suggest that you could remove childcare support without ripping the rug out from under a huge number of families in 2015?!?!??!?!

What do you imagine would be the effect on workforce participation you f*****g numpty?
02:14pm 16/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22552 posts
The indisposable right to free welfare does not extend to childcare benefit. If a family wants a double income to buy nice things, and they want to access a childcare benefit in order to facilitate their second income, they will comply with basic government rules. That's life.
02:22pm 16/04/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16048 posts
The indisposable right to free welfare does not extend to childcare benefit. If a family wants a double income to buy nice things, and they want to access a childcare benefit in order to facilitate their second income, they will comply with basic government rules. That's life.

A family does not want a double income to buy nice things, a family has a double income just to get by.

Is $575 enough for a 3-5 person family infi? Do the math. Rent, food, clothing, electricity. Don't bother including alcohol or smokes or things that people on a minimum wage shouldn't expect, like entertainment or birthday presents or holidays. Just rent and food and car repayments (or public transport bills) and school books and school fees and s*** like that.

Come back to me with a working $575 family budget.
02:24pm 16/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25022 posts
So without childcare benefit which has only been in 25 years, society as we know it collapses?
Strawman argument. It's like you have some sort of pathological need to use strawman arguments. You use them literally 100% of the time. I know self-reflection and honesty are not really your thing, but you should ask yourself why whenever you're trying to make one of your 'points' you use logical fallacies.

Spoiler:
It's because you can't argue your thoughts rationally because they're all dumb and wrong
02:26pm 16/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17447 posts

If a family wants a double income to buy nice things, and they want to access a childcare benefit in order to facilitate their second income, they will comply with basic government rules. That's life.


Of course they must comply with basic government rules, you cry about the government stealing your money by tax, to live in this country you must comply with basic government rules.

The argument is that people shouldn't do what the government says. The argument is that what the government is choosing to do is wrong. Interesting that a person who is meant to be so liberal supports what is essentially forced medication.

What it comes down to is that you truly believe that people on welfare are a sub-class of people that do not get the same rights as those not on welfare. Instead of having the rights of choice, you are totally OK with government coercion to force the will of the government on those people. You are not OK with same coercion to force the will of the government on YOU.
02:49pm 16/04/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10464 posts
I am all for removing the religious objection grounds on vaccinations. (But it'll never get anywhere)

And porno you explained the negatives of alcohol. Good great whatever.
Explain the scenario where, they are not giving me something if I drink alcohol.
ps. I am fine with a 0.00 limit on driving.


Here I'll make one up for you. "No medical treatment if involved in an accident and the driver had a BAC > 0.0." (I don't think the science or medical profession will back it ... so still doesn't meet the criteria)

Toddler badly injured in an accident where mum was 0.01, gets driven to hospital but refused treatment, outcome dead baby, totally preventable but a law caused the death.

Now lets compare that to immunisation.
Toddler gets measles where mom just didn't bother, gets to hospital they can't save the kid, outcome dead baby, totally preventable but a stupid choice caused the death.



02:49pm 16/04/15 Permalink
Reverend Evil
Wynnum, Queensland
22200 posts
Toddler badly injured in an accident where mum was 0.01, gets driven to hospital but refused treatment, outcome dead baby, totally preventable but a law caused the death.

Now lets compare that to immunisation.
Toddler gets measles where mom just didn't bother, gets to hospital they can't save the kid, outcome dead baby, totally preventable but a stupid choice caused the death.


Maybe I'm stupid, but I have no idea what the f*** you're talking about here. I have been drinking but I don't understand that at all. lol
03:03pm 16/04/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10465 posts
I was straw manning someones straw man.
03:04pm 16/04/15 Permalink
Reverend Evil
Wynnum, Queensland
22201 posts
Ah, coolies.

Well. I'm just about to watch Ghostbusters so if anyone is bored you're more than welcome to come over.
03:12pm 16/04/15 Permalink
Dodgymon
Brisbane, Queensland
2786 posts
Will I get an RBJ while watching Ghostbusters?
04:00pm 16/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1656 posts
Well no actually mine isn't a strawman.

The negative societal effects of alcohol aren't confined to driving for a start. Secondly its engaged in merely for enjoyment, so the harm you can visit on yourself and others by its consumption should be even less susceptible to management by the person as opposed to the state.

The question isn't are you fine with with 0% driving, the question is would you support taking away child support payments from someone who drove within the legal limit, merely because of the associated elevation of risk.

Immunization is a risk management program Obes. To talk about specific examples is to conflate anecdote with data. There is no suggestion that the Measels virus will become extinct as a result of vaccination. It's all about managing the risks.

So with that in mind, the increase of un-vaccinated children is about 20,000 over 10 years. Or a year on year change of 0.0095% of the population over the decade.

Now I find it unsurprising that you wouldn't have a problem removing the religious exemption, but you said:
It's one of the best things any government has done in over a decade.


In light of a sober examination of the extent and cause of the problem explain to me how this can be described as a good policy. It's a virtually non-extant problem caused by the exact thing the policy doesn't and can't address. It's political grandstanding over a non-issue, where scott morrison gets to look reasonable and tough at the same time.

I don't know anybody here who is saying that vaccines are ineffective, a fully subsidized immunization program isn't a sensible and effective public health policy, or that vaccines covered in the payment scheme have side effects that you can't safely ignore.

I'm vaccinated, my entire family is vaccinated. I would attempt to persuade anyone I know who wasn't they should. I'm thankful that is the case.

There is a huge difference however, between accepting that engaging in vaccination is a good idea, with positive outcomes not confined merely to the subjects well being, and then, in virtue of the former, you are free to push it on everyone regardless of whether they want it or not.

The whole argument of "ERMAGERD Herd Immunity" would have some purchase if the overwhelming majority of parents didn't vaccinate their kids. But they do, over 90%. At the current trend it will take 105 years to reach 89%

The fact that you would consider it acceptable take money off children (which is the effect of the policy) who belong to a demographic that can safely free-ride, before engaging in an appropriate education campaign is a breathtaking lack of respect for basic human rights.

You've been dogwhistled by scott morrison. Hope it feels good.
04:39pm 16/04/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7144 posts
10:51pm 16/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1695 posts
10:12am 17/04/15 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
20657 posts

The Abbott government found $4m for the climate contrarian Bjørn Lomborg to establish his “consensus centre” at an Australian university, even as it struggled to impose deep spending cuts on the higher education sector
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/17/abbott-government-gives-4m-to-help-climate-sceptic-set-up-australian-centre?CMP=soc_567
01:15pm 17/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1271 posts

Out of nothing more than just pure selfishness.

Italian police have arrested 15 Muslim migrants suspected of throwing a dozen Christians from a boat in the Mediterranean. Police in the Sicilian capital Palermo said they had arrested the men on Thursday after survivors reported they had thrown 12 people from Nigeria and Ghana to their deaths.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-17/asylum-seekers-throw-fellow-passengers-overboard-religion-row/6399270


01:30pm 17/04/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10466 posts
PornoPete.


These are welfare handouts and Tax breaks. A large number of countries provide neither. The government can stick whatever requirements they like on it, and it is still something for nothing.


If the government chooses to tie them into the unrelated activity of driving a car with 0.001 BAC... ok ... but it makes no sense because a large number of people don't get either, thus it has little meaning or consequence for changing that behaviour in a large percentage of the population.

01:55pm 17/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1657 posts
Obes,

The argument isn't that difficult to follow.

Injecting someone with a medicine against their will, however misguided, is a straightforward violation of their rights (you could point to any number of human rights conventions but the ICCPR, CAT, and CRC spring to mind).

The subordination of that right is permissible only where a grave communal threat exists.

For a certain subset of the community, removing access to welfare is going to be tantamount to forcing them to take medicine.

The question then becomes, does the current level of anti-vaccination present a grave communal threat. I think it's pretty clear that with immunization rates over 90%, and the anit-vax movement gaining momentum at the terrifying rate of 0.0095% of the population per annum, the answer to that question is no.

It follows that there is insufficient grounds to subordinate their right not to be medicated against their will.

so far as I can see it's a hysterical response to a minor problem. Classic political grandstanding.

but it makes no sense because a large number of people don't get either, thus it has little meaning or consequence for changing that behaviour in a large percentage of the population.


I don't understand what you are saying here? Not enough people claim benefits to make worthwhile change in societal behavior? Doesn't that apply like exactly to a vaccination program?
03:23pm 17/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39296 posts
i am happy if stupid people are forced to take medicine that will make my kids safer, especially when they dont want to.
03:34pm 17/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1696 posts
What about the rights of children who cannot be vaccinated because of medical reasons?

What happens when they contract a life threatening easily preventable, should have been wiped out illness?
03:35pm 17/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1658 posts
Spook quantify the risk faced by your children as a result of this. Because it seems to me that the actual danger faced by your kids as a result of such a minimal lack of coverage, could be equated to any number of risky behaviors you engage in each day. Driving them in your car is almost certainly more risky.

Redhat, I don't think you were obvious enough.

Maybe include a picture of a severely deformed child. Might make your point more salient.

You people make it sound like its march of the red army or something.
03:58pm 17/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1697 posts
Try thinking of an answer to the point I make instead of trying to debase it as a non issue and side stepping it.
04:05pm 17/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1659 posts
Try not making ridiculous appeals to emotion.
04:07pm 17/04/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7145 posts
09:46pm 17/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17452 posts
The chances of a child catching a dangerous disease due to an unvaccinated child whilst the general vaccinations are at 90% is very low. I suspect it is really, really low.
It's a terrible thing to be sure. I have children, I would be devastated. I still don't support people being medicating against their will or the will of their guardian.

Where do you draw the line? Parents who smoke with children in the house? That can cause the child to get cancer? Should we forcibly remove those parents so their children don't die of cancer? No that's silly, the chances of that happening is really, really low. Certainly not high enough to warrant the massive erosion of the rights of the parent.

This is the essentially the same thing. People are going to be forced to medicate their children against their will. A government is going to inject a human being with a medication that will alter their internal structure, it will alter the person. Against their will. Not for a matter of public safety, but for the sake of political point scoring.
We know that the majority of anti-vaxers are not on centrelink, so it can't be public safety and can only be politically motivated.
11:32pm 17/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39297 posts
i am happy for governments to remove children from smokers also.
06:09am 18/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1274 posts

I wonder if the "AUSTRALIA IS RACIST" self-loathing frothers are paying attention to whats happening South Africa?

After the "evil and racist whites" were "defeated" in South Africa, apartheid was meant to be over and South Africa was meant to be a utopia for tolerance, especially racial tolerance.

Fast forward to 2015, Half of the white population has fled the country do to their lands being taken and/or due to racial violence towards them and now they are even turning on their fellow Africans.Migrants are now living in camps so they arent attacked by the locals.

South Africa has sought diplomatic support from countries across the continent to defeat the "demon" of anti-immigrant violence in which at least four people have been killed over the past fortnight.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-17/south-africa-seeks-support-as-anti-immigrant-violence-spreads/6402608


11:44am 18/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1698 posts
The chances of a child catching a dangerous disease due to an unvaccinated child whilst the general vaccinations are at 90% is very low. I suspect it is really, really low.
It's a terrible thing to be sure. I have children, I would be devastated. I still don't support people being medicating against their will or the will of their guardian.

Where do you draw the line? Parents who smoke with children in the house? That can cause the child to get cancer? Should we forcibly remove those parents so their children don't die of cancer? No that's silly, the chances of that happening is really, really low. Certainly not high enough to warrant the massive erosion of the rights of the parent.

This is the essentially the same thing. People are going to be forced to medicate their children against their will. A government is going to inject a human being with a medication that will alter their internal structure, it will alter the person. Against their will. Not for a matter of public safety, but for the sake of political point scoring.
We know that the majority of anti-vaxers are not on centrelink, so it can't be public safety and can only be politically motivated.


Removing kids from their parents is obviously bad even if they are dirty smokers. Immunising children has no drawbacks except "muh rights".
12:41pm 18/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17455 posts

Immunising children has no drawbacks except "muh rights".


No drawbacks in your opinion. You don't value your rights as highly as others, not this one anyway. There is no reasonable reason to force people to do this via threatening to cut their welfare. To let it go unchallenged only encourages the next attempt at a reduction in rights, and so on.
If you are going to erode the rights of a person, at least make it for something that is truly a problem.
If the vaccination rates where below 80% for people on welfare, then you may have an argument. However when those on welfare have a higher percentage of vaccination than those who aren't I submit you don't really have a good argument to erode a persons rights.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 14:49:12 18/Apr/15
02:46pm 18/04/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11656 posts
This bothers me a whole lot more than the Metadata thing.
It is a shocking abuse of power.
The Anti-vaxxers need to pool some money and hire a top silk.

need a Bill of Rights.
03:21pm 18/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39301 posts
yes, people who want to inflict their ignorance on the general public should have their rights looked after!
03:51pm 18/04/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2198 posts
I submit you don't really have a good argument to erode a persons rights.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 14:49:12 18/Apr/15


Please show us a link to these alleged rights you think there are?
05:01pm 18/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17456 posts
You are right Jimmy, we don't have rights explicitly listed in a Bill and our Constitution is rather lacking in that area.

I guess we should all just bend over because we don't have many rights at all.
05:19pm 18/04/15 Permalink
koopz
Brisbane, Queensland
10705 posts
if your spouse or your children are in Uni - do yourself a favour and sit in on a few of their classes.


my wife complained to me in her 3rd year of her degree that she couldn't understand her instructor - I attended quietly on a couple of occasions.


I could understand the lady - though at the same time I was speaking to Chinese and Indian tech support reps as a part of my job. It wasn't too great a stretch, though I was used to hearing thick accents and broken English on a daily basis - not from an instructor. I left the session before my wife was aware of my presence.


I'm no closer to understanding what it is that my wife does as a teacher however.


things have changed greatly since i went to primary school. Does this happen for high school also? I'm unaware of the difference in the Uni courses my wife took and the path that secondary teachers walk

last edited by koopz at 19:56:10 18/Apr/15
07:53pm 18/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17457 posts
Koopz, What?
11:08pm 18/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1275 posts

Atleast Tonez knows how to party on a Saturday night.

https://twitter.com/matthewlesh/status/589410680391897089


11:19pm 18/04/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11662 posts
Swanny wants another go at creating a surplus

Wayne Swan's decision to renominate for another term in Parliament has sparked fear amongst his colleagues about his leadership intentions and prompted one long-time supporter to publicly call for the former Treasurer's immediate resignation.

Several Labor insiders have told Fairfax Media they fear Mr Swan is attempting to engineer his own return to the frontbench as well as helping install Tanya Plibersek as leader in the long term.


http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/veteran-wayne-swan-should-go-says-longtime-friend-cameron-milner-20150419-1mnnj3.html


10:55pm 19/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1277 posts
The "worlds best treasurer" wants another go at desperately trying to get a surplus while actually increasing government spending and budget deficits.

If he is the best treasurer, i couldn't what the worst treasurer would be like.
01:42am 20/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1700 posts
Hahaha, protip, it's hockey.
07:28am 20/04/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39306 posts
lolz
07:49am 20/04/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7151 posts
Yeah they are both spineless jelly backs.

08:37am 20/04/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16051 posts
Curious how upset you are about this Toll.

Social welfare is not a right. There are lots and lots of contingencies. Stop calling welfare a right, no basic human rights are being impinged by any stretch. I'm the biggest supporter of social welfare on this forum (I literally advocate a national basic income which is the ultimate welfare state) but its not a right.

In my opinion, not vaccinating your children is a (mild) form of child abuse. You are denying them valid and appropriate medical treatment without valid cause, so coercion via social welfare instruments is absolutely appropriate.

If a parent refuses or does not seek urgent medical treatment for their child, they will be charged with criminal neglect and possibly murder / manslaughter if the kid dies.

If a kid dies from measles because a parent wilfully refused vaccination should they be charge? This is literally a possibility.

IMO, yes. Which makes coercion via welfare for vaccination is appropriate.
10:36am 20/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17459 posts
If China's real-estate collapses and the rumours that Chinese own a lot of Australian stuff like real estate, does that mean as China's real-estate collapses and people start having an severe money flow issues, they will start dumping their Australian Assets? This putting, would I would assume would be, fairly heavy downward pressure on our real-estate?

If this is true and at the same time global iron and other ores significant to Aus are on a down turn PLUS our governments utter failure to capture the renewable energy boom ... kind of means Aus is royally f***ed regardless of what budget decisions either major government party does?
10:37am 20/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22556 posts
being refused middle class welfare is not coercion

kind of means Aus is royally f***ed regardless of what budget decisions either major government party does?


not to mention china would be f***ed too... except theirs would be rioting and military crack downs.
10:38am 20/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17460 posts
I dislike the idea that a specific demographic is being targeted to be coerced by the government to do something, particularly invasive medication. I feel that this is not a morally right thing to do.
I also don't think it is morally right to deny a child vaccinations that may otherwise save their lives. Two wrongs don't make a right. By pushing vaccinations onto people, you don't solve the second problem anyway.

If it was truly an issue about vaccinations then legislate that ALL medically sound people must vaccinate. Ask yourself why that isn't happening and instead the government is just hitting the vulnerable, where the problem exists equally or more in the non-vulnerable demographics?

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 10:43:41 20/Apr/15
10:41am 20/04/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16052 posts
I dislike the idea that a specific demographic is being targeted to be coerced by the government to do something, particularly invasive medication. I feel that this is not a morally right thing to do.
I also don't think it is morally right to deny a child vaccinations that may otherwise save their lives. Two wrongs don't make a right. By pushing vaccinations onto people, you don't solve the second problem anyway.

A specific demographic is not being 'targetted'. CCB applies to almost all childcare enrolments. Lets get real here, CCB can in no sane way be described as a welfare program that just affects the poor:
http://i.imgur.com/2JiSniw.png
If it was truly an issue about vaccinations

Its not truly about a class war. Its a really silly point mate.
then legislate that ALL medically sound people must vaccinate. Ask yourself why that isn't happening and instead the government is just hitting the vulnerable, where the problem exists equally or more in the non-vulnerable demographics?

Its not happening because that is not a measured response to the scope of the problem. Fortunately the vast majority of children are vaccinated, but there is a disturbing trend to non-vaccination which is affecting the health and safety of children in Government-supported childcare placements who are unable to be vaccinated due to age or medical concerns.

Tying Government support for placements is a measured response. Legislating mandatory vaccinations is not. "Ask yourself why" is the sort of "wake up sheeple" bulls*** rhetoric that FaceMan does, and its beneath you. Its not a Government conspiracy or boot laid into poor people.
11:31am 20/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17461 posts
Fair enough Hoggy, I may have to concede defeat after that. See kids, political threads can change minds.

Although Hoggy, Family Tax Benefit A is also removed.
11:41am 20/04/15 Permalink
zaraq
Adelaide, South Australia
490 posts
The Federal Government has hinted at a rise in the GST, i thought the GST was returned lock stock and barrel back to the states as in a state of Communism where the committee redistributes the tax evenly back to the people so the reason for raised eye brows is, whats in it for the Federal Government?
12:43pm 20/04/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11663 posts
Anyone who is getting the Private Health Insurance Rebate should also be included.
12:54pm 20/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1278 posts
Im waiting for the day that the housing market collapses, so i can laugh at all the bogans who think they are some highly intelligent and savvy investor because they have bought a house in an expensive housing market bubble.

Then ill pick up a cheap house. BOOM.
01:04pm 20/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
8611 posts
This post has been removed.
Reason: Disruptive
Send Private Message
01:08pm 20/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17462 posts

Anyone who is getting the Private Health Insurance Rebate should also be included.


Absolutely.
01:23pm 20/04/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1660 posts
Hoggie,
The right in question isn't a right to welfare. It's about who has to take medicine and under what conditions. The fact that the CCB is also used by people who are relatively well off, doesn't speak anything to the fact that lower income families having it cut off is a undeniably going be a stronger influence on consent to take medicine they otherwise don't want.

The right in question, is the right to consent to being medicated NOT a right to welfare.

You don't need to talk about secret class warfare on behalf of Morrison et al, to see that lower income families will face a stronger coercive effect from this policy than wealthier ones.
The issue is what is the appropriate policy response to the problem, when the problem is appraised soberly.

So from someone who actually has to deal the problem:
ROBERT BOOY, PROF., WESTMEAD CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: There are better ways to approach hesitant parents. And if we take the time to listen to their questions as health professionals, if we give high-quality information, most parents who are hesitant will go and get their children immunised.

Immunisation sells itself. You don't have to coerce people.
source

The dude being quoted is this guy, he arguably knows a bit.

If that dude doesn't see the need then frankly I don't see any reason to strong arm people about this. The whole issue is about what people feel is best for their kids, in such a sensitive policy space I'd argue the lighter the policy touch the better.

Threatening to take significant amounts of money off people for something that you can usually just ask people to fix is using a sledgehammer to crack a peanut. In the context of misguided activism, I think a heavy handed policy response giving them a feeling of vindication is also a live concern.

Personally I just don't understand the whole debate. I get that people hate the idea of free-riding etc but in an area where the objective is to create a free-riding space(herd-immunity), wouldn't the optimal policy setting be to take maximum advantage of the free-riding? The people who medically can't be immunised don't make up 5% of the population not even close, so who cares who takes up the other slots?
01:23pm 20/04/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17463 posts

Im waiting for the day that the housing market collapses,


Do you have any idea of how that will affect how country overall? You think the government has a problem with pension welfare spending now? It will be significantly worse after an event like that. So much of Australias wealth is in Real Estate. Picking up a cheap house may be good for you, however I suspect the flow on effects will hurt you more overall, indirectly and quite possibly directly.

To wish that on people is pretty low dude.
01:25pm 20/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1279 posts

Do you have any idea of how that will affect how country overall?


I do, it's not going to be pleasant but its going to happen and we are all going to be in big trouble.. The ridicolous bubble we have isn't going to last and should/could have been averted.

It's like driving fast towards the edge off a cliff. We are nearly at the end, nothing you can do now.


You think the government has a problem with pension welfare spending now? It will be significantly worse after an event like that. So much of Australias wealth is in Real Estate


I know this.

To wish that on people is pretty low dude.


The property bubble will burst causing chaos in the economy, added with the fact that the government has a spending, debt and deficit crisis and won't be able to assist will devastating.

Australians will have to get use to a new way of life rather than the spoon fed good times of the mining boom where there is no more free rides. Sometimes people have to learn the hard way, and we definitely will be taught.

Greedy and selfish Australians only have themselves to blame.
01:31pm 20/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25031 posts
Being told by a little basement boy still completely dependent on his mother that the spoon-fed easy times will soon be over and we're all going to have to toughen up will never stop being hilarious. Here's some steps to you can take brool to stop being so hilarious -

1) get a job
2) read a book that hasn't been authored by Ayn Rand
3) go get laid by someone over the age of 10.
01:57pm 20/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1280 posts
Whenever you respond to my posts and you do your little cute incorrect "you are unemployed and live in a basement" fantasy routine, it reminds me of this video.

02:05pm 20/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
8613 posts
This post has been removed.
Reason: Not Relevant
Send Private Message
02:20pm 20/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22557 posts
it's not a matter of anyone's wishes (as if that will affect the outcome of the Australian housing market lol)

market mood is driven by herd mentality. as long as there is a bigger idiot willing to pay more then houses will be stable and/or rise. current market settings are designed to keep the real estate market buoyant with record low interest rates. rates have been cut recently BECAUSE the RBA knows the Australian economy is weak and fragile.

I agree that the super high prices of Sydney and Melbourne are driven partly by Chinese investment. The Chinese use Australian property as a safe haven for their laundered funds a discussed on Four Corners. If this pipeline of Chinese money dries up (not so dependent on the Chinese economy at large but mostly Chinese organised crime and plutocrats) then Australia will be in strife for sure as there will become an excess of sellers over buyers.

Means testing of pension could also become a future driver for a real estate pull back. If pensioners can no longer receive payments in their million dollar homes and have to downsize then once again there will be a rise in sellers over buyers.

Having been doing some more reading about negative gearing, I doubt it will ever be removed because it is a standard commercial tax deduction all over the world and for Australia to remove it from tax laws would force us to become the odd one out.
02:23pm 20/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1281 posts
Means testing of pension could also become a future driver for a real estate pull back. If pensioners can no longer receive payments i their million dollar homes and have to downsize then ponce again there will be a rise in sellers over buyers.


The oldies need to find something else to invest in. Theyll get a rude shock when the bubble pops too.

Ever since you've given the game away that you're a child sex tourist and I've started mentioning it you've completely stopped talking about your SE Asia trips that once upon a time you couldn't shut up about.


F*****g LOL. You are a great source of entertainment ;)
02:29pm 20/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22558 posts
yeah everyone who goes to SE Asia is a pervert. LOL
02:32pm 20/04/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
8614 posts
This post has been removed.
Reason: Not Relevant
Send Private Message
02:47pm 20/04/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11664 posts
You see brool one piece of advice I've actually taken from you is to read your posts carefully


Didnt fpot say a few days ago that nobody reads brools posts ??

ur a dummy fpot


03:46pm 20/04/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
254 posts

Those damn chinese and their laundering and market crashing! Despite the fact they'd lose a s***load of money in the process...

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/australia/balance-of-trade

Or maybe they were just taking advantage of a favourable exchange rate that came about because of a sudden massive trade deficit (on Aus's part) brought about by the declining value of our exports... the amount of foreign capital coming into aus is in direct proportion to our trade deficit.

I doubt anyone anywhere invests money to deliberately lose it all... even if they are ignorant billionaire commies.


06:36pm 21/04/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22560 posts
No one invests money to lose it. They are moving their assets from China into a safe country governed by rule of law in case their dynasty at home falls out of favour with the Party.
10:27pm 21/04/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7154 posts
safe country governed by rule of law


To me that means just a country with less corruption.
08:19am 22/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1701 posts

I wonder if the liberals will have the ticker to reign in these ridiculous super concessions handed out by the most profligate treasurer ever?

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/apr/21/labor-plans-to-rein-in-super-concessions-for-wealthy-in-bid-to-raise-14bn

Or are they "deficit deniers"?


09:08am 22/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1283 posts
Probably not. They have already shown they don't have the ticker to do anything substantial to reduce the deficit which is unfortunate.

No doubt Labor will do a "OMG, ATTACKING THE ELDERLY" routine as well.
01:45pm 22/04/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
255 posts
can't imagine being paid $6000 per week ($3000,000 per year)... or around $3000 after tax and super... could have that stroker crank within a few weeks instead of a few years.

I just can't imagine it...........................brm brm brm brm QQ
08:36pm 22/04/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1995 posts
can't imagine being paid $6000 per week
When I worked in PNG Southern Highlands that's how much I was being paid. Alas even that amount didn't compensate enough for the experience.
11:24pm 22/04/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7155 posts
Chris Bowen has said Labor will 'grandfather' current Negative Gearing arrangements and make changes to make Australia's favorite tax rort.

I hate Labor but I will now be voting for them next election.

If the Libs were fair dinkum about 'ending the age of entitlement' they would have already implemented something like this.
08:21am 23/04/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1706 posts
Chris Bowen has said Labor will 'grandfather' current Negative Gearing arrangements and make changes to make Australia's favorite tax rort.

I hate Labor but I will now be voting for them next election.

If the Libs were fair dinkum about 'ending the age of entitlement' they would have already implemented something like this.


Here's why LNP wouldn't touch negative gearing with a barge pole.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDt1yjdUsAAk7j5.jpg

Age of entitlement is here to stay for the landed gentry.
09:46am 29/04/15 Permalink
zaraq
Adelaide, South Australia
505 posts
I find all this hairy chested rarara coming from T Abbott and co thinking of imposing sanctions or retribution over the Bali 9 incident so hypocritical i could give the swine a slap.

John Howard took the stance "tough on drugs" and T Abbott also took the same point of view.

Australia endorsed the death penalty for the Bali Nine members the moment the Australian Federal Police tipped off the Indonesians in 2005. Widodo knows that Abbott supports his over-arching drugs strategy.
11:12am 29/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1292 posts
Borrowing a line from fpot to describe the indos after these executions - Brown Savages.



Here's why LNP wouldn't touch negative gearing with a barge pole.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDt1yjdUsAAk7j5.jpg

Age of entitlement is here to stay for the landed gentry.


> implying negative gearing is an entitlement.
> implying recieving a tax break is the same as recieving a handout when it's a handin.
01:34pm 29/04/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1294 posts
I'm at the aboriginal protest in melbourne. So many vash types here, basically no aboriginals. Plenty of Socialist alliance signs and red flags.

Another great opportunity for the Reds to advertise themselves without explaining who they really are. They also have kids walking around in groups handing out their propaganda. It's basically child abuse.


http://i.imgur.com/QNlNwHa.jpg
05:24pm 01/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17518 posts
I dunno know about you but I see a fair few aboriginal linage looking people in that photo.
05:37pm 01/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25054 posts
It's basically child abuse.
You're an expert in that field.
05:40pm 01/05/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11679 posts
The Member for Domestic Violence has another problem
http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/more-claims-against-qld-mp-gordon/story-e6frfku9-1227330367522

This soap opera has to end.
He is technically bankrupt if he cant pay child support.
He has to go.
11:00pm 01/05/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7163 posts
So true.

What s**** me is that Bull S***ten would be just as hypocritical.

This country is royally f***ed.

07:56pm 02/05/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2202 posts

The Member for Domestic Violence has another problem
http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/more-claims-against-qld-mp-gordon/story-e6frfku9-1227330367522

This soap opera has to end.
He is technically bankrupt if he cant pay child support.
He has to go.


You don't know much about how child support works. As for the rest of the claim it's a "he said she said".
08:44pm 02/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25057 posts
07:30pm 03/05/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7166 posts
08:22am 06/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1712 posts

Hockey owned... again

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-06/fact-check-did-abolishing-negative-gearing-push-up/6447910


Negative gearing needs to go.

It should only be available for new buildings because you're actually increasing supply and taking a risk in investment. Builders might not finish, or do a dodgy job or something.
08:56am 06/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17527 posts
I think Negative gearing on real estate should be allowed on a diminishing returns basis. You get 100% negative gearing on 1 investment property, 50% on a 2nd investment property and 0% on the the third and onwards. This allows negative gearing to remain to help boost supply without creating a tax break for the property speculators. Why should the tax payer fund the risks of speculators?
09:16am 06/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22584 posts
Should negative gearing apply to commercial property?

Should it apply to owning a retirement village or aged care facility which are commercial but also residential in nature?

Cancelling negative gearing would be a terrible idea. It distorts the overall investment laws by singling out one area for punitive treatment. Beware the law of unintended consequences.
09:25am 06/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1713 posts
What's being distorted is affordable housing.

Also Christine Milne has resigned as Greens party leader.

I wonder if Adam Bandt will take over.
09:36am 06/05/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11684 posts
Thank god Milne is going.
That womans voice could have been used at GitMo for torture.
Surely that Sarah crybaby isnt going to be made Leader ?

Negative Gearing is reasonable for a few properties and gets people interested in investing, but I was reading somewhere that 30 000 people have 5 or more properties, thats just ripping off Taxpayers, like those clowns with 12 Solar Panels getting FITs.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/taxpayers-fork-out-as-investors-fill-pockets/story-fni0fiyv-1227304073156
11:27am 06/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17528 posts
You couldn't cancel it outright. You'd have to phase it out.
11:37am 06/05/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11686 posts
Islam is changing Britain
Can you imagine something like this happening at a Labor Rally here ?

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/files/2015/05/segregation9-563x413.png

Men on the Left
Women on the Right

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2015/05/labour-stays-silent-over-gender-segregation-at-party-rally/

02:22pm 06/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17529 posts
Arg I read the comments of that post Faceman. Well some of them I couldn't get very far.
03:03pm 06/05/15 Permalink
Eorl
AusGamers Editor
Brisbane, Queensland
14661 posts

Islam is changing Britain
Can you imagine something like this happening at a Labor Rally here ?

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/files/2015/05/segregation9-563x413.png

Men on the Left
Women on the Right

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2015/05/labour-stays-silent-over-gender-segregation-at-party-rally/


Screw that, I'd get right in the middle of the segregated females, open a beer and party on like an Aussie at a rally.
07:30pm 06/05/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1296 posts

Islam is changing Britain
Can you imagine something like this happening at a Labor Rally here ?

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/files/2015/05/segregation9-563x413.png

Men on the Left
Women on the Right

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2015/05/labour-stays-silent-over-gender-segregation-at-party-rally/



Labour in the UK purposely increased immigration to increase their voter base, and this is exactly what they knew they would get.
12:03am 07/05/15 Permalink
baz
Victoria
913 posts

Its not happening because that is not a measured response to the scope of the problem. Fortunately the vast majority of children are vaccinated, but there is a disturbing trend to non-vaccination which is affecting the health and safety of children in Government-supported childcare placements who are unable to be vaccinated due to age or medical concerns.

Tying Government support for placements is a measured response. Legislating mandatory vaccinations is not. "Ask yourself why" is the sort of "wake up sheeple" bulls*** rhetoric that FaceMan does, and its beneath you. Its not a Government conspiracy or boot laid into poor people.



Excellent.
Love your work.
12:35am 07/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1714 posts

This guy...

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/climate-change-a-unled-ruse-says-tony-abbotts-business-adviser-maurice-newman-20150507-ggwuzt.html

This is not about facts or logic. It's about a new world order under the control of the UN


Wake up sheeple!


10:11am 08/05/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1297 posts
ROFL. Best trolling of the left this week. Watch the internet break now.
04:57pm 08/05/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11690 posts
Bill Nye - The Science guy

"we need a carbon tax to redistribute wealth...we need government to run things...everyone else should shut up"

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/03/bill-nye-we-need-carbon-tax-to.html


05:55pm 08/05/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7167 posts
I don't care what type of skydaddy you worship but ffs sake this sharia law bulls*** is getting out of hand.
07:14pm 08/05/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1298 posts
I don't care what type of skydaddy you worship but ffs sake this sharia law bulls*** is getting out of hand.


That's racist!
08:35pm 08/05/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1299 posts
The Left: Support democracy until you overwhelming lose a general election.

http://t.co/exbQ3lPQO4
01:24pm 10/05/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11694 posts
UKIP polled 13% of the votes = 1 seat
The Scottish Nationals win 5% of the votes = 56 seats



03:23pm 10/05/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1300 posts
Bernard Keane is your classic left leaning journalist who is completely and fully partisan, like mike carlton was.
02:27am 11/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22586 posts
Keane didn't answer Pyne's question.
09:15am 11/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17536 posts
Pyne didn't answer Keane's question first haha
09:56am 11/05/15 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
971 posts
Michael Keane is a bully. It's not very sporting to pick up an intellectual nothing like Christopher Pyne.
11:26am 11/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22587 posts
Pyne didn't answer Keane's question first haha


Keane's "question" was an insult, it was a not genuine question. It just reinforces his political bias.
11:50am 11/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17537 posts
Ah, so Pyne's insult is still a valid question but Keane's isn't.
11:57am 11/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22588 posts
Pyne was asking Keane why, as a journalist, he is demonstrating bias. This was a response to Keane making a wild claim to Pyne. Is Keane purporting to be a journo or just a gossip writer...
12:11pm 11/05/15 Permalink
Vash
4487 posts
No such thing as unbiased journalism, especially in the Australian and telegraph case. Closest would be ABC and Fairfax.
12:15pm 11/05/15 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
972 posts
I actually checked out this thread again as I was thinking about making a post about the *lack* of impartiality with the ABC. And remember, I'm well in the loony-left side of politics according to Political Compass (something like -8,-8).
12:19pm 11/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22589 posts
ABC Brisbane's regular political commentator is Keane. Says it all really.
12:34pm 11/05/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1664 posts
I actually checked out this thread again as I was thinking about making a post about the *lack* of impartiality with the ABC


Er care to flesh that out a little? I feel I'm tempting a gamergate tirade.
01:15pm 11/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17538 posts
They are both being douche's infi, why support one douche over the other when both are doing essentially the same thing?
01:25pm 11/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22590 posts
Pyne asked a legitimate question about why unis have to quash dissent and foster group think.

Keane makes a blatantly false (and unrelated) accusation in response. That's great journalism.
01:32pm 11/05/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1665 posts
Pyne asked a legitimate question about why unis have to quash dissent and foster group think.


When you have to make the argument "lomborg is just asking questions, what is everyone afraid of?" you've going to conspiracy town and need to rethink your point of view.
01:46pm 11/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17540 posts
Pyne didn't ask a question. He made a statement.

Your first response was that Keane didn't answer the question, when it was pointed out that neither did Pyne you changed the goal posts, and then again. It seems pretty clear that you'll just keep shifting things around so that you don't have accept that Pyne is a bit of dolt. Carry on supporting incompetent MP's, and governments.
01:49pm 11/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22591 posts
when it was pointed out that neither did Pyne you changed the goal posts


Keane's question was a fictional insult. Pyne's question was directly in response to Keane's bias and unprofessionalism.

When you have to make the argument "lomborg is just asking questions, what is everyone afraid of?" you've going to conspiracy town and need to rethink your point of view.


the entire climate change industry relies on government research grants but if a different line of research emerges that the academic industry disgarees with then it is doomed. the vice-chancellors are cowed into submission. good to see the system working.
02:18pm 11/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1717 posts

Lomborg is completely free to submit his papers to publications for peer review like every other scientist has to.
He shouldn't just get a soapbox because he's "challenging the status quo".

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/11/universities-censor-bad-ideas-all-the-time-tim-wilson-its-called-learning


02:21pm 11/05/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1666 posts
Yes or you could go "down the rabbit hole" instead of change your view.

Thousands of scientists are organizing to muscle out the one truth teller. Seems strange you'd need to set up a "consensus" center under those circumstances, but carry on.
02:22pm 11/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17542 posts
Yup, you just keep going along with that infi, two wrongs make a right eh.

02:27pm 11/05/15 Permalink
Jim
UK
13655 posts
pyne's first comment in that screengrab is an example of the balance fallacy
it's not a case of silencing a dissenting voice, it's a case of not supporting pseudoscience - which is the correct course of action for an educational institution
03:57pm 11/05/15 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
973 posts
PornoPete: Not GamerGate this time, no. But I doubt you'd like it much better.

I'm getting mightly sick and tired of the rush of recent Domestic Violence stories by the ABC (ABC Online News, The Drum, ABC Radio's AM etc) that *only* focus on male on female domestic violence. That *only* talk about female deaths. That talk about the "34 women killed this year" and *incorrectly* attribute this to Domestic Violence only and to male perpetrators only and that it's this suddenly huge spike etc. etc. whilst never talking about the men killed as well.

I'm tired of the publishing of out of context quotes and cherry picking from studies *that they don't actually link to or even name*.

Domestic Violence is a problem that effects too many people and I'm 100% behind efforts to address and curb it. What I'm not for however is the culture of silence from places like the ABC as well as from MP's and Senators when it comes to the 40% of victims of DV that aren't women that have been attacked by men.

I want them to speak up for *all* victims of DV. I want anger management referal services for both men *and* women that feel they need it, not just for men.

Basically, I want equality and unbiased and non-sexist reporting.


04:05pm 11/05/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1667 posts
Sure, can you quickly post the where they count 34 dead women, and to a credible source refuting it?

Also you need to be very careful talking about The Drum. All the ABC could ever be expected to achieve there is balance of commentators.

7.30's report on domestic violence in the wake of that school teacher who was abducted seemed most balanced to me.

To be clear I also don't like the selective use of stats.

edit:

Found this report.

They quite clearly say that of the 34 women killed (unlawfully non-accidentally presumably) so far this year it is estimated that two thirds were killed by a partner, ex partner or family member.

It seems like they have pretty clearly and honestly represented the statistic.
05:12pm 11/05/15 Permalink
Vash
4488 posts
Thats why i like listening to triple J hack, they bring people from both sides of the argument on the show, instead of just people who support their argument, like on the alan jones show.
05:20pm 11/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17543 posts
Your sentence structure suggests Alan Jones show brings on people so support both sides of the argument, however I don't think that is what you meant.
05:32pm 11/05/15 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
974 posts
PornoPete: There's been plenty of reports across social media that use the 34 killed figure (or as they like to say, 2 women a week) as most stick it into stories about domestic violence, state the figure and then use that as evidence that there's some sudden spike. Almost none of them list the figures for men.

The Australian Insititue of Criminology, on behalf of the Australian Bureau of Statistics, published a report in 2013 which looked into homicides in Australia. They analysed all of the homicides that took place between July 1st 2008 through to June 30th 2010 (i.e. 730 days worth).

We're currently 131 days into the year and there's been 34 women killed. That's 1 woman every 3.85 days. That's not much more than the result from the AIC report where it was 1 woman every 4.2 days. For comparison, in that report 1 man was killed every 2.0 days. i.e. Men were 67.7% of homicide victims or 2 in 3.

As for Domestic Violence, from that report, 1 woman was killed every 6.3 days from either a partner, ex-partner, boyfriend/girlfriend, parent, sibling, child or other relative. 1 man was killed every 9.7 days from the same sources. i.e. Women were 60.6% of DV homicide victims and men were 39.4%.

For Intimate Partner Homicides (i.e. only where the perpetrator is a current or former partner) it was 1 woman every 8.2 days and 1 man every 22.1 days. i.e. Women were 72.9% of Intimate Partner homicide victims and men were 27.1%.

The DV:Total ratio for women from that report was 66.7%, i.e. 2/3rds.

So, from that report, 40% of DV related homicide victims are men. But if you read the news stories and press releases etc. you would think that the only victims are women and the only perpetratos are men.

Of course the ABC is by no means the only offender of presenting misleading figures (and yes, they definitely have done so). There's plenty worse ones but they're not the public broadcaster that have a responsibility to provide unbiased journalism.


06:16pm 11/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1718 posts

I wonder how many articles news corpse has run about "leaners". Meanwhile...

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/how-news-corp-ended-up-being-the-nations-no1-tax-risk-20150511-ggz1hg.html

They are the only company in this high risk bracket from the ATO.


11:48am 12/05/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1668 posts
Rukh:

Well ok, if there has been plenty of social media reports then it should be straightforward to link to some.

I really don't think you've shown the ABC news service to be biased in any meaningful sense. I linked to a news report that displayed the number but with all the relevant qualifications.

I would also point out that individual twitter accounts are likely to reflect personal views rather than the ABC as an institution, it follows that you'd need to go to some length to establish bias by way of social media reports.

The ABC couldn't be clearer about the nature of the content on the drum etc. It's the opinion section of the site, and as such a roughly equal representation of opinions is all that should be reasonably required.

If acknowledging that DV is an issue to be addressed and that it effects more women than men which your stats seem to indicate, a logical starting point would be the group most affected would it not?

I don't think it diminishes male victims to point out there are larger numbers of female victims. Certainly I don't think you could show institutional bias down that route.

Anyway, I don't really want to get into a huge back and forth. Thank you for your stats and a clear link to the source however.
12:22pm 12/05/15 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
8971 posts
Every time someone gets on the "Violence against women" soapbox they lose all credibility with me.

What's wrong with just being against violence period? Why does gender have to factor in to the issue? When asked their by supporting campaign they're stating that violence against men is more acceptable than violence against women, they like to deflect by saying "oh but it's more frequent". So what?

Going on that basis then maybe we should only be focusing on DV cases that involve immigrants or certain religious groups which per capita have a waaaaayyyy higher incidence than average, or paedophilia cases involving kids attending church because it's more commonly going to affect them - and if you're not part of that demographic well we don't need to bring attention to it?
01:20pm 12/05/15 Permalink
Vash
4489 posts
privately owned media companies are far more likely to be biased than a government owned one. The exception are dictatorships or countries with corrupted democracies.

Private corporations are not your friend. I'd rather everything government owned than pure liberalism where money buys influence. The ABC is less likely to be corrupted or biased because it's taxpayer funded, news corp's extreme bias taints democracy,because it isn't held accountable. Imagine if the ABC was biased, like the daily telegraph for example. there would be an uproar and changes made to management thanks to democracy.
Thank f*** Labor created the ABC for some real journalism in this country.
01:23pm 12/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
12392 posts
This post has been removed.
Reason: Dumb
Send Private Message
01:26pm 12/05/15 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
975 posts
There's a couple of your points I want to quickly address:

If acknowledging that DV is an issue to be addressed and that it effects more women than men which your stats seem to indicate, a logical starting point would be the group most affected would it not?


By that measure we should ignore indigenous issues as they only account for 2% of the population and instead focus on white only issues first as whites account for the vast bulk of the population. By the same logic we should ignore men's issues as a whole as women outnumber men. And we should ignore all LGBT+ issues as they're heavily outnumbered by cis-heteronormative people.
And your point assumes that we're at a "starting point". The campaigns against male on female domestic violence have been going on for decades. There's absolutely nothing new in the approaches taken. At what point exactly does one say "okay, so we've been working on this one aspect of DV for the last 30 years or so, it's now time to acknowledge and also support the other 40%"?


I don't think it diminishes male victims to point out there are larger numbers of female victims. Certainly I don't think you could show institutional bias down that route.


Do you see me diminishing female victims by pointing out the number of male victims? I don't. I try hard to ensure that I always provide numbers for *both* male and female victims. And I acknowledge that (at least by the ABS's numbers, though not with some larger international studies) women constitute the majority of the victims. I most *definitely* have run however into the situation where people try to shut down any discussion of male victims as "derailing" and being "a domestic violence supporter" and a "rape apologist". I most *definitely* have encountered shaming tactics "man up", "be a real man", "male piss baby" etc. etc. And I'm lucky enough to have not actually been a victim of DV. Think for a minute about those that have and for them to be told to stfu and that we shouldn't talk about male victims as it diminishes female victims. Which yes, I've seen people say numerous times.

As for no institutional bias?! Seriously? If the proportion of male victims of DV ranges between 26% and 39% (depending upon type etc) then for there to be no institutional bias one would expect at least something close to 1/4 to 2/5 of the reports about DV to acknowledge or even be about male victims. If there was no instituational bias one would expect at least something close to 1/4 to 2/5 of the DV shelters to allow men *and even teenage boys* in. One would expect somewhere close to 1/4 to 2/5 of the government funding to be for male victims of DV. Yes? However the reality is very different as I'm sure you're aware. So yes, PornoPete, there is an *institutional* bias against male victims of DV.

01:34pm 12/05/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1669 posts
Raven,

Let me be absolutely clear.

The current quality of feminist debate I find to be stunningly low (which is linked very closely with current DV issues). I completely agree with Rukh that the 34 figure being used to represent an emerging crisis is infuriating.

People saying the most dangerous place for a women between the ages of 15 and 45 is their own home is a stat so disingenuous it makes my head hurt.

I also dislike the current trend for social justice causes to engage in outright public relations rather than fact finding. Kony 2012, the new york cat calling video, are prime examples.

In fact the data of the catcalling video was of such poor quality they should have tossed it out and started again.

a choice quote from the article.


To further evaluate hypothesis 2, let’s turn to what the producer of the video said. According to a Slate article, he explained what happened like this:

"We got a fair amount of white guys, but for whatever reason, a lot of what they said was in passing, or off camera, or was ruined by a siren or other noise. The final product, he writes, is not a perfect representation of everything that happened."

And that right there, is indefensible, methodologically or substantively. The only neutral explanation is that there is a lot of construction, ambulances and sirens going on in more white parts of New York, and somehow they just cannot catch a catcalling white guy. That sounds implausible to me, but if—a big if—that were the case, an ethical researcher would redo their study because the data is no longer valid because of the confounding variable—noise at non-minority neighborhoods. At a minimum, some effort would need to make sure the presentation of the findings were not tainted by this methodological obstacle.



However, 34 women have been victims of homicide so far this year and a large number of them are likely due to DV. The ABC reporting that is not evidence of bias.

My comments are confined to the issue of perceived or actual bias of the ABC, NOT the validity or otherwise of the current debate around DV

edit:
Rukh, I am sorry that you have had people call you various obscenities. However I didn't accuse you of diminishing anyone's experience and I don't feel I've been rude or antagonistic toward you. When am I speaking of institutional bias, I mean specifically at the ABC.
01:44pm 12/05/15 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
976 posts
Rukh, I am sorry that you have had people call you various obscenities. However I didn't accuse you of diminishing anyone's experience and I don't feel I've been rude or antagonistic toward you. When am I speaking of institutional bias, I mean specifically at the ABC.


You haven't been rude or antagonistic towards me, don't worry. I was using my experiences (and the experiences I've seen of many men *and women* that try to speak up about male victims) as a counterpoint to your point about diminishing male or female victims etc.

With regards to institutional bias within the ABC, yes, I suppose I could try to go through the archives of all of the stories (I can limit it to non-Drum stories) relating to DV since say the start of the year and categorize them on what and how they discuss. I could probably just do it for the last week and still have a fair few stories but 1 week isn't too fair a time-slice.
04:04pm 12/05/15 Permalink
Vash
4490 posts
06:33pm 12/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25060 posts
People who are vocally against violence against women, even overwhelmingly so, are also against violence in general. To suggest they aren't is absurd. You're creating things in your mind to get angry and indignant about.

I got banned for attacking people in this thread. That's a damn shame because holy hell making fun of the human excrement that post in here and then watching their feeble attempts to fight back was amusing. I know it's childish and maybe even a bit mean, but I think when you're as bad as they are you've pretty much got a license to say whatever you want. Kind of like Marv feeling free to kill hitmen in Sin City. Guess I'll have to tone it down a bit but why ruin my fun? It's not like I'm impeding any sort of worthwhile discussion or anything.

Those newspaper covers are amazing in the most terrible way possible. That 'Australia Needs Tony' with the Australian flag in the background is a real highlight. Looking forward to seeing what they produce next year.
08:08pm 12/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22593 posts
So because in your esteemed opinion this thread is worthless you deem it practical to post attacks against people. If it is worthless why are you posting? Is it a cry for attention? An outlet for frustration at your meagre life?

Tonight's budget is a great second attempt for Hockey. I am glad to see the wait for the dole scrapped. The maternity payment reform is great as is the childcare reform.

Company tax reductions and 100% year one deductions for purchases up to $20k are great for business.

Best of all we return to surplus by 2018-2019. This budget deserves a cigar. And if Labor blocks any of it they will look very negative.
08:41pm 12/05/15 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
977 posts
People who are vocally against violence against women, even overwhelmingly so, are also against violence in general. To suggest they aren't is absurd. You're creating things in your mind to get angry and indignant about.



You'd think that but I'm guessing you haven't actually tried raising such issues in comment sections before. I guess you haven't received hate mail threats of violence from people that live near you because of raising such issues.

Yes, there are some that will say they're against all forms of violence when it's pointed out them what the actual figures are. But all too often I encounter those people that simply do not want to care about male victims and take great umbrage and anyone that dares bring them up.

08:59pm 12/05/15 Permalink
Vash
4491 posts
Apparently this budget's spending is as high as during GFC. There appears to be quite abit of misinformation about who the overspenders are here.. gee i wonder who could have spread that perception to the population at large? a certain biased media company?
09:08pm 12/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22595 posts
09:18pm 12/05/15 Permalink
Herron
Brisbane, Queensland
321 posts
And if Labor blocks any of it they will look very negative.


Have they put any conditions on it, like passing certain elements from last years's?
09:03am 13/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17547 posts
They have!
09:08am 13/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1720 posts
Deregulating uni fees is still hidden away in the budget. Pyne fixed it.
09:25am 13/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17548 posts
It's because he is a fixer. He fixes things. A fixer.
09:35am 13/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1721 posts
The party of lower taxes.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CE28zIhWEAEWA2Q.jpg

I love it how Libs don't let numbers get in the way of a good narrative.
02:23pm 13/05/15 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
8974 posts
Did I read somewhere in the budget something about young people being eligible for an extra $10 per week if they did something like 25 hours(!!!) of volunteer community service?

I just want to see if I understood that correctly - for volunteering in a practically full-time role, you get $10??!

And this thing about a $3k tax break for small business owners "to help employment" - WTF? What the hell is $3k going to do to help employ people? Already I'm seeing posts on FB from fellow business owners that are akin to the baby bonus - they're just going to use it to buy a new computer.
02:29pm 13/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25061 posts
So because in your esteemed opinion this thread is worthless you deem it practical to post attacks against people.
Well you have to admit it's pretty damn funny. Watching yourself and brool completely sell yourselves out to the LNP leading up to the election, completely ignoring every piece of advice and warning given to you was hilarious because anyone with a brain knew what was going to happen. Then we had the honeymoon period. The six months or so of you two repeating their slogans and statements verbatim and both of you becoming snivelling little apologists.

The best bit though was when it finally dawned on you. When they hit rock bottom and all of a sudden you both changed your tune, hoping and praying that people would forget the events I described. However instead of learning from your mistakes you just doubled down saying we actually need a more extreme version of the LNP to succeed.

And here we are again. The LNP have thrown you another little doggy treat, and like a good little doggy you've gobbled it up and have begun to prime yourself into election mode and the whole process is about to repeat itself. The reason I post is because I've never seen behaviour like you two anywhere - in real life or the internet. The pathological lying, the pathological denial. It's quite something.
02:31pm 13/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17558 posts
So.. now is a good time to get that new office PC for your home business. You know, the office PC with Twin Titan's, i7 and 144mhz monitor. $20,000 is a lot of money for tax deductible equipment.
02:35pm 13/05/15 Permalink
Vash
4492 posts
Is that deduction for the current financial year, or for the next?
03:41pm 13/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22596 posts

Is that deduction for the current financial year, or for the next?


it is for the current tax year, any purchase made after 7.30pm last night. this is how stimulus spending in the GFC should have been handled, instead of wheeling cash into the streets.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-13/budget-2015-small-business-tax-break-explained/6466066

The LNP have thrown you another little doggy treat, and like a good little doggy you've gobbled it up and have begun to prime yourself into election mode and the whole process is about to repeat itself.


they havent thrown me any treats. i don't benefit one iota from this budget. it is a better budget for the country, it should even get bipartisan support for most parts. so in that sense it is also a better budget politically, and this is confirmed by the media commentariat.

spending is still far too high. the liberal party is just like the labor party, they are both tax and spend parties, not seeking to cut costs but spend everything they rake in and then even more.

i think you just like slapping yourself on the back for making breakthrough discoveries in your own head, that you 100% agree with. that must deliver great satisfaction.
03:48pm 13/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25062 posts
No it's what I said. Seeing someone who has been insulated from reality their whole life speak their mind freely is really funny and I get a whole lotta enjoyment from provoking you and seeing just how low you will sink to keep the little bubble that surrounds you intact.
03:51pm 13/05/15 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
20708 posts

Haha lols

The Budget Emergency that has wreaked havoc on the Australian economy over the past eight years has been put on hold and will not be brought back until the Coalition is next in opposition.

“The Emergency has done a great job over these past few years, but we’ve come to a point where there’s no longer a need for it, at least not right now,” Treasurer Joe Hockey explained.
http://www.theshovel.com.au/2015/05/13/hockey-postpones-budget-emergency-until-next-labor-government/


08:09pm 13/05/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7169 posts
No changes to super annuation or Negative Gearing on property.

Another fail budget, good-bye Australia.
09:07pm 13/05/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1670 posts
Good one pave.

Status of Hocott as a entity that will say virtually anything to retain power confirmed.

Slightly less "Fair Dinkum" than rancid tuna salad.
09:03am 14/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1724 posts
lol, paveway. I love the shovel.

No changes to super annuation or Negative Gearing on property.

Another fail budget, good-bye Australia.


Do they need to do tax reforms at budget time? That's just general legislation?

Joe thinks that removing negative gearing will increase rents so he said he doesn't want to do that, but I thought super was on the cards to be looked at?
11:28am 14/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17560 posts
Joe thinks that removing negative gearing will increase rents


Which has been shown to be wrong, but asif he cares.
11:42am 14/05/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11698 posts
Hey remember that British Labor meeting were the Women were segregated ?

Now its started in Australia.

WOMEN were segregated and asked to sit at the back of a lecture by the radical group Hizb ut-Tahrir at a Muslim students group at the University of Western Sydney last night.

At the event in Parramatta, men and women were asked to sit apart. The Daily Telegraph attended the talk — and this reporter sat with the women before being politely told “brothers to the front” and “sisters” to the back.

The women were ushered through a door marked “sisters” at the rear of the hall, while the “brothers” entered through another door and were told to take their place in “the front five rows”.


http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/women-forced-to-back-of-lecture-theatre-at-hizb-ut-tahrir-lecture/story-fnj3rq0y-1227355834864

Islam is changing Australia.
12:17pm 15/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17570 posts
I would have told them politely no, I'll sit where I want thank you.
12:29pm 15/05/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
1999 posts
Faceman, why haven't you highlighted the fact this has happened for eons in Australia with Orthodox Judaism. Does that mean Jews are changing Australia? Seems silly to pick on one religion and/or culture and leave others alone.
12:32pm 15/05/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11699 posts
That is an Australian University not a Mosque.
12:41pm 15/05/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
2000 posts
Orthodox Jews don't do it in a mosque either nor do they segregate only in a Synagogue. What's your problem, Islam has been here for ages and it hasn't changed my world or any Australian's world that I know of.
12:47pm 15/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17571 posts

or any Australian's world that I know of.


Except for those couple of people that buggered off to fight a war in another country, and that kid that was going to blow stuff up recently. Also the people that racially slur Muslims even though it's not a racial thing. Islam has most certainly had an impact on Australian's. Not a huge impact, but an impact none the less
01:03pm 15/05/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2206 posts


Except for those couple of people that buggered off to fight a war in another country, and that kid that was going to blow stuff up recently. Also the people that racially slur Muslims even though it's not a racial thing. Islam has most certainly had an impact on Australian's. Not a huge impact, but an impact none the less


Indeed, where did all those feral camels come from..
01:36pm 15/05/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39394 posts
05:16pm 16/05/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7172 posts
Sorry I won't be submitting to Islam so I won't be supporting Sharia Law in any way shape or form.
06:35pm 16/05/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2207 posts

lols, maybe the coalition is new to politics?
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/comment/paid-parental-leave-could-the-coalition-have-been-any-dumber-20150516-gh30om


No the same politics.

The same politics which allows someones daughter to live at Kirribilli house for $250 pw, the same politics which allows a certain person to rent his wife's house (which he formerly owned) and claim the rent. The same politics which a certain girlie-man whose wife double dipped the PPL but calls anyone else a rorter.

Who else but infis/brools lord and master.
07:30pm 16/05/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7173 posts
lol .. politics in this country is a fkn joke

12:24pm 17/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25064 posts
What was wrong with how that was handled?
12:54pm 17/05/15 Permalink
deadlyf
Queensland
3736 posts
What was wrong with how that was handled?

Are you serious? You think it's appropriate to handle something like that in the media? That really couldn't have been handled any worse than it was.

The one thing that bothered me about that whole incident though is how no one seemed to mind that someone had setup a telescopic camera to film inside the place he was living in. Complete and utter contempt for a human beings basic privacy is something that just gets overlooked as normal behavior.
01:34pm 17/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25065 posts
I didn't pay a whole lot of attention to it. Depp brought some dogs over, some guy said bugger off back to the states and then the dogs buggered back off. Seems like a pretty minor blip when we have concentration camps running. Are we angry with the government or media here?
01:39pm 17/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22603 posts
The same politics which allows someones daughter to live at Kirribilli house for $250 pw, the same politics which allows a certain person to rent his wife's house (which he formerly owned) and claim the rent. The same politics which a certain girlie-man whose wife double dipped the PPL but calls anyone else a rorter.


it is poor form to call someone a rorter who complies with government rules as they stood at the time. families plan their lives around these rules. I agree with the changes though. The taxpayer scheme is a safety net, no something to be bolted on to what a mother already gets.

Are you serious? You think it's appropriate to handle something like that in the media? That really couldn't have been handled any worse than it was.

The one thing that bothered me about that whole incident though is how no one seemed to mind that someone had setup a telescopic camera to film inside the place he was living in. Complete and utter contempt for a human beings basic privacy is something that just gets overlooked as normal behavior.


so politicians can have every little sordid detail of their lives splayed in the media but mega-millionaire celebrities breaking the law are entitled to privacy? pull the other one.
01:52pm 17/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25066 posts
so politicians can have every little sordid detail of their lives splayed in the media but mega-millionaire celebrities breaking the law are entitled to privacy? pull the other one.
Can you once, just f*****g once, present an argument that isn't a strawman? Please.

It is blindingly obvious that he was against invasion of privacy in general.
02:31pm 17/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22604 posts
there has been ample opportunity to deplore that, but I hear silence.
02:47pm 17/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25067 posts
lol what the f***? What the f*****g f***? What in the actual f***?

I think you may have said the dumbest ever thing on the internet, and that's quite a thing.
02:55pm 17/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22605 posts
show me where someone here has critcised publicising private information of a politician...
03:21pm 17/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25068 posts
You know what this thread is also not against? Setting koalas on fire and then selling their ashes on the chinese medicine black market. Don't believe me? Then show me in this thread where someone has spoken against it. Just shut up and stop embarrassing yourself.
03:33pm 17/05/15 Permalink
deadlyf
Queensland
3737 posts
I didn't pay a whole lot of attention to it. Depp brought some dogs over, some guy said bugger off back to the states and then the dogs buggered back off. Seems like a pretty minor blip when we have concentration camps running. Are we angry with the government or media here?
I don't think it would have been in the media if it wasn't for that idiot Barnaby Joyce. This made world headlines and he should have known that threatening to kill two little dogs of a celebrity on national TV would have resulted in that. I tried my best to avoid it in the news as well but that shot looking through the back windows of his house just seemed so bizarre to me, I mean we're worried about meta data but apparently it is already perfectly fine to use telephoto lenses to film inside peoples houses.

Not only that but can you imagine how easy it must be to get drugs into this country if customs don't even notice two dogs going through the airport?
03:33pm 17/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25069 posts
In my opinion it was the right move. Depp is a rich man and hence a powerful man. If this was kept behind closed doors then he may have been able to use his power and wealth to have the issue hushed and the dogs may have stayed. This is an unacceptable risk - rabies is very very bad. By making the public aware of the situation it made it impossible for Depp to wrangle his way out of the situation. I was also amazed (in a bad way) at that shot of inside Mick Doohan's house, but it's our pathetic excuse for news organisations that are to blame in this situation imo.
03:43pm 17/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22606 posts
You know what this thread is also not against? Setting koalas on fire and then selling their ashes on the chinese medicine black market. Don't believe me? Then show me in this thread where someone has spoken against it. Just shut up and stop embarrassing yourself.



So you would consider yourself against invasion of the privacy of politicians?

It was the right move to disclose Depp's infringement to the media... But it's still the media's fault. LOL
04:25pm 17/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25070 posts
I'm against invading the privacy of anyone. Looking forward to seeing the cunning trap you think you've set for me here.

It was the right move to disclose Depp's infringement to the media... But it's still the media's fault. LOL
Yep and I explained why. As usual you're just having a little tanty froth and not pointing out any flaws with what I said. You're a joke mate.
04:29pm 17/05/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7174 posts
What was wrong with how that was handled?


Nothing.

It's the fact that we are even talking about while serious issues are ignored by the media and politicians is the cause of my despair.

http://s22.postimg.org/5pcb61flt/Johnny_Depp_Dog_2_620x400.jpg
gif uploader




last edited by sLaps_Forehead at 17:57:35 17/May/15
05:48pm 17/05/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16104 posts
OK new topic.

Our Government wants to be able to revoke citizenship of people it accuses of fighting for ISIS, thereby removing the right of entry to Australia. This will apply to dual citizens only, to prevent statelessness. Unsure why the person is more the other country's responsibility than ours, especially if they grew up here, or what happens if Country B also want to revoke citizenship. Maybe its like a first in, best dressed, kinda thing?

Anyone got a problem with this? Should accused terrorists have the right to defend themselves before an Australian court before losing citizenship? Is this a violation of a whole s***load of Human Rights Conventions we signed up for? Is arbitrary (ie without trial) revocation of citizenship a power the Government should ever even have?
01:07pm 22/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22610 posts
So we may strike them with a drone OR welcome them back onto Centrelink. Makes sense.
02:22pm 22/05/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
259 posts
Should accused terrorists have the right to defend themselves before an Australian court before losing citizenship?


nah too messy. I'm pretty sure there'd have to be proof and courts involved before anything could be revoked, but it'd simply be about proving the person travelled somewhere they weren't allowed to, rather than what they actually did while there.

But if one of them happened to have a really, really, really, really, really good reason for going there... they'd be spewin ey.

With this whole todo about using them as anti-IS propaganda tools, it seems like they'd lose all merit if the only reason why they agree to it is to get a more lenient sentence form a judge.
02:29pm 22/05/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16106 posts
So we may strike them with a drone OR welcome them back onto Centrelink. Makes sense.

Why not arrest them on arrival back to Australia and pursue them for their alleged crimes?

What the actual f*** does Centrelink have to do with it, and how is being greeted by the AFP and arrested for terrorism charges being 'welcomed back'?
nah too messy. I'm pretty sure there'd have to be proof and courts involved before anything could be revoked

The point of the measure is to prevent re-entry to Australia, as Citizens have a right of entry. How can you have your day in court and defend yourself against charges of terrorism if your citizenship is revoked before you even try to enter the country?
02:48pm 22/05/15 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
8978 posts
Our Government wants to be able to revoke citizenship of people it accuses of fighting for ISIS, thereby removing the right of entry to Australia. This will apply to dual citizens only, to prevent statelessness. Unsure why the person is more the other country's responsibility than ours, especially if they grew up here, or what happens if Country B also want to revoke citizenship. Maybe its like a first in, best dressed, kinda thing?

Anyone got a problem with this? Should accused terrorists have the right to defend themselves before an Australian court before losing citizenship? Is this a violation of a whole s***load of Human Rights Conventions we signed up for? Is arbitrary (ie without trial) revocation of citizenship a power the Government should ever even have?

I do love this pattern we're seeing of "oh no, why should we bother with a trial, I mean it's obvious he did it, far beyond question and has far too much evidence for something so serious"... it's almost like the brains of these politicians stopped functioning somewhere along the way. If it's that clear, obvious and provable they did something wrong, give them their six minutes in court which it will obviously take if it's so provable.

Because this won't be misused at all.

"Hey, that guy's exposing our back room deals to profit from laws we're making! Quick, accuse him of fighting for ISIS!"
03:29pm 22/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22611 posts
Why not arrest them on arrival back to Australia and pursue them for their alleged crimes?

What the actual f*** does Centrelink have to do with it, and how is being greeted by the AFP and arrested for terrorism charges being 'welcomed back'?

these are not Catholic missionaries, they are ISIS soldiers. They don't have a job to go back to - there is no "jihad leave" in Australia. We should be agreeable and just let them stay in the Caliphate they feel so strongly for.
03:34pm 22/05/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16107 posts
these are not Catholic missionaries, they are ISIS soldiers. They don't have a job to go back to - there is no "jihad leave" in Australia. We should be agreeable and just let them stay in the Caliphate they feel so strongly for.

I get that we don't like jihadists and such. We also don't like pedophiles, rapists and murderers.

But as a citizen you you should (must!) always get the opportunity to defend yourself in court no matter who you are and what it is alleged by the Government that you have done.
03:39pm 22/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22612 posts
But as a citizen you you should (must!) always get the opportunity to defend yourself in court no matter who you are and what it is alleged by the Government that you have done.


and then bear the cost of their imprisonment?... I would support a fair trial provided they are detained outside our borders.... say in the Caliphate they think so highly of. it should be like Doctor Evil.

03:46pm 22/05/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16108 posts
and then bear the cost of their imprisonment?... I would support a fair trial provided they are detained outside our borders.... say in the Caliphate they think so highly of. it should be like Doctor Evil.

They are Australian citizens. If they choose to return to Australia and are successfully prosecuted then of course their imprisonment is at the tax payer's cost like any other criminal.

You have made some absurd arguments for stripping Australian citizens of their citizenship without right of appeal. Yes it costs money, big f*****g deal, maintaining the justice system is part of what our taxes are for.

I'd rather have Australian terrorists prosecuted in the Australian court system and rotting in Australian jails rather than loose in the world.
04:07pm 22/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22613 posts
they are enemy combatants. we are mostly likely soon going to be sending soldiers to the area to kill them (without trial mind you). we are currently allied to forces bombing the s*** out of the area trying to kill them. they have in effect renounced/repudiated their citizenship. they don't just get to come back and decide to submit to the laws of the land. the minute they set foot in the Caliphate their passport should be torn up.
04:21pm 22/05/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16109 posts
David Hicks was declared an enemy combatant. He didn't have his passport revoked, and it wasn't even considered when he was being repatriated from Guantanamo Bay.

He's a white Australian, isn't he?

I still don't see any sensible argument from you why the Government accusing a person of a crime is sufficient to have their citizenship revoked without opportunity to defend yourself via the justice system. We are supposed to have an independent judiciary for a reason.
04:24pm 22/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22614 posts
i would have been cool with that for hicks too. they are not aussies.
04:27pm 22/05/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16110 posts
i would have been cool with that for hicks too. they are not aussies.

Please explain why the Government should be able to revoke citizenship without trying (sp?) the citizen.
04:29pm 22/05/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
260 posts
What evidence could possibly be presented either way?

Actually that's the whole point. The only thing provable either way is that this "citizen" travelled to a certain place at a certain time and our wonderful government was kind enough to let them know beforehand that said travelling would cop certain consequences.

There's no point in putting them in front of a judge or jury so they can tell some bulls*** story about how they saved puppies and only ever shot over enemies' heads with no way to prove their claims one way or the other. It'd be a bloody farce.

It'd be just as legitimate to charge them with war crimes and hold them accountable for all the nasty s*** IS has done. They made a conscious decision to fight against their own state... OUR state, however much our sheltered lives approve of it.

F*** them. They can crawl back to their war-torn s***hole and beg forgiveness there.
04:46pm 22/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17590 posts
You can't say they are guilty of being ISIS soldiers until they have been found guilty by a court of law, do to otherwise is against this countries system of law. It is somewhat treasonous. Once they have been found guilty though, then you revoke their citizenship/whatever.
09:54pm 22/05/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16111 posts
Roonee, that's the whole point mate.

You assume that because the Government says they are a terrorist that they are, even if they have no evidence! There's lots of legitimate reasons to travel to a war zone that are not treasonous. Revoking citizenship is the ultimate punishment, I'd personally say worse than incarceration. We don't do it for any other crime, not rape, not murder, not child molestation, but we'll do it for this one without trial or evidence?
01:01pm 23/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22617 posts
They are not being imprisoned. They are having their citizenship cancelled as a dual citizenship holder.
01:27pm 23/05/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16116 posts
They are not being imprisoned. They are having their citizenship cancelled as a dual citizenship holder.


So what? It is clearly an act of criminal punishment by Government decree rather than judicial process.

I guess lolbertarian values really don't apply to brown people, and a dual citizen is a lesser citizen without full rights? fpot may be onto something after all.
10:54am 24/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22618 posts
Depends how serious you are about removing jihadi extremist scum from our country. Libertarians dont do any of that nonsense - what a pointless waste of liberty.

Their other citizenship could be British for all I care.
11:23am 24/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1734 posts
Labors reckless spending has doomed us all.

01:20pm 24/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25079 posts
Lolbertarians - always advocating other people bootstrapping themselves to success from the safety of their daddy's impossible to fail office.

Lolbertarians - always complaining about those pesky laws and government intervention exposing their incompetence. But when it comes to grinding those into the dirt that they've been doggy trained to believe are irredeemably evil? They can't be big or powerful enough.

The difference between these people wanting to come back and infi is that there is hope they'll be rehabilitated and become normal human beings one day. There's no hope for you infi.
04:31pm 24/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22620 posts
I don't kill people that I disagree with. That's the difference. Keep on supporting terrorist scum. That's what the loony left is all about.
05:12pm 24/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25080 posts
You do support the torture and imprisonment of those who are illegally brown though.

Also I'm not supporting terrorist scum. I'm supporting their right to a fair trial before they're punished for their crimes. The way you've worded it is a ridiculous exaggeration of my position in a failed attempt to legitimise yours. Known as a strawman argument. Maybe tomorrow you'll stop using them.
05:26pm 24/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22621 posts
I don't support any form of torture. Our government must protect the vulnerable and law abiding while checking every entrant for national security risks. I know for you it is easy come easy go but adults take security seriously.
05:44pm 24/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25081 posts
If you didn't support any form of torture then you'd stop posting because reading your posts is... well...

You can't support the indefinite detention of people in inhumane conditions, the refoulement of asylum seekers back to genocidal regimes and the punishment of those without trial and say you don't support torture. Now I know about your little defense mechanism where you'll deny facts and reality to keep your precious fantasy world alive but there are some people out there who are able to accept them. You should try it some time.
05:54pm 24/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17598 posts
So I'm not sure here. Is Infi wanting people to be have their citizenship revoked by the government without any trial? That is not very liberal. Kind of the opposite really.
06:00pm 24/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22622 posts
Fighting for enemies of the state is more illiberal. Allowing free movement of extremists is illiberal. They seek to defile the liberty of all who disagree with them.

Terrorism and extremism is not a game. Where a compelling case os made to a judge that is sufficient.

I am sure the case for cancellation of citizenship will be made before a judge. That is the right balance.
06:05pm 24/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25082 posts
It's like we have our very own boltcomments generator in here.
06:07pm 24/05/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16119 posts
I am sure the case for cancellation of citizenship will be made before a judge. That is the right balance.

#1 judicial component is required rather than simply executive.
#2 the accused terrorist must (not should, must) have the right to defend themselves in the proceedings.
06:34pm 24/05/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11713 posts
I dont care if they are dual citizenship or just Australian.
I dont want anyone thats been involved with the Death Cult returning to this Country.
What kind of dummy would ?

where else but the Liberalism Utopia of Sweden ....

06:37pm 24/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22623 posts

#1 judicial component is required rather than simply executive.
#2 the accused terrorist must (not should, must) have the right to defend themselves in the proceedings.


i don't have a problem with them making a submission from whatever s***hole they are in. but they must not re-enter australia until found no case to answer. why would an Islamic State fighter want to return to Australia from the Caliphate?

What kind of dummy would ?


some people just feel better inside. these poor extremists need help.
06:40pm 24/05/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16120 posts
i don't have a problem with them making a submission from whatever s***hole they are in. but they must not re-enter australia until found no case to answer. why would an Islamic State fighter want to return to Australia from the Caliphate?

Section 80 of the constitution guarantees the right to a trial by jury for any serious criminal offense against the Commonwealth.
06:51pm 24/05/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7177 posts


Quite surprising how well spoken old Cory is. I always thought he was a bit of a nutter.
07:05pm 24/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22624 posts

Section 80 of the constitution guarantees the right to a trial by jury for any serious criminal offense against the Commonwealth.


I suspect They will not be tried for an offence. This is a declaration that their passport and citizenship is cancelled.

It will be a new law and not be an offence. The foreign fighters act is a different matter.

This is speculation of course until the legislation is prepared.
07:26pm 24/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25083 posts
So now not only do people face punishment without trial, they now also face it without even receiving a charge. What a brave new world we live in. By the way, what's with the random capitalisation on they? That's a thing crazy people do.
08:17pm 24/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22625 posts
So now not only do people face punishment without trial, they now also face it without even receiving a charge. What a brave new world we live in. By the way, what's with the random capitalisation on they? That's a thing crazy people do.


Just because extremists want to freely come and go from Australia while waging jihad, it doesn't mean the government must tolerate it.

I expect there will be rights to procedural fairness (right of reply so they can prove they were on a Kon Tiki cruise) and judicial review of citizenship decisions. It just wont be along conventional lines given we are talking about suspected IS members.

Random Capitalisation comes from using a Phone.
08:25pm 24/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25084 posts
I find your position completely absurd to be honest. For starters they're wanting to come back because they regret their decision. Surely that means they aren't going to try and suggest they were there on holiday. If they were planning that story they'd just come back. I think they know they will be wearing handcuffs on their flight back.

Maybe I've watched too many courtroom shows, but couldn't a plea deal be offered where if they plead guilty to whatever terrorism charges they end up facing they can get out of jail one day? Plus if they come back and face trial, doesn't that also remove some terrorists from the pool and also act as an encouragement for anyone else who is willing to defect back? Less terrorists is a real no brainer, but if other people are over there feeling the same way see people's citizenship revoked it's going to encourage them to stay there right? Sure they'll probably end up KIA, but they might kill a few people before that happens.

It just seems like an overwhelming positive. A disillusioned enemy willing to come back and sing like a canary. It would be a shame if it was squandered due to stupidity.
09:01pm 24/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1735 posts

Quite surprising how well spoken old Cory is. I always thought he was a bit of a nutter.


lol, it's ok for these f**** to be racist and complain about free speech protections but then this...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-17/joe-hockey-seeks-substantial-damages-in-fairfax-defamation-case/6326020
10:00pm 24/05/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7178 posts
^ to be fair he wasn't being racist, he was being a bigot.
10:37pm 24/05/15 Permalink
Vash
4501 posts
Infi's life on the left.

http://m.imgur.com/gallery/h82vC
11:55am 25/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22626 posts
Infi's life on the left.

http://m.imgur.com/gallery/h82vC


given you know nothing about me you wouldn't realise i got all my own jobs and promotions. no connections, just mailing out hundreds of resumes and kicking down doors.

its amazing how much is out there just to be taken by those who dare to. the cartoon reminds me of russell brand's stereotypical whiny rants.
12:08pm 25/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17601 posts
You missed the bit where the story was about a dude growing up in a privileged environment and instilled a belief by that environment that he is worthy to 'dare to'.
It was less about class difference giving a 'leg up' and more about class difference instilling a cognitive bias to aim low/high. Which is a real thing.

Be happy your environment happened to be the one where it instilled confidence and a feeling of being worthy. Be sympathetic to those who grew up in the opposite, it wasn't their fault. It's not an excuse to give up and expect hand outs, it is however a solid reason for sympathy.
12:55pm 25/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22628 posts
Is that a class bias or a parent bias?
01:02pm 25/05/15 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16122 posts
given you know nothing about me you wouldn't realise i got all my own jobs and promotions. no connections, just mailing out hundreds of resumes and kicking down doors.

its amazing how much is out there just to be taken by those who dare to. the cartoon reminds me of russell brand's stereotypical whiny rants.

Its amazing how much you epitomise that comic. Its like a study in irony.
01:04pm 25/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17602 posts

Is that a class bias or a parent bias?


In the above example it was clearly a class bias. As the environment the child grows up in is beyond just parents, it includes peers (and their parents), schooling and the social networks at the school, job opportunities due to having better networks of potential employers, etc.

Sure the parents have a hand in this. However remember the parents themselves are also part of the social conditioning they grew up in, and they are passing that on. This is why it's called a cycle. I'm pretty sure you know this, or at least should.
01:10pm 25/05/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25085 posts
That comic is great. Sums up infi brilliantly. The guy on the left needs to be a hateful bigot for it to really be him though.

It really deserves to be embedded. oh it's multiple images I cbf
01:19pm 25/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1736 posts

Worst gov ever.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/the-economy/australia-dumbs-down-as-government-bets-on-baristas-over-brains-20150525-gh9hrp.html

The country that brought you refrigerators, black-box flight recorders, bionic ears and Wi-Fi will cut its research budget by 7 per cent over the next 12 months, and another 10 per cent in the following three years. At the same time it's offering tax cuts and write-offs in its budget this month for small firms to buy equipment like espresso machines and lawnmowers as the centerpiece of a plan to build a "stronger and more prosperous Australia."


10:39am 26/05/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1672 posts
Faceman, posting "facts" from anyone affiliated with infowars should be an instantly banable offence. These threads have a loose enough correlation with reality already.
01:21pm 26/05/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
2003 posts
he was a bit of a nutter.
no "was", "is".
01:56pm 26/05/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7179 posts
07:48pm 26/05/15 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
2651 posts
That comic is a bit dubious imo. You could do the same cartoon upwards of the upward one all the way to oligarchs and downwards of the downward one all the way down to 4 year olds mining rubbish in a favela. It's very first world and arbitrary to contrast fully employed university educated people and try and engender pity for one. The woman in this story needs to stop being a victim and be grateful for what she's got and the man needs to not be such a total bastard. Not to say nature, nurture and privilege don't all play huge roles in individuals life paths and relative success, I think they do.

Very saddened to see the continuing overall political decline in Aus.

It struck me that the IMF's recent revelation of the extent of fossil fuel subsidies, revealing their true cost (so renewable will be cheaper) and the genuine need to dramatically act on climate change now in order to avert disaster in the not too distance future, is particularly troublesome for Australia and it's reliance on fossil fuel mining and exports (not to mention recent anti-climate policies).

In addition to the looming conflict in the South China Sea, and the coming geopolitical stand-off between China and the US, in respect of the US's plans for Australia to be a pivotal ally in any such conflict and China being a major trading partner of Aus. Their and others recent dip in commodities prices are set to wipe a stack off the budget.

So we've got a possible scenario of the massive shift over to renewables actually happening in the near future, and Aus having to balance or choose sides between the US and China. What's the plan Aus?
08:24pm 26/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22631 posts
The challenges in renewables are not just Australia's problem. When will the major emitters take substantial (in contrast to token) measures?

China is manufacturing islands in the South China Sea and thereby manufacturing conflict. They are looking for a scuttle. Why they would ask US to tango with them is beyond me...
08:44pm 26/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17605 posts

Why they would ask US to tango with them is beyond me...


It's a bluff game at the moment. Will the US call it and sail their warships through China's claimed waters? Or will they not do it and thus basically let China assert its claim.

Then the following question is what will China do about foreign warships sailing in the waters? If they let them it basically says China gives up their claim. Phwore, a game of bluff.. or is China not bluffing? We will maybe see in the coming years.
08:52pm 26/05/15 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
2652 posts
You're right Infi, my point is the combined drivers of climate change action and renewables being cheaper, will push the major emitters to actually start changing, which would mean China buying less coal exports from Aus for example. It's actually already starting to happen, China has a growing (though recently had some market woes) solar industry. As we've seen from the commodities slip, these things can have dramatic ramifications for Aus's economy.

I think the South China Sea conflict is historically complicated, but they key issue for US involvement is that over half of the globe's shipping routes go through it, and many of the busiest shipping ports are located around it, and China seems to be planning to restrict access, so it has important global commerce implications. That and the US has a need to preempt China attempting to sway American dominance, I imagine we'll see an encirclement policy (similar to the cold war era one in Europe v Soviet Union) between the US and all those minor Asian countries against China.

The scary thing I'd say is China aren't known to be bluffers, they generally follow through!

Edit: Important to note I'm talking long term outlooks here, 5-10-15-20 years, etc. Thing is, to properly setup for that you need to start changes now really.
09:05pm 26/05/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11715 posts
Fossil Fuels Subsidies ?
lets take a closer look at the formula:

The vast subsidy derives largely from polluters not paying the costs imposed on governments by the burning of coal, oil and gas. These include the harm caused to local populations by air pollution, and to people across the globe affected by the floods, droughts and storms being driven by climate change.


In other words, the IMF doesn’t mean “subsidies” in the sense that most of us would understand: that is, handouts from the state to favoured institutions. It means “subsidies” in the sense of “vast, almost limitless taxes which the governments should have imposed but haven’t”.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/20/5-3-trillion-on-government-fossil-fuel-subsidies-what-total-and-utter-bilge/


10:23pm 26/05/15 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
2654 posts

Are you for reaslies, or trolling? Either way.

Okay, so Breitbart (and its collective) being a right-wing conservative news piece is hardly a credible source of economic/policy review (nor much news at all really). Though I'll accept the leftiness of the Guardian, it and the BBC are not as biased or unobjective as this right-wing outfit suggests.

Given that they contest in that article the credibility of the majority of the scientific community being in agreement on climate change (a fact), and go on to argue for similar themes suggests they are denialists. Which perhaps in turn reveals some insight as to why they are trying to discredit the IMF's findings.

To be fair to that point the items referenced there would be called externalities not subsidies in proper economic language, and it is true that much of the economics can be ambiguous. Although the facts on climate change and the need to switch from fossil fuels to renewables are not (whatever the nonbelievers might say).

Two things, 1) there are real subsidies, here's a couple of examples:

About 333bn (215bn) is expected to be spent by governments to petroleum, natural gas and electricity producers in 2015. These direct subsidies are concentrated in developing countries, particularly oil exporters like Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela, where petroleum is often virtually free. Subsidies to producers are small but still worth considering. In the developed world, the subsidies range from 1.9bn (1.3bn) every year to prop up the German coal industry, to a billion-dollar fuel tax exemption for American farmers, to 280m in tax breaks for North Sea oil and gas producers in Britain.


2) the externalities have genuine climate, health, economic and cost impacts - though estimating the true cost is pretty difficult!

Although the IMF misnames them, there are genuine externalities to worry about from the use of fossil fuels, particularly coal. The World Health Organisation estimates that air pollution causes 3.2m premature deaths worldwide every year, and coal is estimated to account for approximately 93pc of these. It makes sense to try to price these premature deaths into the cost of using coal.


See a more detailed view on all the subsidies and externalities here: http://blog-imfdirect.imf.org/2015/05/18/act-local-solve-global-the-5-3-trillion-energy-subsidy-problem/ and also here http://www.imf.org/external/np/fad/subsidies/

There's also a bunch of evidence of developing countries growing renewables industries, and removing subsidies on various fossil fuels with positive results.

All in all fairly typical denliast BS that probably hasn't read the detailed IMF report. Though taking it into account for the sake of it, the question becomes - does using fossil fuels cost us more than we currently measure or not. Whether you call it a subsidy or an externality it doesn't matter. Would we save that money by not doing it? Should we thus use this number to calculate the affordability of alternative energy? Apparently so. Will that positively benefit people, nations and the planet? Apparently so. Not to derail on climate change, where's that thread!?


03:09am 27/05/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
265 posts
In addition to the looming conflict in the South China Sea, and the coming geopolitical stand-off between China and the US, in respect of the US's plans for Australia to be a pivotal ally in any such conflict and China being a major trading partner of Aus. Their and others recent dip in commodities prices are set to wipe a stack off the budget.


The US is a hegemon in decline and China is on the way up - these sorts of assertions are inevitable, though probably a bit too blatant for China's current naval capabilities. Still, the South China Sea is a long way from the US..

As a Great Man*** once said: we need to start calling ourselves an asian country. It may be time to accept reaity and cut those seppos adrift for good.








***Keating... but then you should never trust a man who owned a pig farm... the movie 'Snatch' taught me that.
07:11pm 27/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22633 posts
Still, the South China Sea is a long way from the US..


So was Vietnam, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan.

It may be time to accept reaity and cut those seppos adrift for good.


America's defense budget is four times that of China.
07:34pm 27/05/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1673 posts
Yeah I think if the US and China were to butt heads any time in the next ten years, China is going to get its ass handed to it.

The US navy is more than triple the size. With a new class of aircraft carrier about to launch no less.
09:23am 28/05/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
266 posts
So was Vietnam, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan.


And Korea. All very successful campaigns.
09:43am 28/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22634 posts
Successful or not, they got their army to the theatre of war.
09:54am 28/05/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
267 posts
Sure, and if america can get a quarter of their spent "defence budget" to China's doorstep they'll do just fine.

China are militaristically asserting themselves close to home... all things considered it's pretty standard. "Experts" talking about the potential for war are idiots.

What would be worrying is if the US started backing one of China's more powerful neighbours as a deliberate move to undermine China's militaristic superiority in the region. ie India, which also has a very strong and fast growing economy as well as quite deep cultural ties to the west.

Historically speaking, hegemonic struggles are decided by naval strength and the backing of the previous nation in power - the US was backed by Britain against Germany, then before that, Britain was backed by the Netherlands against the French.
10:49am 28/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1741 posts

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/05/worlds-biggest-sovereign-wealth-fund-dumps-dozens-of-coal-companies

This is great news for the planet. Bad news for companies who's business is digging up old plants.

A report by Goldman Sachs in January also called time on the use of coal for electricity generation: “Just as a worker celebrating their 65th birthday can settle into a more sedate lifestyle while they look back on past achievements, we argue that thermal coal has reached its retirement age.” Goldman Sachs downgraded its long term price forecast for coal by 18%.

11:19am 28/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17610 posts
But Coal is the Future Redhat, Tony said so.

However we all know what Tony was really saying. He was saying that Australia's tax revenue is strongly influenced by coal. With falling coal prices due to a world looking for alternatives we need to increase supply to cover that lost revenue. Also due to this governments chronic lying addiction, he cant come out straight and say it how it is.

Meanwhile we need to gut one of our best performing scientific establishments so that we make it more difficult for ourselves to capitalise on new forms of energy production. Mainly because the government seems to be rather clueless when it comes to the scientific method and how it benefits a countries economy. What do we expect though from the Australia's Worst Treasurer.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 11:42:10 28/May/15
11:41am 28/05/15 Permalink
Vash
4503 posts
Logically we would start diverting our economy to renewables instead of the dead end that is fossil fuels. Keep that s*** in the ground, more money into science so we can create technology to sell to the world, we've always been good at that.
But tones is doing the reverse, cutting funding from science, saying coal is good for humanity, and wants to keep relying on s*** in the ground instead of our greatest asset, our innovation.
This is just common sense though, something the liberals are missing.

oh and this:

12:12pm 28/05/15 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
2657 posts
http://i.embed.ly/1/display/resize?key=1e6a1a1efdb011df84894040444cdc60&url=http://pbs.twimg.com/media/CFSC5p9WgAAUqBn.jpg

Yeah, Australia really needs to be thinking seriously about changing it's main economic drivers for the near and long-term future.

Just on the US/China stuff; China is no match now, but they're catching up. Interestingly they've been investing heavily in asymmetrical capabilities to the US's naval strength. And they're allying with Russia.

Chinese navy to focus on 'open seas', paper says
China-Russia drills in Med show shifting strategies

All well and good to bemoan the US's hegemony if you're a bit anti-imperialist, but we've directly prospered from that and it's flourished the relatively peaceful global order (for us at least) - do you want to switch to a Chinese supremacy? One ruled by a corrupt pseudo dictatorship quasi communist party that has the largest population on the planet and isn't overly fond of the west? Good luck with that buddy, even if it's a pretty extreme example. Not to mention the inherent, and rather critical, geostrategic risk of allowing even a semi unified Eurasian power.
06:52pm 28/05/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17614 posts
'Not an Ikea Catalog'....


What a douche this Morison Guy is. Can't wait till we stop wasting tax payer $'s employing him.
07:40am 29/05/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1742 posts
10:24am 29/05/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10501 posts
The US navy is more than triple the size.

Because you need boats to stop intercontinental ordnance... oh wait ...

And the new battlefield is not boats or bullets.

Who has the money?
China and the Arabs could destroy the US economy by playing with money. They don't because they continue to collect large amounts of money.

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/files/2014/08/US-China-bilateral-trade-in-goods.png
They are USD billions ... China has absolutely no interest in having a war with the US, they are way too busy making f*** tonnes of money a lot of it based on credit.

01:46am 30/05/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1674 posts
Because you need boats to stop intercontinental ordnance... oh wait ...


Because intercontinental ordnance is totally the way it would be fought. and the US is of course not the world leader in that technology, oh wait....

Doesn't your chart sort of imply China needs the US more than the US needs China?

if the relationship stops net economic activity is going hit china harder than the US. and watch the trillion or so US treasury bonds china own evaporate overnight.
07:15pm 30/05/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22639 posts
if china were to ever stop buying us treasury bonds and float their currency, their regime woud promptly collapse through citizen revolution. china relies on the US to keep buying their cheap s***, then buys worthless US dollars from the proceeds, in turn keeping Chinese citizens employed and poor.

i would be a lot more worried about russia than china. china has a head on its shoulders.
09:55pm 30/05/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1675 posts
I suppose my point was more, china can't really attack the US from an economic point of view per obes suggestion. Certainly not without dire economic consequences.

I have at no time suggested an actual confrontation was likely. I was merely addressing the hypothetical question of the outcome if it happened.
10:24pm 30/05/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11723 posts
Its like a Starcraft game.
China has sent out an SCV and started building in the Ocean.
Thats going to be like a SuperCarrier for the region.

why did it take so long to make noise about it ?
Surely America knew much earlier what was happening.

10:38pm 30/05/15 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
2659 posts

Sounds like they've been planning for war with China since the year 2000 or so. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/stephen-glain/2011/03/31/washington-is-preparing-for-a-long-war-with-china


05:04am 31/05/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
268 posts

Sounds like they've been planning for war with China since the year 2000 or so. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/stephen-glain/2011/03/31/washington-is-preparing-for-a-long-war-with-china


Boxxing them in isn't really planning for war, and it's been happening since WW2/Korea with the massive export and military subsidies the US gave Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, plus similar efforts for Singapore and Hong Kong from Britain.

Direct influence is slowly shifting in China's favour but a bit of sabre rattling will be more than enough to mark the changes. The only winner in a direct conflict would be a country like Russia and so really, for at least the next few decades, China and the US actually have more in common than not.

It's a slow change and China will consolidate as much as possible while the US will preserve as much as possible, but direct conflict will serve pretty much everyone but themselves. The only reason why any single action looks confrontational is because it's been plucked out of context... the cold war analogy doesn't seem accurate to me at all.
02:08pm 31/05/15 Permalink
zaraq
Adelaide, South Australia
536 posts
I don't know how the Abbott government in all good conscience can condone same sex marriage when the laws against sodomy are still extant,for eg WA has the death penalty for buggery.

This would become Federal Government sponsored criminality and wouldn't change the State laws in any way.
04:51pm 01/06/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1744 posts

Abbott on housing: "F*** you, got mine".

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-01/home-prices-retreat-in-may-but-annual-growth-strengthens/6511068

Asked in Question Time whether he agreed with the Treasury Secretary, Prime Minister Tony Abbott emphasised efforts to make housing more available and affordable, but said he hoped prices would increase "modestly".

"As someone who, along with the bank, owns the house in Sydney, I do hope that our housing prices are increasing," he told Parliament.

"I want housing to be affordable but nevertheless, I also want house prices to be modestly increasing."


04:53pm 01/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25099 posts
"The institution of marriage came from religion, it was adopted by the state and I have always been a firm believer in the separation of church and state and the main reason for that is it protects the church and I think the church’s institutions do need to be protected."

- Scott Morrison
Surely this quote isn't real. Surely. I am too scared to check.
04:59pm 01/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22642 posts
Abbott on housing: "F*** you, got mine"


like he's going to say he hopes house prices fall, the share markets fall, and all your superannuation funds dry up.

Surely this quote isn't real. Surely. I am too scared to check.


He said it here. Australia presently protects religion from anti-discrimination legislation. Marriage existed long before organised religion adopted it - it was a civil status of cohabitation. In the modern context marriage is about asset and legal protection, much of which has been resolved by various legislation on Centrelink, family law, superannuation law, tax law etc.

All that is left is the symbolism of saying I am gay and can get married so why split hairs (except to pander to the religious lobby). A caller on ABC radio today made the interesting point: if God's law is not the driving force now for marriage policy why cannot marriage be between multiple partners....
07:02pm 01/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25101 posts
if God's law is not the driving force now for marriage policy why cannot marriage be between multiple partners....
Why is this an interesting point?
07:37pm 01/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17617 posts
No fpot, he is telling the truth. In a State as run by Scott Morrison even Churches need protection.
07:38pm 01/06/15 Permalink
groganus
Brisbane, Queensland
3135 posts
A caller on ABC radio today made the interesting point: if God's law is not the driving force now for marriage policy why cannot marriage be between multiple partners....


Because the driving point is equality you f*****g Muppet head.
07:39pm 01/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22644 posts
Because the driving point is equality you f*****g Muppet head.


so why are polygamists discriminated against? are some unions more equal than others now? very curious indeed.
08:00pm 01/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17620 posts

so why are polygamists discriminated against? are some unions more equal than others now? very curious indeed.


Because it would be a pain the arse for paper work. We have forms for marriage to one person, a whole bunch on NEW forms would have to be made for polygamy.
08:09pm 01/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25102 posts
I'd have no problem whatsoever with polygamists being allowed to legally marry with multiple partners. I see this issue brought up often as a type of slippery-slope argument by those who are resistant to the idea of homosexual marriage being legalised.
08:11pm 01/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22645 posts
I honestly dont care who gets married. I am grappling with the public policy distinction of only legalising gay marriage of a couple.
08:18pm 01/06/15 Permalink
groganus
Brisbane, Queensland
3136 posts
Polyagamy often leads to spousal abuse, it's a practice dropped by many religions because of the abusive relationship it places the participants in. There's nothing wrong with consenting adults having what ever arrangements they want to have, a legal Union between more than 2 individuals isn't necessary however. Go read up on the hundreds of years of history with polygamy, it's a pretty picture of male dominated societies.

Besides that though...

The whole idea of legalising same sex marriage is to give everyone the same opportunities, status and rights as everyone else, it isn't to physically change what the act of marriage actually is.

To be specific, allowing same sex, transgender couples to wed in a union between 2 people is giving those individuals equal rights, opportunity and status as same sex couples, this is equality, this is what it's all about, Allowing 3 people to wed is altering the act of marriage to include another individual... This is not what it's about.. It's the oppoisite and it's an argument that same sex marriage supporters having been trying to break down since some red neck ignorant homophobe made the argument to same sex marriage decades ago.

So infi, f*** off.
08:39pm 01/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22646 posts
says you. Some people dont conform to your stereotypes and now they are second class citizens.
08:49pm 01/06/15 Permalink
groganus
Brisbane, Queensland
3137 posts
What ever, troll.
08:54pm 01/06/15 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3352 posts
Haven't we talked the whole same sex marriage thing to death by now? There's no new arguments, there's equality on one side, and "think of the children" on the other. I'm just so f*****g tired of it already. I imagine the majority of the electorate is too. Lets just do it, and move on, the world isn't going to f*****g end because Australia managed to pull its f*****g head out of its arse.
09:06pm 01/06/15 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
984 posts
Heh. People that equate polygamy with polygyny.
09:59pm 01/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
269 posts
Worked with a guy from pakistan who had 2 wives. He had brought the younger/newer one here to study... He was quite well off for someone who probably worships cows, and it seemed like how many wives you had was a reflection of social status.

I guess to some extent the mass of plebs had to share the hotdog rolls that were left... probably america's fault.

the world isn't going to f*****g end because Australia managed to pull its f*****g head out of its arse.


I disagree.
11:38am 02/06/15 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
987 posts
Hindus only account for around 2% of the population of Pakistan. So while it's possible he might have "worshipped cows", it's far more likely he's a Muslim.
01:11pm 02/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17622 posts

"come to Jesus moment".


Seriously? This guy is a tosser.
10:27pm 02/06/15 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
988 posts
Hey now Tollazor, don't kink shame. So Abbott gets off to pictures of Jesus... It's not the weirdest kink I've heard of. ;)
11:03pm 02/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25118 posts
04:40pm 05/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25123 posts

We must stop the flow of cash to these evil people smugglers!!!!!!!!

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jun/10/peter-dutton-invokes-on-water-secrecy-over-claim-of-payments-to-boat-crew?CMP=soc_567

"On-water matters": Petter Dutton has invoked the controversial secrecy rule to defend not comprehensively answering claims that Australian officials paid $30,000 – in cash – to the crew of an intercepted asylum-seeker boat to return to Indonesia.


edit: and while I'm here I guess...

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jun/09/scott-morrison-knew-of-nauru-abuse-a-year-before-government-acted-inquiry-told

Scott Morrison was made aware in December 2013 of serious allegations of sexual abuse at Australia’s detention centre on Nauru, almost a year before a full review into allegations was commissioned, a Senate inquiry has heard.

09:37pm 10/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22663 posts
It's our weekly summary of The Guardian. Thanks!

Both articles report unverified one sided evidence. Hear say and rumor. Just the usual Guardian dross.
09:54pm 10/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25124 posts
Both articles report unverified one sided evidence. Hear say and rumor. Just the usual Guardian dross.
Such a well trained little doggy.
09:59pm 10/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22664 posts
Are you suggesting it isn't one sided unverified evidence in both reports?
10:06pm 10/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7182 posts
http://s29.postimg.org/ww5x6pnyf/bubblejoe.jpg






Treasurer Joe Hockey has apologised for statements he made yesterday about buying a first home, saying he didn’t realise low-income earners even used houses at all.

“If I offended anyone, I’m sorry. My comments were obviously directed at people already earning a high income. I didn’t know poor people used houses, or used them much. But I’ve since seen reports that suggest they do. You’re always learning on this job”.

He later joked that he doesn’t use his houses much either. “At least not the investment properties!”




last edited by sLaps_Forehead at 22:42:35 10/Jun/15
10:35pm 10/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25125 posts
Are you suggesting it isn't one sided unverified evidence in both reports?
Are you seriously strawmanning, again?

The Guardian are reporting on first hand accounts of people who have actually spent time on Nauru Island and from someone who witnessed the cash trading hands. They have sought comment from the LNP, but instead of the truth they've been handed operational secrecy bulls***. You see it's okay to dismiss allegations if they're isolated and bizarre, but when there is an overwhelming torrent of them flooding in about truly disgusting criminal behaviour being almost commonplace then it's time to exit your safety bubble and stop mindlessly dismissing them. Also remember the two who have died in custody? One murdered in very murky circumstances, and one dying from an infection because he was denied medical treatment. What does that say about the safety of the conditions there?
10:54pm 10/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22665 posts
The Guardian are reporting on first hand accounts of people who have actually spent time on Nauru Island and from someone who witnessed the cash trading hands.


Just like people "witnessed" Australian border security personnel harming asylum seekers on boats... instead of jumping to conclusions all evidence should be tested. If asylum seekers and people smugglers could in any way damage the funding or rigor of the border security program it would be good for their business. They are witnesses with a vested interest.

What does that say about the safety of the conditions there?


I agree the safety should be improved. Refugees in our care should not die or fear abuse. Don't take individual complaints as gospel until they have been investigated and the allegations tested. Manus Island is a hole and should be shut.
11:25pm 10/06/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1304 posts
If asylum seekers and people smugglers could in any way damage the funding or rigor of the border security program it would be good for their business.


They have tried many times, one example which you pointed out is where they tried to pretend Aus navy "tortured" them and the ABC reported it as fact. They know if they can win a propaganda war, the government will be forced to back down.

These economic migrants and the criminals they pay will never back down.
12:46am 11/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
275 posts
Are you suggesting it isn't one sided unverified evidence in both reports?


Pretty ridiculous way to dismiss an article about a senate inquiry. You accuse refugees, save the children workers, senators, journalists, the integrity commissioner of playing politics, but your kneejerk dismissal that makes no sense is obviously politically motivated.

At least put some effort in.
12:07pm 11/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25126 posts
If asylum seekers and people smugglers could in any way damage the funding or rigor of the border security program it would be good for their business. They are witnesses with a vested interest.
Ahh yes. It's all a big coordinated conspiracy between doctors, asylum seekers, social workers, charity workers and whistle blowing guards to undermine the sanctity of Australia's benevolent border protection program which is truly the most poignant and pure display of altruism of our time. How dare they damage it with their allegations.

I would love for these allegations to be tested because I know some if not most of them are going to stick. You know who doesn't want them tested? Scott Morrison, who kept the details of serious sexual assault allegations under wraps for a year instead of investigating them immediately. You know who else doesn't want them tested? You, because you get all indignant and frothy about the allegations simply being printed, which is the first step to them ever seeing a courtroom. Instead of accepting them and welcoming an investigation you'll instead paint the victims as the perpetrators, calling them liars. This is the mark of a truly despicable piece of s***, so indoctrinated with the smell of their own farts that they're willing to forgo rationality, logic, empathy and just plain old common sense so they can live in their fantasy world a little bit longer. You're a child trying to play adult dress up and you're failing badly at it.
12:42pm 11/06/15 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
39463 posts
scott morrison is a c***.
12:54pm 11/06/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2222 posts
scott morrison is a c***.


No, c**** are useful.
03:55pm 11/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25127 posts
05:07pm 11/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17637 posts

"When I've been up close to these things, not only are they visually awful, but they make a lot of noise," Mr Abbott told Sydney broadcaster Alan Jones this morning.


WTF, he says this after Joe copped a lot of s*** for saying they are utterly offensive.

Remember, when people compared them to open cut coal mines.

Hurry up and get this embarrassment of a PM out of that position.
07:16pm 11/06/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1749 posts


WTF, he says this after Joe copped a lot of s*** for saying they are utterly offensive.

Remember, when people compared them to open cut coal mines.

Hurry up and get this embarrassment of a PM out of that position.


I don't get alan jones being anti wind? He was in the anti CSG rallys and some of the anti coal when they were on farmland, is he just a massive fan of solar?

edit: I have just realised that he is a doddering old d******* carry on.
09:08pm 11/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7183 posts
GOLD!


08:29am 12/06/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1750 posts
01:52pm 12/06/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2223 posts

So people smugglers are now on the LNP payroll?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-12/abbott-refuses-to-deny-people-smugglers-paid-to-turn-back/6540866




Well Howard also used to pay them so no change from normal.
02:21pm 12/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1692 posts
smash that business model. SMAASH IT I SAY
02:26pm 12/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17640 posts

So people smugglers are now on the LNP payroll?


no no, you're doing it wrong. You have to go after the emotions of the people, like the Liberals do. Say it like this:

The LNP are using Tax Payer money (your money!) to employee people smugglers to drop off their cargo elsewhere. Only a Liberal Government would use tax payer money so inappropriately.



Oh, you would also take any opportunity you could to blame the previous government for anything, anytime, even 2 years into your government.
02:54pm 12/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22666 posts
The government must clarify what has occurred here. Using taxpayer funds to pay off people smugglers would be a serious misuse of taxpayer funds.
05:08pm 12/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
276 posts
I approve of this measure. It's like the underground railroad but in reverse - send the slaves back to where they belong!

Trying to afford a new iphone FFS.
05:50pm 12/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25129 posts
The government must clarify what has occurred here.
Their track record of honesty and transparency so far has been unparalleled so I have complete confidence this will happen. I mean, it's not like they started lying even before they got elected and up to this point in time now is it?
07:00pm 12/06/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2224 posts
07:31pm 12/06/15 Permalink
Dazhel
Gold Coast, Queensland
6743 posts
The government must clarify what has occurred here.


No! It's an operational matter!
07:49pm 12/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17642 posts


The government must clarify what has occurred here.



No! It's an operational matter!


Yeah Infi, you were all for keeping it hush hush, now you don't when it's abused. Hahaha
11:37pm 12/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
12461 posts
This post has been removed.
Reason: Dumb
Send Private Message
11:43pm 12/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7184 posts
Yeah well I and a lot of other sensible people in Australia are all for freedom of religion but are not fans of medieval superstitious ideologies like Sharia Law. To me halal is an extension of Sharia Law - so I reject halal on that basis.

I say yes to a Multicultural, Multiracial Australia.... Multi-Laws ....I say no.

Does that make me a member of the loony-right?
08:01am 13/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1693 posts
Do you reject kosher? It's an extension of a religious set of laws that are nearly 4000 years older than shari law. Kosher certification almost certainly funded Jewish terrorism in the '30's and 40's.

Do you have any idea of the substantive content of Shari Law or Halal? Or do you sensibly reject something you don't really know anything about?
10:21am 13/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17643 posts

To me halal is an extension of Sharia Law - so I reject halal on that basis.


Halal is just food that is deemed allowable to eat by the Islamic Faith. It has no bearing on you at all.

A Potato is halal, a piece of celery is halal.

I can understand if a person is of Catholic Faith and cannot not knowingly eat food blessed to a false idol/satan, then you will have reason not to eat Halal certified animal products, as each individual animal is offered to Allah upon slaughter.


last edited by Tollaz0r! at 11:32:58 13/Jun/15
11:30am 13/06/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
2009 posts
like Sharia Law. To me halal is an extension of Sharia Law - so I reject halal on that basis.

I say yes to a Multicultural, Multiracial Australia.... Multi-Laws ....I say no.
Sharia Law is never going to happen in Australia in terms of overriding our own laws so only a nutter would think there is ever a chance of it happening. The furore over Halal is also bulls*** and again only a nutter would be worried by it.

Does that make me a member of the loony-right?
No, just a loony.
02:42pm 13/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7185 posts
Let me be clear I meant halal certification.

And yes I reject kosher and hot cross buns. Food production and certification should be secular.

I think our food should be free from all superstitious certification.
04:10pm 13/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25130 posts
You're a weirdo.
06:28pm 13/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7186 posts
so are you
07:18pm 13/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17645 posts
Well, there is a market for it.
You don't have to buy halal certified meat products if you don't want.

In fact is a bit rude to say people can't create a completely voluntary certification program, that is legal, if they see a market need/want for it.
07:24pm 13/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1694 posts
Food production and certification should be secular.


I don't totally understand why this should be the case.
08:08pm 13/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7187 posts
^ from what I have read .. and correct me if I am wrong. Food companies have to pay for the certification and that it is unnecessary added expense for what amounts to 2% of the Australian population that is Islamic.

Halal certification first started globally in the 1980's so I think it is safe to assume that Muslims were able to eat food as they blessed their food themselves or went to buy meat from a halal butcher who had their livestock slaughtered and bled out (rather cruelly I feel) facing mecca etc.

I suppose the only thing to me that justifies halal is that in Islam, eating pig products or alcohol is not acceptable. So if traces of these items are present I guess it makes sense to make people aware of this. Perhaps a simple "No traces of alcohol or pig products" label would address this.

I've also been reading some articles where even moderate Muslims feel that some halal certification organizations are a scam.
09:35pm 13/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1695 posts
Yeah but just putting that label on doesn't really mean anything unless it is audited.

So to have a secular "no alcohol or pig products" will still have an administrative overhead.

I don't know about the precise business history of Halal but I'd be surprised if that 1980's quip is telling the full story.

There probably is a degree of fraud that goes on with certification but that's just business it happens everywhere.

If access to the 2% of Australian Muslims overcomes the cost of the certification, which it will, because there is *no way* Kraft (Vegemite) will be forking out for it if there is no return, I reiterate who cares?

To want religious dietary requirements to be expressed in secular terms doesn't make buckets of sense.

I don't especially like religious certification, I just don't see what harm there is in it.

I don't think it makes you a right wing loony to view religious certification with some skepticism. I just don't think this is case where it matters. Its not like its claiming special healing powers like homeopathy.
09:51pm 13/06/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11743 posts
man, if the Government is paying people smugglers, that sounds like a Constitutional Crisis. Surely, that has not happened.



10:31pm 13/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25131 posts
I tried to google just how much the unnecessary added expense was and I really couldn't find anything. Surely you've come across it in your travels. How much more am I paying for a steak roundabouts?
10:34pm 13/06/15 Permalink
Taipan
USA
4934 posts
GOLD!




Just read a comment on this video on Youtube, man there really are some dumb as f*** people on this earth. It's f*****g depressing.
02:55am 14/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7188 posts
fair enough Pete. I take on board your points.
10:59am 14/06/15 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
20791 posts
And like any good liberal supporter, ignore them? Lols
11:58am 14/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25132 posts
Calling it now, once the claims that the government paid asylum seeker boat captains to turn around are undeniable they will say that it was all part of a larger operation. Kind of like purchasing from a low-end drug dealer to gain trust so you can meet/get to the high-end drug dealer.

Also slaps_forehead you forgot to say how much these unnecessary halal expenses are adding per steak that I buy.
01:32pm 14/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17646 posts

Also slaps_forehead you forgot to say how much these unnecessary halal expenses are adding per steak that I buy.


Cause he knows the answer is $0.

Woolies barely even stocks it. A rumor goes around once in a while that all woolies meat is halal. If you bother to ask woolies the say, 'nope, some stores have halal specific sections, the general meat isn't halal certified nor would they bother to do it for all their meats'

Halal certification is fairly cheap. Cadbury's for example has stated it adds no extra cost. There are few companies that have actually passed on any cost, because adding 1cent to a product to cover the cost probably isn't worth the effort of repricing.
02:10pm 14/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17647 posts
Also many companies that do halal certification aren't doing it for the domestic market. It gives them access to export their product to a rather large international market, to some countries that wont allow the imports without that certification.


Almost everyone I've talked to who is against Halal certification (but lol, doesn't give a s*** about kosher) is almost always using it as a shield to hide behind. They don't want to be seen as anti-islamic/biggots so they grab onto this halal thing and run with it, a lot of the time they don't even know what halal is properly and/or what certification actually does.

They just listen to Jackie Lambert and Paulin Hanson, and in many cases parrot their words (extortion racket is a common one).
02:14pm 14/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7189 posts
And like any good liberal supporter, ignore them? Lols


No I'm a swinging voter based on certain policies. I think all three major parties in general are a joke.

I'm ready to vote for Labor as soon as I hear the final amendments they intend to make to Negative Gearing on property investment. As Phony and Slop have stated they will not even have a look at Negative Gearing, I will now give Labor a chance even though I can't stand the Kingslayer.
04:37pm 14/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7190 posts
Also slaps_forehead you forgot to say how much these unnecessary halal expenses are adding per steak that I buy.


Yeah good point. Whilst I have read that Halal certification does cost large producers a fee of few thousand dollars per year, I have just had a google and yeah per "carton" of steaks it costs about 25 cents. SO yeah, you are right the cost to the consumer is negligible.

I will keep reading to see how much it affects small producers and sole traders.

Yeah, I guess I'm just an anti-sharia bigot who needs to read a bit more.
04:52pm 14/06/15 Permalink
Enska
Sydney, New South Wales
2612 posts
The amount of f***** retarts I see at work on almost a daily basis crying about how halal food "tastes" s*** so they can be passively racist c**** without the guilt trip is astonishing tbh, but then I work in a terribly racist and backwards thinking industry.

I buy most of my meat from a halal butcher, purely because the dude is a f***** good butcher and the meat from there is always grouse
05:13pm 14/06/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2225 posts
I buy most of my meat from a halal butcher, purely because the dude is a f***** good butcher and the meat from there is always grouse


So he only sells grouse or are you speaking like a Victorian (Mexican)..

http://www.grousehunting.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/spruce-grouse-300x232.jpg
05:55pm 14/06/15 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
20793 posts
Haha good quality watching tone avoid the question
06:12pm 14/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25133 posts
Any chance he could be booted for this? He deserves to be.
06:43pm 14/06/15 Permalink
Enska
Sydney, New South Wales
2613 posts
Gee that was funny HJ but what about the really witty meme you forgot to post.
07:04pm 14/06/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1752 posts
Should we pay off ISIS? Should we have paid the bali 9?

Let's just pay off everyone in war.

No wonder the liberal gov likes war and hates ICAC.
09:19pm 14/06/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2226 posts
Gee that was funny HJ but what about the really witty meme you forgot to post.


Ok

http://i62.tinypic.com/ea2zqs.jpg
09:54pm 14/06/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11728 posts
This post has been removed.
Reason: Dumb
Send Private Message
10:51pm 14/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7191 posts
The amount of f***** retarts I see at work on almost a daily basis crying about how halal food "tastes" s*** so they can be passively racist c**** without the guilt trip is astonishing tbh, but then I work in a terribly racist and backwards thinking industry.


Yeah I experience the same thing at my work. Any mention of halal and "muzzo's" and some people say some pretty nasty, racist s*** that makes ISIS look like the Care-Bears.

That's why I try and get different points of view and form my own judgments on it.

Remember also, just because someone makes a criticism of any religious ideology it does not make them a racist. Close minded and bigoted yes, but unless they are degrading someone based on their ethnic background it is not racism.
11:42pm 14/06/15 Permalink
baz
Victoria
960 posts
Would there ever be a need for bacon bombs?

Perhaps the US could drop pig products instead of explosives?
12:28am 15/06/15 Permalink
Taipan
USA
4935 posts
baz there a number of products here in the US that use pig fat specifically for the purpose of pissing off Muslims. Just the other day I saw some gun oil laced with pig fat for sale that state on the bottle that its to deny muslims going to paradise when they die.
01:27am 15/06/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1014 posts
This post has been removed.
Reason: Dumb
Send Private Message
02:04am 15/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17648 posts

baz there a number of products here in the US that use pig fat specifically for the purpose of pissing off Muslims. Just the other day I saw some gun oil laced with pig fat for sale that state on the bottle that its to deny muslims going to paradise when they die.


I'm pretty sure that if the person doesn't realize that the product contains pig fat then they haven't committed a sin and paradise would still await them.
06:38am 15/06/15 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
20795 posts
yeah that's the loophole, if they don't know then it's ok
10:26am 15/06/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1754 posts
02:24pm 15/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1697 posts
yeah that URL is really misleading Redhat. Should have a big "IF" in there.
03:19pm 15/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17651 posts

“The vast majority of the fifty-odd Australian dual nationals fighting with terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq would retain their citizenship if a conviction was required.

“In many cases law enforcement agencies will know an Australian has been fighting with terrorist groups but will be unable to present sufficient eligible evidence to secure a conviction.


'So, how do you know he is fighting for terrorist group?'
'we just do'
'So what, no images, videos, papers, ... evidence?'
'nope, not really. We have a gut feeling but'

06:42pm 15/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25135 posts

“In many cases law enforcement agencies will know an Australian has been fighting with terrorist groups but will be unable to present sufficient eligible evidence to secure a conviction.
Utterly f***ed up.
08:32pm 15/06/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10507 posts
Infi fights for desh/deash/isis ... well he is a bad person, I promise ... let's vote him off the Island.
11:53pm 15/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17652 posts
Pretty sure it is really anti-liberal to allow a government to circumvent the law.
07:51am 16/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22669 posts
National security is about making decisions in the best interest of the country. If your intelligence agency has inadmissible evidence (hearsay/confidential informants, illegally tapped/intercepted) indicating a particular person is an ISIS foreign fighter would you let them back into Australia? No.

it's not that the govt has no evidence, its that they have inadmissible evidence for legal conviction. National security operations are not about obtaining convictions, they about protecting our borders. These people are not being imprisoned they can stay in the wonderful caliphate.
11:03am 16/06/15 Permalink
zaraq
Adelaide, South Australia
546 posts
"inadmissible evidence" = idle gossip around the water cooler,Chinese whispers, i can't imagine how that would prevent a person from reentering the country if you are going to start penalizing people with nonexistent evidence you begin to enter into the realms of the Salem witch trials.
11:32am 16/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17654 posts
Isn't that the point of trials to give the person the best chance they aren't wrongfully accused?

It's a sad state of affairs when people support stripping the constitutional rights of a citizen, without even bothering to change the constitution. F*** it, why stop there?

It's also counter productive. It's an attempt to exert more control over people, I find it hard to consider that this sort of iron fist treatment doesn't lead an increase in support for ISIS as 'freedom fighters'.
11:40am 16/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22670 posts
I don't support the Minister making the decision. It should be put before a judge to satisfy a prima facie case, as with other anti-terror related actions e.g. preventative detention order or control order. I do not think however it is in the same category as a criminal offence proceeding.
12:26pm 16/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17655 posts
As long as it goes before a judge and the defendant has some sort of right of reply.
12:37pm 16/06/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1306 posts

F*****g lol. Labor has been screaming about the Liberals apparently paying people smugglers and not denying it due to "operational matters" now its been exposed Labor did pay people smugglers and are now refusing to deny it citing "operational matters"

Labor is absolute comedy gold.

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/asylum-boat-turnbacks-australia-paid-people-smugglers-under-former-labor-government-20150616-ghotbt


01:29pm 16/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
277 posts
Letting people return to Aus after fighting for ISIS is not good.

Stripping an innocent person of their australian citizenship is not good.

Both option are s***. Really, really s*** and with long term implications that are even more s***.

Seems like arguing in favour of s*** options is the summation of our political culture. Nothing but a pissing contest to one-up on your opponent.

Hopefully someone thinks of something better soon... we've got hundreds of politicians who are supposed to be pretty smart. Unfortunately their first priority is toeing the party line (ie politics).

Maybe we should lock up these ISIS fighter with the refugees... brown is brown, after all.
01:54pm 16/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1698 posts
Letting people return to Aus after fighting for ISIS is not good.


Forcing Iraq to deal with our wayward youth is worse. The one thing they could really use right now is more fighters they can't get rid of.
03:03pm 16/06/15 Permalink
WirlWind
Central Coast, New South Wales
1716 posts


'So, how do you know he is fighting for terrorist group?'
'we just do'
'So what, no images, videos, papers, ... evidence?'
'nope, not really. We have a gut feeling but'



I think this would have been more appropriate:

"How do you know she is a witch?"

"Well, SHE LOOKS LIKE ONE!"

"YES BURN HER BURN THE WITCH!"

(Monty Python's Quest for the Holy Grail, if anyone missed the reference)
03:27pm 16/06/15 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
8993 posts
Pft, you have to at least test the theory first. Tie them up and drop them in a lake. If it floats, it's a witch.
03:56pm 16/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25136 posts
F*****g lol. Labor has been screaming about the Liberals apparently paying people smugglers and not denying it due to "operational matters" now its been exposed Labor did pay people smugglers and are now refusing to deny it citing "operational matters"
This is actually a good post.

I reckon Labor have done this. I'd like to hear their motives though. The LNP are all the way in on their stop the boats campaign so I guess they would try literally anything. What amazes me about them doing it is they were too stupid to realise this would have the potential to piss off everyone. Even torture apologists will get on board the hate train because of the muh taxdollers!!! aspect of this latest stunt.

Labor were never spewing stop the boats rhetoric, except right at the end of their term in a desperate attempt to win the election. Is this when the payments took place?
06:53pm 16/06/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2227 posts
This is actually a good post.

I reckon Labor have done this. I'd like to hear their motives though. The LNP are all the way in on their stop the boats campaign so I guess they would try literally anything. What amazes me about them doing it is they were too stupid to realise this would have the potential to piss off everyone. Even torture apologists will get on board the hate train because of the muh taxdollers!!! aspect of this latest stunt.

Labor were never spewing stop the boats rhetoric, except right at the end of their term in a desperate attempt to win the election. Is this when the payments took place?


Paying off the people smugglers was start during the Howard era. I think it stopped under Rudd because then we got a flood of boats..in other words pay us or we send them. It's not as if the refugees have disappeared from Indonesia all of a sudden.

This meme has a ring of truth;

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xtf1/v/t1.0-9/11427880_1015693105122577_4470620394530123368_n.jpg?oh=b4f685ec998c1beaa819805e921a7062&oe=5630D069&__gda__=1441502401_14cd7c34ee7e96b89d50c03921750a8e
07:38pm 16/06/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
2011 posts
^ Meme is spot on.
09:27pm 16/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7194 posts
Owned owned owned

09:52pm 16/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17657 posts
Bahah those graphs don't take into account 'forward trajectory'. That same forward trajectory that has be so wrong so often. Whatever.


Talks about how you have to rake in a range of factors, then ignores that for another question and massively over simplifies it.

He got owned.
10:30pm 16/06/15 Permalink
Dazhel
Gold Coast, Queensland
6746 posts
Pft, you have to at least test the theory first. Tie them up and drop them in a lake. If it floats, it's a witch.


Ahhh... but what also floats in water?

Logically, if expatriates accused of fighting with ISIS return to Australia and weigh the same as a duck, then they're terrorists. BURN THEM!
10:38pm 16/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1699 posts
Yeah that was a caning. Cormann is a twat. from 4:30 he says that evidence correlating high vacancy with no negative gearing is evidence of a reduction of supply 0_o.
11:36pm 16/06/15 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10510 posts
Mathius err err err is not Australian.
Mathius err err err doesn't give a f***. He is getting paid boat loads (lets bribe those boats) to basically not do anything. err err err


Lets create more land ...!
11:59pm 16/06/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1307 posts
Mathius err err err is not Australian.


hey hey hey, don't be racist please. He is Australian
12:34am 17/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7195 posts
Our finance minister sounds like Arnold Schwarzenegger.
08:29am 17/06/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
2012 posts
Cormann is a smug bastard. Comes across as a total pratt. F*** him.
09:29am 17/06/15 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2229 posts


hey hey hey, don't be racist please. He is Australian
rac·ist
ˈrāsəst/
noun
noun: racist; plural noun: racists

1.
a person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
synonyms: racial bigot, racialist, xenophobe, chauvinist, supremacist More
"he was exposed as a racist"
(racially) discriminatory, racialist, prejudiced, bigoted
"a racist society"

adjective
noun: racist; plural noun: racists; adjective: racist

1.
having or showing the belief that a particular race is superior to another.
"we are investigating complaints about racist abuse at the club"

Saying he isn't Australian isn't racist, its just incorrect. Though it still doesn't change Cormann from being a former Belgian with a panache for buggery who would also shaved his scrotum with a straight razor...
12:57pm 17/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
278 posts
I really wish they'd all stop treating sydney like the centre of the f*****g universe. Values in Perth have dropped below 2.5% growth in recent years/months and it's taken the whole construction industry with it.

Removing negative gearing won't do the west any favours economically.

I'm all for improving affordability, but changing tax laws that affects the whole country just because Sydney is full of hipster wankers who'd rather keep their big single resident blocks and then b**** about how much they cost instead of doing the kind of large-scale rezoning that perth has done is bloody ridiculous.
01:47pm 17/06/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1308 posts

Saying he isn't Australian isn't racist, its just incorrect. Though it still doesn't change Cormann from being a former Belgian with a panache for buggery who would also shaved his scrotum with a straight razor...


I was just trying to be one of those PC people who screams "racist" to everything. No doubt if he was black, it would have been acceptable.

I really wish they'd all stop treating sydney like the centre of the f*****g universe. Values in Perth have dropped below 2.5% growth in recent years/months and it's taken the whole construction industry with it.

Removing negative gearing won't do the west any favours economically.

I'm all for improving affordability, but changing tax laws that affects the whole country just because Sydney is full of hipster wankers who'd rather keep their big single resident blocks and then b**** about how much they cost instead of doing the kind of large-scale rezoning that perth has done is bloody ridiculous.


It's the increase in foreign ownership and government regulation restricting land supply + density that has been driving the prices up.
02:35pm 17/06/15 Permalink
Vash
4518 posts
Nah. we've had s*** tons of apartments going up in sydney, and prices still not letting up.
Negative gearing, too lucrative for investors so the investors are buying instead of first home buyers. It should be the other way around.
When you make investment too attractive, prices go up.

It's not a supply problem, people are buying because of raising prices to get a good return.
02:43pm 17/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
279 posts
If removing negative gearing is going to make property more affordable, the rate of growth has to decrease. Perth can't afford that.

foreign ownership and the existence of negative gearing across the whole country - these things don't explain why sydney has 5 or 6 times the growth of other cities.

foreign investment and a market driven by speculation (which is what you are both saying) are symptoms, not causes. You have to ask what it is that makes sydney different.
03:43pm 17/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17659 posts

When you make investment too attractive, prices go up.


That only applies to solar investment schemes and insulation, and to other schemes where you can stick it to the previous government for being crap. The negative gearing scheme, no that is different. That market distortion is OK because many liberal and labor voters profit from it. To tackle that problem would cost precious votes and we can't have that now can we. It's better to run the country into ruin than to risk losing votes (but helping out your mates in the big end of town is totally worth throwing a few votes away for!).
04:12pm 17/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1700 posts
market driven by speculation (which is what you are both saying) are symptoms, not causes.


yeah and negative gearing is a huge cause of that speculation.

If removing negative gearing is going to make property more affordable, the rate of growth has to decrease. Perth can't afford that.


This would only be true if negative gearing was correlated with new dwellings. The rate of growth in real estate in Australia is characterized by capital gains in existing dwellings not new ones, so the argument that negative gearing is a friend of the construction industry is flat out false.

here is a handy graph demonstrating the point.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/callam_july9_graph1.png?itok=puLJLr52
04:40pm 17/06/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
2014 posts
^ yeah, that's what I thought Pete.

was just trying to be one of those
dumbc**** that can't help themselves.
04:43pm 17/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22672 posts
Nah. we've had s*** tons of apartments going up in sydney, and prices still not letting up.
Negative gearing, too lucrative for investors so the investors are buying instead of first home buyers. It should be the other way around.
When you make investment too attractive, prices go up.

It's not a supply problem, people are buying because of raising prices to get a good return.


And the investors come from overseas. Chinese funneling their wealth our of China. They would be buying regardless of the negative gearing.
04:45pm 17/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1701 posts
Even if it were true that its all the Chinese, whats your point infi, because they wont stop (edit to make this clear DONT NEED AN INCENTIVE) we should keep incentivising them to the tune of $13 billion?

I thought you hated reckless spending.
04:48pm 17/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22673 posts
Allowing deductions in the making of assessable income is standard taxation law. There is no need to change the tax law as that would only complicate things. Does rental income become tax free if it generates a net profit?

Do businesses lose the right offset property deductions against operating profits? It's just stupid tax policy to be changing normal rules of deductions.

Build more dwellings and/or levy foreign investors.
05:07pm 17/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1702 posts
Quarantining deductions against income earned in a particular income generating activity is also standard taxation law infi.
05:16pm 17/06/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1757 posts

Allowing deductions in the making of assessable income is standard taxation law. There is no need to change the tax law as that would only complicate things. Does rental income become tax free if it generates a net profit?

Do businesses lose the right offset property deductions against operating profits? It's just stupid tax policy to be changing normal rules of deductions.

Build more dwellings and/or levy foreign investors.


No but half of capital gains tax is exempt. For some reason capital gains is rewarded as "special income" when it is really just rent seeking, especially on existing housing stock. It is pretty atrocious. Why is a job where you produce something taxed a a higher rate than spending money on an existing house, collecting rent and waiting for it to go up? What service does this actually provide?

I support some deductions on new housing stock, like negative gearing. You are taking a bit of a punt, builder might have used some dodgy practices and the rent isn't covering a sinking fund/strata. Existing housing however....my house is about 100 years old, chances are it's going to be standing tomorrow.

In other news how awesome is Richard Di Natale? Winds back terrible howard pension reforms for rich people and has labor bemoaning how it's unfair.

He and Scott Ludlam are like some kind of lefty dream team.
http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2015/06/senator-scott-ludlam-destroys-negative-gearing-myths/
06:30pm 17/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17660 posts

Build more dwellings and/or levy foreign investors.


Mass transport is a big key to doing this. High speed rail means people can live further away from city centers whilst still attending their work in a timely manner in those centers. This would reduce demand for expensive real estate as well as give new opportunities for new businesses to service these new dwellings.
Australia needs high speed rail.



Allowing deductions in the making of assessable income is standard taxation law.


One must ask why there is a need to deduct tax in the first place? Is the tax rate too high?

08:09pm 17/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7196 posts
Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

10:28pm 17/06/15 Permalink
Vash
4519 posts
Ludlam for PM
12:14am 18/06/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1309 posts
Nah. we've had s*** tons of apartments going up in sydney, and prices still not letting up.
Negative gearing, too lucrative for investors so the investors are buying instead of first home buyers. It should be the other way around.
When you make investment too attractive, prices go up.

It's not a supply problem, people are buying because of raising prices to get a good return.


House =/= Apartment.

It's definitely a supply problem, as land release figures show. Not everything is a murdoch media or "da evil rich peoples" conspiracy Vash.
12:47am 18/06/15 Permalink
Vash
4520 posts
considering my apartment has gone up in value 12% and i've only owned it 6 months, it doesn't just apply to houses..
12:58am 18/06/15 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
11749 posts
F***Face Von Clownstick is running for US President.


01:16am 18/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7197 posts
House =/= Apartment.

It's definitely a supply problem, as land release figures show. Not everything is a murdoch media or "da evil rich peoples" conspiracy Vash.


Land release is only part of the problem.

To completely ignore one side of this housing equation, while blaming Australia’s poor affordability solely on demand-side or supply-side factors, is myopic and only half right.



last edited by sLaps_Forehead at 08:28:04 18/Jun/15
08:22am 18/06/15 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
20817 posts
that guy wasn't funny, at all
08:23am 18/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
280 posts
This would only be true if negative gearing was correlated with new dwellings. The rate of growth in real estate in Australia is characterized by capital gains in existing dwellings not new ones, so the argument that negative gearing is a friend of the construction industry is flat out false.

here is a handy graph demonstrating the point.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/callam_july9_graph1.png?itok=puLJLr52


"rate of growth" refers to value and it drives/is driven by both investment and construction. Established versus new dwellings is completely meaningless - they are not separate markets.

New dwellings tend to be further and further from the city and so cheaper than established, or, at least so long as values in general increase over time, the proportion of added value that new dwellings represent will continuously diminish over time. This shouldn't be surprising. Even so, when values for existing dwellings go up, it makes constructing new ones more lucrative, and then less so when values go down.

Removing negative gearing is simply removing money (potential tax money) from the property market, which means demand will drop and values will drop. Removing negative gearing does not suddenly give potential home buyers more money - becoming "more affordable" by reducing demand means values will drop. Fine for sydney, potentially devastating for most other parts.

f*****g noob.
08:54am 18/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1703 posts
are you serious Roonee?
09:34am 18/06/15 Permalink
Vash
4521 posts
removing neg gearing is the correction we need to have.. investors will be hurt (including me) but i think the economy would benefit far greater if more people bought their own homes, and paid less rent. which means more money to spend in the economy.
you need to reduce the cost of living for everyday people, not investors. that just further moves wealth to the top, which hurts the economy.
10:17am 18/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
281 posts
are you serious Roonee?


that the construction industry is driven by investment and property values?

that removing negative gearing will reduce investment and reduce value and reduce construction?

that sydney is not the centre of the f*****g universe?

No, not serious at all.

Hey I'm all for there being more home owners and less investor owners, and I'd even be all for giving that negative gearing money to first home buyers (but this wouldn't help sydney), but the fact is Sydney is pretty much the only place that could take a big hit to demand right now. Sometimes our sense of morality needs a reality check.

There's a problem with only a very small part of the country and we're talking about solving it with something that affects the whole country...
10:44am 18/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1704 posts
that the construction industry is driven by investment and property values?

that removing negative gearing will reduce investment and reduce value and reduce construction?


So you'd have some evidence then that the graph I posted doesn't reflect physical dwellings as the partition of investor loans.

After all you said that value growth drives new construction, and that therefore the partition of investor funds may be explained by the diminution of share of value of new dwellings right?

I wonder if transactions over physical dwellings is similarly split. If only there was a place to find out that sort of thing.

I think you might be the n00b.
11:04am 18/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22674 posts
the discussion on negative gearing is so retarded, it really isnt funny. a section of the economy gets overheated so the solution is to remove tax deductions for it?

is that the solution during the mining boom? is that the solution during the tech bubble? is that the solution during the real estate boom of the 80s?

removing negative gearing because sydney is overheated is a bizarre policy response. it is typical of the Greens because of their "f*** you haven't got mine" attitude but otherwise most ratioinal people want the right to be able invest in real estate and plan for their retirement accordingly.

business and investment thrives on certainty and stability. stop changing tax rules and let themarket build more stock! if other investors and homeowners prize sydney suburban real estate more highly than other areas, this is telling you something: MOVE ELSEWHERE. people are carrying on like it's their God-given constitutional right to own a home in Sydney. it isn't. buy a home where you can afford it.

The Chinese investor issue definitely needs to be addressed. Chinese are relocating wealth usually obtained through their corrupt/underworld/party business practices and want to store it in a transparent safe haven with rule of law. This is causing in-bound capital flows to blow up and artificially squeezes the property market. I think all foreign investment in real estate should carry a substantial levy unless it is an owner occupier.
11:28am 18/06/15 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
20823 posts
i don't think it is just to do with sydney alone

sydney is just the example
11:33am 18/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1705 posts
the discussion on negative gearing is so retarded


no u r.

The discussion around negative gearing is around confining deductions so that they may only be made against income made from a rental property.

The current structure of the deduction incentivises getting the largest loss making rental properties, so you can deduct against any income.

If you know as much about business as you claim to infi you'd know that the Chinese investor nonsense is just that.

Being the second time you've bought that up, it now falls to be asked do you own a negatively geared property. Because I put it to you that blaming the chinese is a neat appeal to racisim that prevents people focusing on the fact that the property market is overwhelming driven by domestic investment. 30 seconds of googling blows the chinese bulls*** out of the water.

but please go all cormann on us. We should just invent more land.

Wanker.
11:41am 18/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22675 posts
i dont own negatively geared property personally but i do know that if my business had an untenanted commercial (or residential) property and all of a sudden I ciouldn't claim a deduction for the interest bill I would be fuming.

And if you think Chinese investors are not a problem ask any telemarketer selling high rises off the plan. Thats who they sell them to. There was a four corners episode on it even. But I am probably just imagining a racist rant... yeah....
11:54am 18/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1706 posts
Are you able to read? I'll quote myself.

he discussion around negative gearing is around confining deductions so that they may only be made against income made from a rental property.


The argument that negative gearing is just the same as any other tax deduction is pure fantasy. It allows losses to be deducted against all income.

It directly incentivises bad investments.

Do you know a bunch of property telemarketers?

support your claim with evidence.

four corners exposing people flouting the FIRB *DOESN"T AND CAN'T* establish the Chinese are responsible for inflating a property bubble.
12:01pm 18/06/15 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
22676 posts
All deductions should be allowed against all income. Income tax is levied against net income. In a series of related trusts or companies , they all share their losses with each other. Why should individuals be excluded from that benefit? If one of my commercial properties is vacant I continue to claim the interest as a deduction even though it exceeds the income generated. The government doesn't get to collect tax when the suns shining and deny deductions if that area of the business is struggling.

Sorry I don't have a uni paper on who buys off the plan investment developments. I just talk to real estate agents and telemarketers every week. I know I know, anecdotal evidence ain't worth s*** on an internet forum. I guess you're right.
12:11pm 18/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1707 posts
All deductions should be allowed against all income.

They aren't and never have been.
*edit*

Income tax is levied against net income

no it isn't this is just flat out factually false. Your accountant must take you for a ride every year Mr i know about business.

Get a better business if your one is struggling. I don't give a f*** that you can't make money. This is Australia, if you can't make money you're a f***** douche bag.

Sorry I don't have a uni paper on who buys off the plan investment developments. I just talk to real estate agents and telemarketers every week. I know I know, anecdotal evidence ain't worth s*** on an internet forum. I guess you're right.


So that's a no then.
12:16pm 18/06/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1310 posts
I doubt negative gearing is even the problem considering people on an average income couldn't even borrow enough to buy a house in Sydney or Melbourne to take advantage of negative gearing.

People should just move to Geelong or Newcastle etc.
01:01pm 18/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25142 posts
Sorry I don't have a uni paper on who buys off the plan investment developments. I just talk to real estate agents and telemarketers every week. I know I know, anecdotal evidence ain't worth s*** on an internet forum. I guess you're right.
lol
02:22pm 18/06/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1311 posts
Who the f*** talks to telemarketers besides lonely old pensioners?
02:37pm 18/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17663 posts

I ciouldn't claim a deduction for the interest bill I would be fuming.


Yeah, I mean why should your business be punished for being inefficient when you can just get a government hand out to cover the hole.
02:49pm 18/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
282 posts


So you'd have some evidence then that the graph I posted doesn't reflect physical dwellings as the partition of investor loans.

After all you said that value growth drives new construction, and that therefore the partition of investor funds may be explained by the diminution of share of value of new dwellings right?

I wonder if transactions over physical dwellings is similarly split. If only there was a place to find out that sort of thing.

I think you might be the n00b.


wait who wot where? please explain.

The rate of construction does not directly correlate with value growth. In fact, if it did, there'd be no growth at all because that would mean supply = demand and everything would be static. Once value growth reaches 5% or so, speculation starts taking over, which explains a large part of your "partition".

But why only in sydney? because while every other city has been opening up new developments and doing a s*** load of rezoning close to the city, sydney has done sweet f*** all because it's full of spoilt hipster wankers who want big houses close to the city (because that's the only place hipster wankers can survive) but who can't grasp basic market dynamics and arithmetic because they're too busy wanking over their ethical mull and free-range wine while pretending to not be self-conscious about their homosexuality.

ps i tried to find actual stats about city to city rezoning but ran out of time. If anyone else can find it, you'd be pretty cool... hey, I could be completely wrong!!1
03:12pm 18/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1708 posts
I could be completely wrong!!1


Probs.

So like infi wanna supply some evidence for your point of view, or you wanna rely on "life experience".

cause I dun wanna

ps i tried to find actual stats about city to city rezoning but ran out of time


Y'all try them there ABS. They be keepin dem records Y'all
03:36pm 18/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25143 posts
Abbott government pledges to appoint a windfarm commissioner in leaked letter

The Abbott government will appoint a “windfarm commissioner” to handle complaints about turbine noise and a new scientific committee to investigate, again, their alleged impacts on human health, in a late-night deal with anti-wind senators over amendments to renewable energy legislation.


Pretty sure they'll be placing a witch doctor in the position of minister for health very shortly.
03:39pm 18/06/15 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
17664 posts
I'm so glad this government is all about stopping the waste. Surly this time they might find some issue with the wind turbines.

Also I'm glad they are assigning a minister for this one singular item. It's not like some sort of Minister of Science would be able to answer those questions.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 16:39:29 18/Jun/15
04:37pm 18/06/15 Permalink
Jim
UK
13658 posts
top contenders for abbot govt scientific committee to investigate wind farms: carl phillips, andrew wakefield, stephanie seneff, judy carman, gilles-eric seralini, mark and david geier, russell blaylock, laura hewitson, deepak chopra and shiva vandana. overseen by prince charles
05:17pm 18/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25144 posts
Dr Oz would also have to be in the running.
05:20pm 18/06/15 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
995 posts
New top contender to oversee the wind farms: CEO of Heinz Baked Beans.
05:56pm 18/06/15 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7198 posts
I really hate this extremist "pick a side c***" attitude to Negative Gearing.

Why is it so hard to have a sensible discussion about making amendments to Negative Gearing so that it favors investment in new dwellings rather than existing dwellings - you know actually encourage building and construction rather than speculation and hoarding which ultimately makes the whole economy constipated.

It doesn't have to be abolished just changed - so that it actually f*****g does what it says on the box.
06:57pm 18/06/15 Permalink
justrev
Melbourne, Victoria
533 posts
If your property is untenanted and you are not actively seeking a tenant the interest becomes capital in nature and you can't claim the deduction, you can use it to reduce the CGT when you sell.

The property is no longer considered a source of "ordinary income".

Negative gearing is not for empty properties, it's for properties where the rent doesn't cover the expenses (and capital cost is not included here, only repairs, some legal costs and interest).

Obviously negatively geared properties are set up to allow the owner a capital gain on sale, not to provide income during the course of the tenancy.

To make it plain that the owner is not breaching the general anti-avoidance rules a quarantining of deductions relating to rental properties seems like a sound idea.

There is a precedent. There are other types of income where the deductions are quarantined to the income source. Also the calculation of HECS/HELP income does not allow for negatively gearing rental properties, as well-to-do families were buying properties in the name of the offspring to help them avoid HECS/HELP.

If people would stop trying to avoid tax by seeking out loopholes the tax law could be a lot shorter, making it easier to understand and administer
10:12am 19/06/15 Permalink
justrev
Melbourne, Victoria
534 posts
Oh ok new dwellings?
Seems to me the rule that overseas people can only invest in new dwellings is causing all the old housing to be pulled down to build towers of tiny little apartments.
It's not that simple.
Perhaps they should only be allowed to invest in new dwellings where an old dwelling is not pulled down to create the new dwelling?
10:17am 19/06/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1759 posts

because they're too busy wanking over their ethical mull and free-range wine while pretending to not be self-conscious about their homosexuality.


This is totally what occupies our time.

Meanwhile in reality there's heaps of new high density developments really close to the city.
https://www.mywealth.commbank.com.au/property/green-square-set-to-transform-sydney-cbd-hottopic201403

A lot of commercial/industrial land has been rezoned for apartments.

Also, we don't live in big old houses close to the city. WA's first suburb appearance in the pop density stakes comes in at 100.
http://censusstats.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/most-densely-populated-suburbs-in.html

Being in the most remote city on the planet must really remove you from reality.
10:51am 19/06/15 Permalink
Some Fat Bastard
Brisbane, Queensland
2016 posts
Pretty sure they'll be placing a witch doctor in the position of minister for health very shortly.
As Tony's mum used to say when tucking him into bed each night "listen ya little f*****, everyone's a c@#$, they're all out to get you and they can all f*** off and die!!!!.".
01:00pm 19/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
283 posts
ok some good stats here:

building approvals

and here:

value growth

specifically tables 7 and 40 in that second link.

In 2014 Sydney averaged 14.5% yearly growth and Perth 4%.

Perth built 62.4% of the number of dwellings that sydney did.

Perth built 57.8% of the residential value that Sydney did.

So sydney had about 3.5 times more value added to the total number of residences, while the value of new construction was almost equal.

So sydney has not been doing anywhere the same amount of construction in high value areas (ie close to the city) as perth has. Not even close.


hipster.f***.
01:16pm 19/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1709 posts
So Sydney has triple the yearly growth but only a 1.3 times the new constructions and your argument is that value growth drives construction?

hipster.f***.


Maybe deploy some logic instead of insults.
02:00pm 19/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
284 posts
So Sydney has triple the yearly growth but only a 1.3 times the new constructions and your argument is that value growth drives construction?


No, that would be a separate argument. Seeming like I've been trolled now. Oh well, I spent the morning learning how to make graphs with excel so I still win.
02:26pm 19/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1710 posts
No, that would be a separate argument.

"rate of growth" refers to value and it drives/is driven by both investment and construction.

that the construction industry is driven by investment and property values?


So they don't teach maths or English comprehension over in Perth eh?
02:35pm 19/06/15 Permalink
IncrEdible_vEgetable
Brisbane, Queensland
2641 posts
26 year old property mogul "had no help"...my arse

Miss Brennan took a $55,000 a year job at a real estate agent to learn as much as she could and bought her first property on her 22nd birthday in October 2012, in Manly Vale, for $386,000, after originally being turned down for a mortgage. Though she had around $100,000 in savings she persuaded her mother to go guarantor for $60,000 with the Belrose family home — meaning she didn’t pay any deposit at all. Four months later she put $80,000 of her savings on her second place in Collaroy. Next, she bought a plot of land on a nature reserve in Glencoe, Scotland, with $50,000 left to her by her grandparents. She’s never visited but land in Scotland comes with a title, which makes her a Lady. A place in Manly, funded by releasing the equity of her Collaroy place followed, and a few weeks ago she bought her latest two properties in Brisbane. Now Miss Brennan has launched her own business to help others do what she’s done, offering everything from financial planning to accounting and mortgages. She’s moved home with her mother, Cathy, who is divorced from her father, while she gets Step Loans off the ground.


So in other words, she didn't get any help, except for bypassing the deposit step...oh and getting a job as a policy advisor to Bronwyn Bishop at 20, surely nothing to do with her rich connected Northern Beaches family right?

edit: my point being that regardless of what the govt pretends, home ownership is increasingly a matter of privilege and established wealth rather than hard work and sticktuitiveness.


last edited by IncrEdible_vEgetable at 15:00:58 19/Jun/15
02:51pm 19/06/15 Permalink
IncrEdible_vEgetable
Brisbane, Queensland
2642 posts
Also:
http://i.imgur.com/Aqmnbu1.jpg'

http://i.imgur.com/iT6Ynu2.jpg

last edited by IncrEdible_vEgetable at 14:56:39 19/Jun/15
02:55pm 19/06/15 Permalink
BroolStoryCo
Melbourne, Victoria
1313 posts
26 year old property mogul "had no help"...my arse



So in other words, she didn't get any help, except for bypassing the deposit step...oh and getting a job as a policy advisor to Bronwyn Bishop at 20, surely nothing to do with her rich connected Northern Beaches family right?

edit: my point being that regardless of what the govt pretends, home ownership is increasingly a matter of privilege and established wealth rather than hard work and sticktuitiveness.


last edited by IncrEdible_vEgetable at 15:00:58 19/Jun/15


lol i read that article too. Half way in and BOOM, she had help via parents. Parents put u their house as guarantor.
05:13pm 19/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
285 posts
Me wote
No, that would be a separate argument.

"rate of growth" refers to value and it drives/is driven by both investment and construction.

that the construction industry is driven by investment and property values?




HipsterPete wrote
So they don't teach maths or English comprehension over in Perth eh?



Me wrote
The rate of construction does not directly correlate with value growth. In fact, if it did, there'd be no growth at all because that would mean supply = demand and everything would be static. Once value growth reaches 5% or so, speculation starts taking over, which explains a large part of your "partition".


prwned again.




Perth: we're bringing back the mullet.

So watch the f*** out.
07:30pm 19/06/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1760 posts
What I'm trying to point out is that even with all your "inner" "city" construction you're not even approaching sydney pop density levels.

I used 2 lots of quotes there because Perth isn't actually a city.
07:54pm 19/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1711 posts
so above 5% annual value growth people don't buy new houses? but they do, because sydney has 1.3 times Perth's new houses.

Its possible you don't know what the f*** your talking about.

Go dig iron out the ground d*******, it's all you're capable of.
02:55am 20/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
286 posts
Its possible you don't know what the f*** your talking about.


it's possible, and I really should have used some averages in my stats, plus there's always a bit of lag with value growth becoming new dwellings so a single year really doesn't necessarily prove too much.

See, I can critisize myself far better than you can. You're out of your league, sunshine.
04:33pm 20/06/15 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1712 posts
Yes thank you for that Roonee.

Your point is that you don't have a point.

Every single piece of data you've put forward has shown literally the opposite of your point.

This:
The rate of construction does not directly correlate with value growth.

isn't a caveat of this:
that the construction industry is driven by investment and property values


It's proof the the second comment is false.
10:06pm 20/06/15 Permalink
Roonee
Perth, Western Australia
289 posts
'directly correlate' prob not the best words. It's not an exact parallel might be better. If you're not aware that construction is driven by property values then you're not in a position to have a valid opinion on any of it, including negative gearing.
10:11am 21/06/15 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1762 posts
How many of these "Fourteen Defining Characteristics Of Fascism" are we ticking off with the current gov?

http://www.rense.com/general37/char.htm

Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each


I count about 10.
10:30am 21/06/15 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25149 posts
That speech in front of the Australian flags he gave was absurd.
10:47am 21/06/15