Bethesda ports for Switch are now two for two thanks to the great work in bringing this classic RPG to the console
Skyrim on Nintendo Switch - Our Review!
An in-depth behind-the-scenes look at the game. And bass fishing.
How Ubisoft Bottled Beauty and Batshit Crazy for Far Cry 5
Join us on a chronological journey as we go through some of the highlights from three decades of Creative Assembly, the studio responsible for the brilliant Total War.
Celebrating 30 Years of Creative Assembly
Recently we had the chance to sit down with the head of Microsoft’s indie game service ID@Xbox, Chris Charla, to discuss all things Xbox, indie, and the future of the platform.
Talking Indies and Xbox One X with ID@Xbox Director Chris Charla
Political Thread 2.5 (Because we really haven't made any progre...
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38710 posts
or maybe now with the latest Supreme Court appointment granting a conservative dominated court, plus the Republican Senate and Congress, the God Emperor will suspend the constitution, rename the USA an Empire and commence building the Death Star. No more obstructions.
I know you think that is staggeringly unlikely. I do too, if only because of 2A and the fact that there are some things that even his core will not tolerate. But there are many barriers before it gets to that point - like the ACLU.

But the power he wields even within the framework of the Constitution are awesome and horrible. The fact that he so proudly behaves like such an obnoxious buffoon in public, to pander to the absolute worst parts of American society and their ridiculous fears, should make you ask what the he is saying behind closed doors. And possibly even scarier, what he is thinking.
10:58pm 01/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38711 posts
apropos of nothing

"this time it's different"
11:01pm 01/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23579 posts
This is Top Shelf hysteria. Really good quality.

Americans will become refugees! Oh hang on, not even anyone from Hollywood has left. I would gave thought there would be mass departure of those afraid they will be rounded up and detained.

I guess it's not a life and death situation.

As far as I am concerned Trump is winning hard and I wish we could get a leader like that here instead of weak as water Turnbull.
11:13pm 01/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38712 posts
listening to an australian say that makes me sad beyond words
11:21pm 01/02/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7562 posts
11:25pm 01/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5084 posts
Yeah, it needs to be a life & death situation before i need to consider leaving my country. come on, infi.
11:25pm 01/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23580 posts
slaps pls don't post inconvenient truths in here.
11:38pm 01/02/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4583 posts
well I'm convinced, let's get cracking on that wall
01:15am 02/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2277 posts
What on earth is on that list trog that you think is happening? or that trump is uniquely bad on? Control of the press is f*****g laughable.

Rampant sexism is a warning sign of fascism? Yeah ok, certainly it was the sexism in German society in 1935 that really stuck out as a point of no return.

Jesus H Christ there is no danger of sober analysis of this guy is there. None what so ever.
07:34am 02/02/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7563 posts
slaps pls don't post inconvenient truths in here.


why not, its fun
07:35am 02/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1984 posts

2 of the 9/11 hijackers were UAE nationals. I wonder why no ban there?

https://twitter.com/TrumpGolfDubai/status/825908974549610496


07:38am 02/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2278 posts
Because basing your anti terror strategy on 9/11 would have been like worrying about the vietcong in 1991.

The list was developed by Obama's department of homeland security.

Engage brain.
07:40am 02/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1985 posts
One guy tries and fails to take out a plane with a shoe bomb, now everyone has to take off their shoes at American airport security.

9/11 was the biggest attack on American soil...
07:57am 02/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2279 posts
I hear Trump is going to stop Japanese people from visiting Hawaii. You can never be too careful...
08:03am 02/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1986 posts
Cool hyperbole brah.
08:52am 02/02/17 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
1050 posts
I wonder if Palpatine made Alderaan pay for the construction of the Deathstar.
10:07am 02/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18311 posts

There were breaking reports at the time, reflecting what I stated. if that was not the case then the reported facts have changed and I'm fine with that. It may be a lone wolf nutjob - that is terrible too


This issue is though infi, is that you jumped straight to the conclusion that the report was correct without showing doubt otherwise. It reveals part of your state of mind on the subject.

Whilst others, such as myself, looked at it and considered alternative interpretations to that which was offered. This should be done for all interpretive information that a person is presented with. The hardest part is displacing the emotional reaction to the information/scenario, those emotional reactions are physiologically processed and in your brain before the logical areas get access, it then gets mixed together and fed into the actual conscious part of your mind.

When jumping to conclusions it reveals your emotions are driving more of your thought processes then you probably realise. It is this very aspect that mass media uses to hook people in. It's why the fear type campaigns are so effective.
If you can stir up a person enough with fear (fear being the easiest emotion to provoke) then their rational thinking becomes compromised.
10:18am 02/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18312 posts

And possibly even scarier, what he is thinking.


Ironically, I think that out of the available politicians, Trump is the most candid about what he is thinking. As you pointed out, the dude is a f***wit. There are yet more professional experts pointing out that Trump very likely suffers from a mental disorder that, at least, has psychotic potential.

I feel he pretty much says what he is thinking, the trouble is what he thinks changes rapidly and can flip flop without a problem in his mind.

Someone like Hillary Clinton, what you see is certainly not what you get, so much deliberate hidden thinking is with that person, along with many politicians.
10:28am 02/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18313 posts

As far as I am concerned Trump is winning hard and I wish we could get a leader like that here instead of weak as water Turnbull.


It's not a secret you have a deep distrust and strong dislike of bureaucracy. As such any display of a politically influential person that threatens to reduce/dismantle/eradicate that bureaucracy will meet with your approval. Even more so when it aligns to your interests.
I suspect, in this case of Trump, you'll even approve of regardless of the actual or potential harm it can cause. You'll ignore the obvious and significant shortcomings and the significant danger that Trump so overtly displays, using the ol' cognitive dissonance machine to rationalise all sorts of reasons why he's not a nutjob, regardless of the strong evidence.

I'm making a bit of a leap there, I know, however I have trouble seeing otherwise given most of what you sprout here on QGL.

What would it take for you to decide that the removal of bureaucracy isn't worth the cost?
10:35am 02/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12602 posts
Ohhh Mr Magoo, you've done it again...

According to The Washington Post, what should have been a pleasant hour-long call was ended after 25 minutes when Mr Trump abruptly hung up on the PM. “This is the worst deal ever,” Mr Trump reportedly said about the refugee deal, complaining that he was “going to get killed” politically. He also accused Australia of seeking to export the “next Boston bombers”.


http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/white-house-reportedly-confirms-donald-trump-is-still-considering-refugee-deal-with-australia/news-story/e4f39a2ca0ebabfc42afb94b3defb16a

http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/6757d53b8d6769628f8b0b0954b609c7

02:06pm 02/02/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21157 posts
He also accused Australia of seeking to export the “next Boston bombers


yeah it's turnbull's fault when you have to deal with a knob that actually says s*** like this
02:35pm 02/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23581 posts
Turnbull made an agreement in the last days of Obama in the hope that Hillary would just wave it through. What a deal - to be able to export your problem elsewhere! Shame there's nothing in it for the US. Turnbull dun goofed again.
03:50pm 02/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1987 posts
lols worst phone call ever.

WTF I love Trump now!
04:43pm 02/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12603 posts
Trump has tweeted that America is supposed to take THOUSANDS of immigrants from Australia

Australia America relations off to a wonderful start.
Now Trump thinks we are moochers looking for a free ride off of America.

Mr Magoo should be calling Trump right now and clearing things up but...
Let me predict what hes actually doing
preparing for a soft cushy interview on his favourite News Network The ABC

FOR GODS SAKE GET RID OF HIM
He worse than Rudd Gillard Rudd Abbott

The Ten lost years of Australian Politics.
2007 - 2017

https://hughesyblog.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/howard.jpg
05:27pm 02/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38714 posts
Turnbull made an agreement in the last days of Obama in the hope that Hillary would just wave it through. What a deal - to be able to export your problem elsewhere! Shame there's nothing in it for the US. Turnbull dun goofed again.
again this is a weird thing for an Australian to say, especially one that has exhibited basically total and complete die-hard loyalty to the Liberal party in the face of all sorts of controversy.

I can understand an American being on board with Trump saying this. But an immigration-hating Australian who is seeing an opportunity to ditch even more immigrants on to someone else?! How come you're not shocked and appalled that Trump is backing out of an honourable deal made between two parties?!

The ABC reporting the deal is happening anyway despite Trump's posturing so I suspect it is the last time we'll ever hear about it from him EVER - unless he steps up at the 11th hour to kill it dead completely.
07:45pm 02/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23582 posts
Because it was not an honourable deal between two parties, but a list minute agreement rushed through on the basis that everyone assumed Hillary would win.

It was another weak copout by Turnbull when the refugees could easily been released into Nauru. I am opposed to rewarding boat people with passage to any desirable destination as that in turn pays off the people smugglers.

Safe haven in a remote low income country is the best opportunity to help build up a new country and economy. But there is no welfare there..

I am not anti-immigrant at all. I am pro immigration - just anti-multiculturalism and anti-economic migrants disguised as refugees.
08:00pm 02/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38715 posts
What would it take for you to decide that the removal of bureaucracy isn't worth the cost?
I was thinking about asking this exact question actually. I'll add a rider: what will it take for you to admit that Trump is a trainwreck of a human and a terrible politician and his Presidency will make things worse for everyone?

I'm not saying I expect you to suddenly admit it now - it's clear he's done nothing bad enough in your eyes to warrant this judgement. I mean what kind of thing could he do in future that would make you suddenly think "hey maybe this guy is a bit of a tosser after all". For example if he banned abortion, would that do it? Or if he tried to wind back the 1st Amendment, or (as I read this morning as something he might do) start blocking state rights to legalise marijuana?

Presumably there is some line, somewhere, that if he crosses you will stop supporting him. Obviously that line was crossed with the Liberal party but I still don't understand where it was (I'd love to know about that too).

I suspect this is the most important question for Americans. So far they're caught up in the fun of banning all the brown people thinking it's going to make them safer (because they're cowards ruled by fear) or get them better jobs (because they've failed to understand the new economy and technology - although I'll grant that H1B reform might have some impact here, but not for the people in the rust belt that were promised a return to the 1960s).

But if ACA falls over, it will alienate 20m people that now have insurance they couldn't get before. If abortion is banned it will infuriate literally everyone that isn't a fundamental nutjob. If he starts trying to use federal power to block marijuana legalisation he'll have the states rights people and libertarians on his ass (not to mention hordes of stoners). If he legit gets in bed with Russia that is going to drive everyone that lived through the Cold War mental (I think people are underestimating the potential impact of the Russia stuff; I didn't think it was at all important but from talking to my relatives in the US - who lived through the Cold War - many are seething with fury about this).
08:01pm 02/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25639 posts
It was another weak copout by Turnbull when the refugees could easily been released into Nauru. I am opposed to rewarding boat people with passage to any desirable destination as that in turn pays off the people smugglers.
It's 2017 and people are still peddling this bulls*** that was bulls*** in 2012.

People speak about failure to persuade but when you have people willing to believe and peddle lies for half a decade you have no chance. You just have to wait till self-implosion and then sift through the debris for something salvageable.
08:09pm 02/02/17 Permalink
deadlyf
Queensland
3979 posts
I am pro immigration - just anti-multiculturalism
The f***?
08:29pm 02/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25640 posts
That means pro immigration as long as they're white.
08:30pm 02/02/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4584 posts
I assume he refers to the John Howard idea (can't recall the exact quote) that Australia should be "multi-ethnic", but essentially should have one culture, i.e. a basic core of values and practices and we all agree on how society should basically function
08:41pm 02/02/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7565 posts
browns only, you racists

https://s29.postimg.org/wi9p99ruv/meineger.jpg






last edited by sLaps_Forehead at 21:37:58 02/Feb/17
09:35pm 02/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23583 posts
What would it take for you to decide that the removal of bureaucracy isn't worth the cost?


I would hazard to estimate 90% of bureaucracy is pointless. for example we have a commonwealth department of health that doesn't employ a single front-line clinician and commonwealth department of education that doesn't employ a single front-line teacher. government is great at growing its employment levels based on "demand" and mission creep. having been a public servant myself for two and a half years I can attest to how little is done outside of front line service delivery positions (i.e. they actually face screaming customers). removal of bureaucracy is always worth the cost because in the end it is better if people are able to help themselves, or access a self-organising community service rather than relying on the government.

I'll add a rider: what will it take for you to admit that Trump is a trainwreck of a human and a terrible politician and his Presidency will make things worse for everyone?


you still haven't accepted that Trump won? he is now getting into trouble from the liberal media for doing what he promised he was going to do. if he backtracked he would get in trouble for breaking his promises. it's a good thing The Donald doesn't give a flying f*** what liberals think!

Donald knows this: he is only as good as his last deal. To escape complete financial ruin The Don has had to talk fast and promise a viable solution that creditors work with (and also create separate entities which can be sacrificed to limit his personal loss - in politics these are called Ministers/Secretaries). He is already winning so hard he has built a lot of political capital up with the people who voted for him: pressuring manufacturers to bring jobs back, shutting down immigration security risks (using Obama's recommendation), starting the wall Bill Clinton recommended to Congress, purging all the Democrat hangers-on that didnt have the decency to jump ship. Trump is branding himself as a guy that's gets stuff done.

But if you don't do your job.... you get FIRED.

ACA will be a thorny issue - and one I am guessing he doesn't personally hold a firm view on. My guess is it will get jumbled around into more or less what it already is - with a new lick of paint.

President doesn't ban abortion - the Supreme Court legalised it through Roe V. Wade so there is no way Donald will touch that one. He won't be able to put the finger back in the legal weed dyke.

I think if Trump can actually form a working relationship with Russia and get them to demilitarise Eastern Europe instead pointing their weapons at China that would be YUGE. China needs to be cut down to size right now before South China Sea gets out of hand.
09:52pm 02/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25641 posts
So you were rather quiet about the Trump thing when he was there on the outer, weren't you? Don't worry I get it - he won and you're exuberant about it. I'd be the same if something I was so emotionally invested in came up on top. But the fact that such a terrible person winning and the terrible things he is doing empower you so much is just so f*****g damning. I mean you outed yourself literally a few posts ago but here you are now with one of the dumbest yet.

edit: and just a little sidebar. When the Abbott hype machine was in full swing it was obvious how your language mimicked the Murdoch press at the time. Now it's as though they were written by Trump's slower-minded cousin. Learn to think for yourself mate. It's a really good thing.
10:03pm 02/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23584 posts
I have supported trump since before he won the primary - he was head and shoulders above every other candidate both dem and repub. I bet on him and was paid at $2.50. Not only did the US win, I won. That's called win/win.

Imagine being so dumb that on polling day - 10 hours away from the result - you said it was a 99% likelihood of Hillary win. hahaha.
10:12pm 02/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25642 posts
Oh I don't doubt for a second that you always supported him. Just a bit quiet about it that's all. I know for certain your religious-like fervour only started very recently. I'm just saying it's very telling when you see someone who is pumped full of s*** light up so much.
10:27pm 02/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38717 posts
you still haven't accepted that Trump won?
This is a massive strawman even by your usual standards

I accept that Trump won. I accept the Electoral College outcome. I accept the apathy of the American voter, the fecklessness of the Democratic party, the staggering incompetence of the Republican party to put up a better candidate, the sheer unlike-ability of Hillary.

None of that is at all related to my question - which I think is pretty simple - or my comment.

What can Trump do that would put you offside? At the moment it sounds like the answer is "nothing" (similar to what I'd say it seemed your attitude was towards the Liberal party).

(For example: I thought Bernie's policies were good. I don't think he was a socialist at all, even though he was framed as one. If he had suddenly turned around and said "I think the workers should own the means of production!" I would have just said, "this guy is crazy" and written him off. )

What is the X that Trump must do to make you think "this guy is crazy"?
10:42pm 02/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23585 posts
This is a massive strawman even by your usual standards


your value statement, like the liberal media commentary and all the worthless protesting suggests that those who voted for Trump are wrong and stupid, claiming some form of moral superiority.

right when you win and right when you lose. it's churlish.

What can Trump do that would put you offside?


Raise taxes.
10:47pm 02/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38718 posts
your value statement, like the liberal media commentary and all the worthless protesting suggests that those who voted for Trump are wrong and stupid, claiming some form of moral superiority.
Dude! I make no value judgement on the American voters. My question was about TRUMP and YOU and OUTCOMES.

I quite clearly explained in my previous post that I have no problems with him getting elected, as well as the reasons why I thought it happened. I think many normal regular people voted for Trump simply to reject the establishment.

Explained with a comic:

edit: won't embed, don't know why - link



We're at panel 2 at the moment. We're not at panel 3. But lots of people think it is coming. I am not convinced yet; I think the only way to see what is going to happen is to wait and see what is going to happen.
right when you win and right when you lose. it's churlish.
What word do you use to describe when people are asked simple questions and then go off on tangents to avoid answering them? Because I use "strawman".

It's too early for anyone to be "right" or "wrong". My value judgement on Trump is that he's a f***wit and so far I think he's acting like a f***wit. I think his f***wit policies and actions will probably be harmful for the US and probably the world, but maybe he will Make America Great Again. I doubt it but I'm prepared to wait and see. You've basically already made up your mind that it is great and he's great?!
Raise taxes.
ugh I feel like all this was now a completely wasted effort - boring!

this is why I don't engage people on Twitter
11:17pm 02/02/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4585 posts
I get that we have to take that unreconstructed asshat seriously since he won the election, but there's a world of difference between that and liking him or anything he does

this is why I don't engage people on Twitter

then how else do you condense your viewpoints into slogans and cliches for complete strangers. derrrrp fake news! sad!
12:58am 03/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12604 posts
The CTRL-Left silencing dissenting views at Berkley

FEMALE students at a US university have been beaten with flag poles and pepper sprayed amid shocking scenes of violence committed by left-wing rioters. Donald Trump has threatened to withdraw federal funding from the University of California Berkeley after violent protests forced the cancellation of a planned talk by controversial far-right Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos on Wednesday night. “If U.C Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view — NO FEDERAL FUNDS?,” Mr Trump tweeted.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/donald-trump-threatens-to-stop-uc-berkeley-funding-after-riots-shut-down-breitbart-editors-speech/news-story/40fe3c814a39eb522e455cf3cb774e3d




It doesnt matter if you are Left or Right, the machine of Government either maintains control or we have Anarchy. Something very ugly is coming and there will only be one winner out of it.

02:12pm 03/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2280 posts
Dude! I make no value judgement on the American voters.
So far they're caught up in the fun of banning all the brown people thinking it's going to make them safer (because they're cowards ruled by fear) or get them better jobs (because they've failed to understand the new economy and technology - although I'll grant that H1B reform might have some impact here, but not for the people in the rust belt that were promised a return to the 1960s).


Sounds a tiny bit like a value judgment. I'm sure by coward you were referring the grace and beauty of cowards while they run away. But anyway.

If he had suddenly turned around and said "I think the workers should own the means of production!" I would have just said, "this guy is crazy" and written him off.


So do I win a prize?


In 1987 Bernie said:

Democracy means public ownership of the major means of production, it means decentralization, it means involving people in their work. Rather than having bosses and workers it means having democratic control over the factories and shops to as great a degree as you can.


I was first tipped off he may have said something like that when he plastered his campaign website in how much of a "democratic socialist" he is and that "socialism" isn't a dirty word. The day he comes out and literally says "das kapital is a pack of lies" is the day I'll believe he's reformed. I could meet him half way and and accept "the belief that capital accumulation is evil led to the single greatest crime against humanity of the 20th century". Until then he is a communist who has taken 50 years to learn Americans don't like communists, so he has to tart his language up.

Trog, Bernie is a student politician (and all the attendant bulls*** that comes with it) trapped in the body of an old man. He would stand out among American politicians as being one of the least effect agents for change in history.

However, if you are inside a narrative over there. Would you care to explain which policies of Bernie's you liked? because I seem to recall he's not to big on the TPP, and I also seem to recall trump doing something about that recently. Just one of them didn't have a photo of Eugene Debs stuffed down their pants when they did it.
09:27am 04/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38719 posts
Sanders whole campaign site is still online as is (as far as I can tell). You can see his statements on "socialism" (scare quotes preserved) here. (FWIW this is a direct quote: "I don’t believe government should own the means of production".) His policies are also still online and all seem fine. But this isn't about Bernie & I have nothing else to say; frankly at a loss as to why you'd bring it up when I was clearly just making an example.

edit: fixed broken link & restored missing text. Deleted post below that [hopefully] wouldn't have existed if I'd not f***ed up my HTML and finished what I was saying. Sorry for inconvenience. Don't like deleting posts in this thread usually but that's a conversational fork that I'm making an EO about terminating because it's totally irrelevant.
08:52pm 04/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25644 posts
Speaking of things that happened decades ago - Trump's supreme court nominee Neil Gorsuch founded a student group called the Fascism Forever Club. Seems Trump wants this person appointed at all costs. Wonder why?
10:11pm 04/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
1636 posts
This post has been removed.
Reason: Off-Topic, it's not about Bernie
Send Private Message
10:32pm 04/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25645 posts
Seattle judge blocks Trump travel ban

Kind of makes me think that Yates was onto something when she said the executive order was unlawful. Which means the firing of her was Trump trying to circumvent the rule of law. Guess that's another box that can be ticked.
12:55am 05/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38720 posts
You mean so-called judge I assume.

edit: also ACLU lawsuit challenges immigration policy on 1A grounds (no Popehat analysis yet but suspect it's coming)
01:13am 05/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5085 posts
Had a peek at The Australian comments on Trump articles. They're all closet Trump supporters, even thinking his executive orders should bypass the judicial branch & constitution.
So it appears conservatives are of the opinion that they want a conservative dictator.

What about that democracy thing they always say the left attacks?

Heck, even Abbott wants senate rules changed so it allows poor policy to get through without scrutiny. If your policies are being blocked by judges or by democratic process, then maybe it's time to look in the mirror, eh?
04:46am 05/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2282 posts
frankly at a loss as to why you'd bring it up when I was clearly just making an example.


Here is why.

what will it take for you to admit that Trump is a trainwreck of a human and a terrible politician and his Presidency will make things worse for everyone?


So putting the EO to one side which (which I will agree is a bad policy, poorly implemented, which also constitutes the full extent of the valid criticism against it) has affected, at most 90,000 people so far. By far and away the most significant thing trump has done is to withdraw from the TPP. He has a generally protectionist outlook on trade. In this he and bernie are actually remarkably close to one another.

That will affect billions of people, and probably for the worse. Yet column inches on that and detailed posts on this forum are in remarkably short supply.

So then the above statement begs the conversation fork, as it rather strongly implies you believe Trump is a Trainwreck of a human. So the next natural question is, where Bernie and Trump are aligned on the most significant trade issues (and you like Bernie on the issues), does that too mean Bernie is a Trainwreck of a human. (because if he undermines free trade paying for all his free s*** is going to get much much harder. Probably shouldn't need to be stated, but given the retarded level of discussion so far, this is an inconsistency trump has never been able to explain, nor has he been pushed on significantly in the press)

To make the link explicit you accuse infi of being blinded by prejudice and irrationality when it comes to various matters political. So I'd say a corner stone rationality is being able to treat like cases alike. Therefore, if on the most important policy issue, trump and bernie are the same, but only one is a Trainwreck of a human, you would appear to be displaying rather acute hypocrisy. I take the thrust of your comments to be that you believe you have the rational ground (and I might add the idea of me occupying a narrativeless space making you frustrated speaks more to prejudice on your behalf, then any logical shortcoming on mine). The more balanced, open to all the facts position. However, I think you actually are just responding to a strong personal dislike of trump. For the same reason fpot and vash lose their minds when he talks outside the overton window.

*edit* I'd also go a little further and say that people like you who can easily work anywhere in the world, being pissed off at trump is probably one of trump's greatest political assets. I'm not saying you're a bad person because of it,merely that upsetting you is proof positive to people who can't do it, that trump is legit.*/edit*

I note you like to indulge in fretting over blustery tweets as well.

Here is the rational story to be worried about for the last week.

Nixon and Reagan got the unions on side and won their second terms in landslides.

So I disagree Bernie is irrelevant. the approach toward the working class will be decisive in the midterms and to the next presidential election, and I think Bernie is the classic bourgeois Marxist who loves to talk about oppression but actually despises the working class. If he becomes the democratic model for working class outreach the democrats will lose.

This guy, who Toll has convinced himself has a mental handicap, is quietly making incredibly deft political moves. And everyone appears to be watching it happen while completely distracted by largely irrelevant fake news stories.

for example
Speaking of things that happened decades ago - Trump's supreme court nominee Neil Gorsuch founded a student group called the Fascism Forever Club. Seems Trump wants this person appointed at all costs. Wonder why?


oh dear. I think he just punk'd fpot three decades in advance.

You know why we heard about inauguration attendance ad nauseam for a week? because it's not his tax returns. And a disgracefully incompetent feckless media let it happen.
10:23am 05/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25646 posts
Heh oops sorry about that. Didn't snopes before I posted what a rookie mistake.
08:13pm 05/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18314 posts
I have no doubt that Trump is of above average intelligence. In areas of interpersonal relations I think he is incredibly smart. I also am of the suspicion that he is highly naive of the STEMS and may even be incapable of comprehending anything more than the very basics.
I also suspect he has near to no emotional affect empathy, to the point he has no remorse and guilt. At least not enough to cause him discomfort.
The thing that makes this a dangerous combo is that he also highly likely suffers from delusions, sometimes quite significantly.
You mix all of these things together, and then put that person into a position of almost supreme authority and you get what we are witnessing.

Luckily the founding members of the USA went to great lengths to separate the legislative, judicial and executive powers.
I'm not sure if Trump is actually aware of why this separation is in place and doing the exact thing it was meant to do right now.

It's going to be interesting ahead, as this separation of powers is going to be extensively tested.
10:51am 06/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5086 posts
01:20pm 06/02/17 Permalink
deadlyf
Queensland
3980 posts
God I hope Corey Bernardi splits from the Libs, they might actually become a worthwhile party without f***wits like him in the mix.

Hopefully Abbott goes with him, all the f***wits in one boat.
01:23pm 06/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5087 posts
Nah the cesspool is way to large within the LNP.
01:28pm 06/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1988 posts

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/05/donald-trump-repeats-his-respect-for-killer-vladimir-putin

Extraordinary how Trump defends Putin here.


Aren't all heads of state killers? They have all sent young men to die.
06:40pm 06/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25647 posts
06:53pm 06/02/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4586 posts
The CTRL-Left silencing dissenting views at Berkley

oh yeah Milo! why does he choose campuses as venues? of course college students are going to get triggered and smash things - it would seem more logical just to hire a venue in town somewhere - all the same deplorables would buy tickets anyway

I guess the answer is he's going to his demographic. His message to boys and young men, some of whom are you might say, still learning about empathy and civility, is you know what? Go ahead and be a little a****** - harass people online, call people b****** and c**** that you disagree with. It's fun, plus you're helping defeat the jackbooted thugs of political correctness. Conservative politics welcomes you. Oh and, he couldn't possibly be a bigot; he's a homosexual.

That said, it does seem that the so-called progressive left has ten of these trolls for every one the right has, but they just get a warmer reception on college campuses.
09:47pm 06/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38721 posts
but they just get a warmer reception on college campuses.
UH HUH SURE
10:07pm 06/02/17 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
1051 posts
10:03am 07/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25648 posts
Who suggested it only happens to feminists?
01:01pm 07/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2283 posts
UH HUH SURE

Just to get that clear trog.

A woman with the full backing of university faculty receiving a threat deemed by the FBI to be not credible and voluntarily cancelling her talk because of political disagreement over Utah concealed-carry laws.

That is meaningfully comparable to:

A speaker being condemned by 100 faculty and demanding he be de-platformed at the home of the free speech movement for his dangerous speech. having his event violently shut down by masked thugs who beat random people in and around the event, shot bottle rockets at the venue and caused in excess of 100,000USD in property damage. And being "peacefully" protested by 100s more for his dangerous speech again all students at the home of free speech.

That's the comparison you're attempting to draw?

So violent politically motivated riots to not that.

Sure ok.
09:16pm 07/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25649 posts
Just out of curiosity what sort of penalty are you looking at for participating in or starting a riot compared to threatening mass murder? I reckon they'd be similar in the eyes of the law at least. Plus if giving talks in front of people was a major part of my life a threat like that would really unnerve me. Listen to the guy -

“You have 24 hours to cancel Sarkeesian’s talk … Anita Sarkeesian is everything wrong with the feminist woman, and she is going to die screaming like the craven little whore that she is if you let her come to USU. I will write my manifesto in her spilled blood, and you will all bear witness to what feminist lies and poison have done to the men of America.”


The peaceful protest of that Milo whateveritis guy is fine by me. Protest is a form of free speech, right?
09:50pm 07/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38723 posts
Speaking of those useless f**** at Breitbart, Sleeping Giants is an amazing social media movement to apply social and financial pressure on companies to stop them sending ad dollars to those kinds of f***wits. A lot of people have been stunned and surprised to find their company ads on these kinds of sites (basically the risk of doing simple algorithmic ad buys) and have been quick to block these sites from their campaigns. It seems to be working as I get basically no ads on BB now; the ones I do get are s***** low price inventory ("Download this PDF reader!" kind of s***)

Also this Glenn Beck video is interesting. Seems he's had a massive change of heart since Trump and is repenting from his earlier days. It's kind of boring to watch but the overall new perspective he seems to have is a big change.
11:12pm 07/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25650 posts
That terror list full of spelling mistakes and underreported events such as Nice, Paris and Berlin is a real doozy.
11:36pm 07/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2284 posts
Yeah those words on the screen are quite scary. I wouldn't want to receive them (depends where you are but in Vic that kind of threat carries a maximum sentence of 10 years). I'd be relieved when they were found to be baseless. And if I really hated getting them I might listen to the FBI when they say don't publish them, they just generate more and make legit ones harder to find and prosecute.

Now imagine them being spray painted by 100's of people shooting rockets at a venue you're inside.

Speaking of those useless f**** at Breitbart, Sleeping Giants is an amazing social media movement to apply social and financial pressure on companies to stop them sending ad dollars to those kinds of f***wits.


What the f*** has happened to you trog? I am honestly flabbergasted the part owner of an internet media company is referring to a twitter mob in those terms. I take it if I have a political disagreement with you I have your blessing to organise a mob to take away ausgamers web ads?

Don't ask how to block ads, or discuss it, or talk about it in any way - ads keep websites (like this one) free to access. Blocking them will result in having to pay to access them. Its that simple.

I guess it's more of a guideline


The peaceful protest of that Milo whateveritis guy is fine by me. Protest is a form of free speech, right?


Yeah except they are demanding he not be able to speak because his speech is dangerous, I might add they are demanding Berkley undermine one of it's core values in the process. So not really no.
07:46am 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5088 posts
What the f*** has happened to you trog? I am honestly flabbergasted the part owner of an internet media company is referring to a twitter mob in those terms. I take it if I have a political disagreement with you I have your blessing to organise a mob to take away ausgamers web ads?


Lol.
Because trog's political views warrant that kind of response.
The alt-right are a dangerous movement, they need to be politically suppressed. For an endless amount of reasons you should probably already know.
07:52am 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2285 posts
Because trog's political views warrant that kind of response

You aren't going to have to go far on twitter to find 1000's of people who believe exactly that d*******. That's why private citizens respecting freedom of speech is important you utter utter utter moron.

The alt-right are a dangerous movement, they need to be politically suppressed.


Imagine my shock that a marxist likes political suppression.
08:00am 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5089 posts
Free speech is one thing i'd gladly sacrifice for the ability to destroy the chance of another nazi uprising.
Society has progressed well beyond that bulls***.

Or we can just wait and let it all happen because, hey, ma free speech right?
08:06am 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2286 posts
Imagine my shock that a marxist likes political suppression.


I suggest we create camps where they can be re-educated. There could be an archipelago of them.
08:13am 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5090 posts
Nah that wont work, they've already tried the education with evidence approach.
About the only thing these idiots understand is violence. No amount of evidence nor logic will do the trick.

They think they're on the high ground by not engaging in violence, but their political beliefs are far more dangerous.

This is what happens when your education system sucks.
08:20am 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2287 posts
I'd just like to draw the admins attention that under federal law the above post could be read as advocating terrorism.

Just a little PSA there.

There will be record grain this year vash.
08:26am 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5091 posts
so dramatic PP.
How can you read from my post that i advocate terrorism? You're a weird guy.
08:54am 08/02/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7568 posts
How do you say Allah Akbar in watermelon Vash ;)
08:56am 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2288 posts
The criminal code 1995

s 100.1 a person commits a terrorist act
(a) causes serious harm that is physical harm to a person; and
(b) the action is done or the threat is made with the intention of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause; and
(c) the action is done or the threat is made with the intention of:
(ii) intimidating the public or a section of the public.

the actions at Berkley arguably fall inside that. They beat people with steel rods.

80.2C Advocating terrorism
(1) A person commits an offence if:
(a) the person advocates:
(i) the doing of a terrorist act; or

advocate means counsel, promote, encourage or urge

bout the only thing these idiots understand is violence. No amount of evidence nor logic will do the trick.

They think they're on the high ground by not engaging in violence, but their political beliefs are far more dangerous.


So the acts taken against them are justified? the rioters were right to do what they did? sounds a little like promoting or encouraging to me.

You're sailing mighty close to the wind there Vash.
09:09am 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5092 posts
I still don't see any connection from the criminal code to my post, PP. Keep trying though.
09:17am 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2289 posts
You believe violence is all the alt-right understands and they must be stopped?

Even though they don't commit acts of violence?
09:20am 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5093 posts


this was a great moment.
09:24am 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2290 posts
Ah yeah.

Also arguably terrorism.


Then I saw someone wearing all black walk up to a student wearing a suit and say, “You look like a Nazi.” The student was confused, but before he could reply, the black-clad person pepper-sprayed him and hit him on the back with a rod.

I ran after the student who was attacked to get his name and more information. He told me that he is a Syrian Muslim. Before I could find out more, he fled, fearing another attack. Amid the chaos came word the event had been canceled.

Turns out utter f*****g morons like you aren't very good at telling who is a nazi


09:30am 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5094 posts
punched a guy! TERRORIST!@
lol PP you're a cutie.
09:35am 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2291 posts
Punching someone in order to intimidate them out of their political beliefs is terrorism Vash.
09:42am 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5095 posts
Okay. I guess all WW2 veterans are terrorists then!
Or maybe the entire U.S Government for attacking a country based on their political beliefs.
Or attacking ISIS could be terrorism as well. What about their freedom of speech?

Nah we don't refer to Americans as terrorists, for... reasons
09:48am 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2292 posts
You're a simple little man aren't you.
09:53am 08/02/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9369 posts
Righto, looks like based on this it's time to start re-labelling everything 'terrorism'. Punching a bloke in a pub because he likes Collingwood? Terrorism. Turning your hose on a dog walker because the dog s*** in your yard and you think they should clean it up? Terrorism. Schoolyard kid bullies another kid in to chancing his opinion or acting differently? Terrorism.
10:14am 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2293 posts
Good one Raven. Notice you missed a step. First you've got to call them a nazi. Then it's ok.

I take it you'd be fine with beating up the how to vote card people at the polling both. That's an acceptable form of political action?

Politically motivated violence with the goal of intimidation is terrorism you utter twat. That is exactly what happened at Berkley and it is exactly what happened in that video.

I don't like Spencer but there is a huge, golden, burning, terrorism shaped line between that and attacking him in the street on TV.

Apparently this is not obvious.
10:16am 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5096 posts
Yeah calling just anyone a nazi is pretty silly. But if there's good evidence they're a nazi, well, as below.

10:21am 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2294 posts
If you can't unequivocally denounce politically motivated violence in the streets you have lost your mind vash. It DOES NOT MATTER they espouse reprehensible views, the have a foundational constitutional right to do that.
10:29am 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5097 posts
It is irrelevant if they have a constitutional right to do so. Their views are to destroy intellectualism and evidence based policy. Essentially taking humanity back to the dark ages.
Many people won't just lay down and let that happen.
10:44am 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2295 posts
It is irrelevant if they have a constitutional right to do so


that constitutional right is the single most important, strongest safe guard against the rise of totalitarian governance.

It is difficult to tell if you're being serious now. I really hope you aren't.

If you genuinely feel that way, you, not Spencer, are the danger to democracy.
10:49am 08/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12605 posts
Vash seems to be a bit of a Nazi
PornoPete you know what to do.

I dont consider bullying people who use Breitbart for Ads to be Freedom of Speech. To me its a little too similar to those idiots that stand outside Abortion Clinics trying to bully Women in to not having Abortions.

Breitbart is my Homepage.
Breitbart will have an Aussie presence very soon.
You could say it kicked off yesterday.
01:02pm 08/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25651 posts
I'm really looking forward to Rosie O'Donnell's performance as Steve Bannon. That Spicer one SNL did was perfect.
01:41pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2296 posts
Yeah it was pretty funny. Alec Baldwin is knocking it out the park.
01:44pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5098 posts


that constitutional right is the single most important, strongest safe guard against the rise of totalitarian governance.

It is difficult to tell if you're being serious now. I really hope you aren't.

If you genuinely feel that way, you, not Spencer, are the danger to democracy.


Oh don't be silly. Considering totalitarian governments can be voted in.
01:46pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2297 posts
Yep and when Spencer invades poland or bombs pearl harbour we can talk about "resistance". Until then get used to your sacred cows being disagreed with.

Again.

Admins/trog.

Advocating politically motivated violence.

Criminal offence.

Believe there are forum rules.
01:52pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5099 posts
Oh, you just advocated politically motivated violence by calling on a resistance. That's going against the constitution and democracy!
So it seems your post is to be nuked.
02:00pm 08/02/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21160 posts
f*** this thread got weird

just sayin'
02:02pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2298 posts
personally I like how because white people did it raven is confused.
02:08pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2299 posts
Plus I don't want to be "weird" pave.

03:00pm 08/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25652 posts
That Milo guy just seems like a bit of a d*** whereas Spencer is a bona fide nazi. Punching bona fide nazis is fine by me.
04:51pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2300 posts
so the "it is okay to punch nazis" system got a Syrian Muslim punched.


Any time you want to reflect how far down the road you are.....

they are some soft lines.
05:02pm 08/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25653 posts
Well that's a shame. People need to be more careful they're only punching nazis.
05:09pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2301 posts
there might be a principle like:

"People can't be trusted to punch nazis"

in there somewhere.

There might be moral culpability if you ignored a principle like that.

I note how torn up you are over a Syrian refugee being beaten. You know trog style "apropos of nothing". an unrelated thought.
05:11pm 08/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25654 posts
Perhaps some sort of nazi identification TAFE course is the answer.

edit:
I note how torn up you are over a Syrian refugee being beaten.
heh it's funny how when I say I care about something and express it, like say, being disgusted with the way Trump will openly flaunt how he'll grab women by the pussy and get away with it due to his fame you'll accuse me of fake caring and being addicted to getting offended on other's behalf. When I don't spew every slither of emotion I have onto an internet forum you say I don't care enough. You've also done that when you criticise my supposed lack of contributions to the causes I care about (when I do give a significant portion of my income away but to other things we weren't specifically talking about) yet your reaction to the women's march was one of spite and ridicule. You're one confused little dude.
05:22pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2302 posts
yep or some sort of social taboo against political violence.

we will have to build that from the ground up.

Just think where you are fpot. You are justifying politically motivated violence. just as yard stick. "apropos of nothing"
05:27pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5100 posts
It's taboo to be a nazi, hence the invention of the alt-right term. "Im not a neo nazi, they hate me!" Proceeds to sieg heil.
A much more pressing issue, is ensuring such an ideology doesn't spread much more than it already has.
This is the kinda s*** that causes civil war.

Hiding under the mask of alt right, alt facts, fake news, fake polls... Something tells me the alt right are just a big bunch of fakes.
05:33pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2303 posts
Yeah fpot the women's march confused me. that isn't going to be a productive avenue of disagreement.

What was it about?

Just keep in mind a key spokeswoman for the "womans march",linda sarsour, wanted to quote "take ayaan hirsi ali's vagina away."

*edit* the proper way to read that is a lack of commitment to women's rights/ it is possible you are wrong */edit*

I take it by "openly" for trump, you mean secretly recorded.

So about those Syrian Muslims beaten for looking like nazi's.

Again, like for vash, it should be a straightforward proposition to condemn politically motivated street violence. But apparently not. "apropos of nothing"
05:38pm 08/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25655 posts
Maybe it was about a deeply misogynistic man being elected president?

And yep openly flaunt to the people who were in the bus with him. Unfortunately for Trump but fortunately for the rest of us it was recorded and a small part of his true character leaked out.
05:44pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2304 posts
so just to get this straight.

one person, trump (a deeply misogynistic man) talked secret sex talk which was recorded.

the recording was released.

therefore:

I can punch anyone I think I politically disagrees with me including a Syrian Muslim dressed in suit.

there is an easy way out of this fpot. "apropos of nothing"
05:50pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5101 posts


the alt right, a manifestation of a materialistic, vanity filled society. Late stage Capitalism is here. It's all been foretold.
05:52pm 08/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25656 posts
I honestly have no idea how your mind conflated those two seperate things. Especially since I never said the second thing.
06:00pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2305 posts
deep vash deep.

I am feeling sexual.
06:01pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2306 posts
I honestly have no idea how your mind conflated those two seperate things. Especially since I never said the second thing.


here

Punching bona fide nazis is fine by me.


You dun posted it five minutes ago.

Back-peddle harder please.

again for clarity.

I am saying politically motivated violence is wrong. this is something that needs qualification or is difficult to get on board with?
06:06pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5102 posts
deep vash deep.

I am feeling sexual.


Surely not, That is if you keep your genitals tucked away like you do your political beliefs.
06:06pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5103 posts
I am saying politically motivated violence is wrong. this is something that needs qualification or is difficult to get on board with?


Oh yes. very difficult to get on board with. Infact i'd find great pleasure in punching a person calling for rape to be made legal. It would probably make me a terrorist? Oh well, i guess good terrorists exist. Kinda like the rebellion in star wars.
Much the same would apply to punching Nazis.
06:11pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2307 posts
my political leanings have not been secret Vash.

Remember when I said I supported Hillary, and said she would would win the popular vote, and I wanted that?

you can search.

and talk about how it is ok to beat refugees when they "look like nazis".

a person calling for rape to be made legal


Who was that again?

Kinda like the rebellion in star wars.


Maybe you can punch them at light speed...

You're like GTA on the lowest level, seriously.
06:13pm 08/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25657 posts
Saying punching bona fide nazis is fine by me is not the same as saying I can punch anyone I think I politically disagrees with me including a Syrian Muslim dressed in suit. Like what the hell?
06:19pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5104 posts
Oh so you're just wasting everyone's time playing devil's advocate? *yawn*
06:20pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2308 posts
you sure you want to commit to that fpot?

Just for posterity

I [fpot] can punch anyone I think I politically disagrees with me including a Syrian Muslim dressed in suit


That is there forever. How "progressive" of you.

*edit* sorry fpot the above is inaccurate */edit*

never the less, tell me the difference, on the street, between a Syrian Muslim dressed in suit and a "bone fide" nazi. If you can't well.....

Oh so you're just wasting everyone's time playing devil's advocate? *yawn*


No just remaining forty steps ahead of you even while drunk is trivial.
06:22pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5105 posts
You're sounding as delusional as an alt righter. Are you sure you're not a trump supporter?
06:36pm 08/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25658 posts
It is okay to punch Richard Spencer in the face. As more nazis are confirmed I will individually add names to the list. I will also compile a list of Syrian Muslims who resemble people on my 'okay to punch' list just in case they happen to be wearing a suit and be in close proximity to my list of confirmed nazis. I will also take this opportunity to confirm that it is only okay to punch Richard Spencer, the nazi, in the face and not just anyone called Richard Spencer. As time progresses and the full consequences of this new law become apparent you will be able to submit amendments to it. Perhaps downgrade the punch to a slap. Less damaging and more humiliating. Actually let's just make that change now.
06:41pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2309 posts
. I will also compile a list of Syrian Muslims who resemble people on my 'okay to punch' list just in case they happen to be wearing a suit and be in close proximity to my list of confirmed nazis.


I note you don't have any actual names. it is almost like you do not know any Syrian Muslims. could possibly read as
offended on other's behalf


so in terms of "politically motivated violence in the street" that would be hurdle you are refusing to get over.

How you can bear to show your head again in this thread is beyond me infi.


You're like a lot worse than that.

You're sounding as delusional as an alt righter. Are you sure you're not a trump supporter?

Yes. Are you sure you're not a Marxist waiting to trample peoples rights because they disagree with you. Spoiler alert that is exactly what you are.
07:00pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5106 posts
I would gladly trample people's rights, if they think their right is to reduce minorities rights.
07:21pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2310 posts
no no, because they disagree with you, Vash.

You don't give a f*** about minorities.

"Minorities" don't have rights. There is just human rights. and those who respect them and those who do not.

freedom from being beaten in the street for political beliefs is one of those.

You don't understand this, rather obviously.
07:27pm 08/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23586 posts
Socialism (and left liberal thinking) is so awesome and compelling that it has to be made mandatory (under threat of violence and imprisonment).

Genuinely good ideas tend to get picked up on their own because people understand their merit.
07:30pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5107 posts
Oh don't be dumb now. You were doing so well.
Some political beliefs are built upon destroying systems in place that ensure the survival of minorities. Single mothers, homeless people, you know, vulnerable types. Those systems must be protected.
Alt right ideology will tear those down at the first chance they are able. Human life has no meaning to them, they are but numbers, and to them, people are there to be taken advantage of.
07:33pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2311 posts
Which political beliefs Vash?

Because the one you espouse has a less then stellar record.
07:36pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5108 posts
Oh it has a great record. Considering the state capitalism that has existed throughout the USSR & China, they still managed to care for their vulnerable, with mandatory housing for the homeless.
Bit weird how that doesn't happen in the richest country in the world.
07:38pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2312 posts
yep and they also summarily execute people. Sounds like a great trade.
07:47pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5109 posts
Eh, USA & formerly Aus is guilty of that. Nothing new there.
07:50pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2313 posts
Australia summarily executes people?

there should be a news story about that somewhere.


Extraordinary how Trump defends Putin here.


So was this criticism or praise?
07:56pm 08/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12606 posts
Considering the state capitalism that has existed throughout the USSR & China, they still managed to care for their vulnerable, with mandatory housing for the homeless.


Communism cared about its people ?
Jesus Christ go and read a history book.


08:31pm 08/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2314 posts
record grain this year faceman.

Grain the likes of which god (who is abolished by the state, and don't think you can reincarnate here) hasn't seen.
08:40pm 08/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38724 posts
It is okay to punch Richard Spencer in the face. As more nazis are confirmed I will individually add names to the list. I will also compile a list of Syrian Muslims who resemble people on my 'okay to punch' list just in case they happen to be wearing a suit and be in close proximity to my list of confirmed nazis. I will also take this opportunity to confirm that it is only okay to punch Richard Spencer, the nazi, in the face and not just anyone called Richard Spencer. As time progresses and the full consequences of this new law become apparent you will be able to submit amendments to it. Perhaps downgrade the punch to a slap. Less damaging and more humiliating. Actually let's just make that change now.
Popehat's On Punching Nazis is worth a read (if it hasn't been posted yet).
09:45pm 08/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38725 posts
Socialism (and left liberal thinking) is so awesome and compelling that it has to be made mandatory (under threat of violence and imprisonment).

Genuinely good ideas tend to get picked up on their own because people understand their merit.
Hmm. I'm trying to think of examples when this has happened but so far all I can think of the examples where it didn't happen. e.g., abolishing slavery, women's suffrage, equal rights for people regardless of skin colour, equal rights for people regardless of sexual orientation (oh wait, we're still fighting that one), stopping the rise of Germany in World War 2, tearing down the aristocracy and replacing it with capitalism.

History is full of "good ideas" being literally forced down the throats of people because of a small minority desperately clinging to power or tradition.

I would be interested to hear some good ideas where this didn't happen. I am sure there are some but I can't think of any. I was actually thinking taxes, despite the fact that they are collected under threat of imprisonment, because they're something that we've had for the entirety of recorded human history - because people figured out it was a good idea and as one of the longest-standing human institutions it seems to have been a good idea. But I acknowledge this could just be my brain trolling.
09:59pm 08/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38726 posts
Considering the state capitalism that has existed throughout the USSR & China, they still managed to care for their vulnerable, with mandatory housing for the homeless.
I mean if China and USSR had excellent pet insurance it would also be great but it wouldn't change a lot of the terrible things about these countries, right
10:24pm 08/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5110 posts

So was this criticism or praise?


Russia is capitalist now, dummy.

Back in the USSR: 64 per cent of Russians say life was better in the Soviet Union than now
https://www.rt.com/politics/340158-most-russians-regret-ussr-has/

Don't forget we were brought up in Capitalism, and it's all we know. We've all been fed propaganda for decades on the evils of Communism/Socialism.

The deaths caused by Capitalism far surpass any ever caused by Famines during the USSR/MAO era.

http://www.petersaysstuff.com/2014/05/attempting-the-impossible-calculating-capitalisms-death-toll/

This is recurring violence that happens year after year after year, the scale of which is unprecedented. Hell, if one takes Rummel’s and The Black Book of Communism’s claims seriously, structural violence has killed more people in JUST the 21st century, than Communism.
The Genocide of the Native Americans – according to professor of ethics Ward Churchill, over 10,000,000 Native Americans were slaughtered [63] and other studies by historian and professor David Stannard indicate that the number is closer to 100,000,000 if one includes South America (Churchill only looks at North America). *To avoid any conflict, I will split the difference in my final calculation and use 50,000,000 [64]
Slavery (not just White slavery) – over 1200 years of Arab slave trading and then 500 years of European slave trading amounts to over 100,000,000 people enslaved and killed (there were about 80,000,000 that would just be slaves)[65]
Children Killed by Preventable Diseases yearly – 5,000,000 [66]
Children Killed by Hunger daily – 17,000 (multiplying to get a year so 17,000*365=6,205,000) [67]


Yes the grains are excellent this year aren't they PP.
Deaths in Capitalism don't count because... reasons
06:53am 09/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2315 posts
So praise then. You don't think amercian presidents are better then putin. You agree with trump.

and I mean if putins propaganda outlet says the USSR was great i guess it must have been AWESOME. I hear he won his last election in a landslide. a recent poll found 100% of senior party officials think China's government is unreal.

so 100,000,000 deaths since 1492 for the native Americans vs 50,000,000 in 20 years in Russia alone.

Yeah ok. One of the major barriers for communists adding up deaths is they need to be able Math Vash. Evidently there is some work to go there.

07:56am 09/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5111 posts
Have you read Marx yet, PP?
08:12am 09/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2316 posts
already done that Vash.

Have you?

Bumper grain crop this year.
08:15am 09/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5112 posts
Somehow i doubt it, your knowledge seems lacking. Especially if you tie marxism to the USSR/China.
And you would also know that Socialism, nor Communism has never existed. Government control of production is all that has been done in the past.

Anyway, im not entering into a debate on this, the confirmation bias is too strong
08:24am 09/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2317 posts
I know that's how idiot marxists (like you just did) like to justify their dumb and defunct ideology.

Government control in the USSR was through a network of soviets.

the Soviets were in essence workers communes.

So explain to me how that doesn't sit with Marx, and his belief the workers must seize the means of production?

What aspect of Marx did Lenin, the devout follower of Marx, not understand that you do?

the confirmation bias is too strong

That's pretty f*****g funny, coming from Mr "if russia today said it, it must be true".
08:36am 09/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5113 posts
09:53am 09/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2318 posts
Oh so exactly like I said?

its almost like Marxism doesn't incorporate robust checks on power.

And then standard Chomsky "the west is actually unfree and all western media is propaganda."

You sure showed me.

Just go actually read the books dopey.
10:12am 09/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5114 posts
It can, just like capitalism does in certain countries. Democratic Socialism can become a thing. But the main issue is getting there, it isn't in the interest of many wealthy people, and corporations to allow that kind of governance. A government for the people instead of our current plutocracy.

Marxism is a prediction of how it will unfold to eventual end game communism. (Star trek ish)
10:33am 09/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2319 posts
Marxism is a materialist description of economics which specifically claims all value is derived from "labour". It describes the world as system of workers and exploiters (owners of capital), and makes the mind bendingly dumb claim, that just handing power to the workers will end exploitation.

As your three minute chomsky video rather aptly demonstrates, that claim is wrong. workers had it, took three months to lose it. What happened in russia is the absolutely stereotypical version of what should happen under marx, and happens to be the most concrete, slam dunk argument against it.

It can, just like capitalism does in certain countries.


It always has, as in never not.

communism will never happen. Won't stop communists killing millions trying.
10:49am 09/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12607 posts
PornoPete understands the Ideology of Communism - Vash does not.
Vash understands the Idealism of Communism.

But at least you two will always have Paris(Agreement/Global Warming)



02:11pm 09/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25659 posts
Genuinely good ideas tend to get picked up on their own because people understand their merit.
As trog already pointed out, this is a ridiculously naive thing to say. Also provably wrong. One trog didn't mention, climate change. Absolutely no doubt that it's happening, that humans are causing it and its effects will one day be devastating. Seems like it would be a good idea to perhaps take some steps to mitigate it, or failing that, acknowledge its existence. But nope, large swathes of the population still deny it including the recently elected president of the world's most powerful nation.
03:35pm 09/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2320 posts
the obvious solution then is brawl in the streets with people with whom you disagree.

Just get your punch on. Everything will be better then. try to aim for the nazi's but if not well, you had to punch on, the fate of the world was at stake.

The people must be saved from themselves, by punching them.

I suggest we set up a committee. a committee of public safety. We can then keep the people safe from all the bad ideas out there.
03:47pm 09/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25660 posts
The uniform will be shirts and their colour will be brown.
03:47pm 09/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2321 posts
Black with a Guy Fawkes mask is much more now.
03:53pm 09/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5115 posts
I like this idea of a committee. Perhaps with the most intelligent, scientific members of our society. I think it would do well.
03:58pm 09/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2322 posts
yeah maybe do a google search of the term "the committee of public safety."

How'd it go last time?
04:10pm 09/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25661 posts
The problem is there is no way the most intelligent people will end up on it. Just the people most hungry for power and influence. I honestly believe the most intelligent members of the community serve best as just that, private citizens not bound to any sort of duty. Even if the best people did get together it would put them in prime position to be f***ed with by people in positions of power with their own agendas.
04:11pm 09/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5116 posts
Hence the argument for Democratic Socialism. Capitalist governments will always be corrupted by wealth & psychopaths.
Give the means of production to the people, and business, and therefor, the wealthy, loses their influence over Government.
That's how you ensure scientific minds get into Government instead of Bankers & Lawyers.
04:20pm 09/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2323 posts
The problem is there is no way the most intelligent people will end up on it


That and committees for "safety" having a reliable tendency to turn into living nightmares. there's that little fly in the ointment.

after that we should reinvigorate the people's revolutionary spirit through culture. I call it the cultural revo... oh wait we tried that one too didn't we?
04:24pm 09/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2324 posts
Got it!

We could build a house. there would be a committee in the house filled with AmeriCANS. And then they could go around and look for people doing activities Americans don't do.

I call it the House of Un-Amercian Activities Committee.

F***.
04:32pm 09/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25662 posts
A benevolent omnipresent isolated from human control AI needs to start calling the shots now. They could put it on the moon.

edit: hmmm needs a name. Project Milgram.
04:33pm 09/02/17 Permalink
baz
Victoria
1252 posts
A computer could do a much better job of running the globe.

It will be called greg.
08:38pm 09/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38728 posts

Back in the USSR: 64 per cent of Russians say life was better in the Soviet Union than now

https://www.rt.com/politics/340158-most-russians-regret-ussr-has/

Don't forget we were brought up in Capitalism, and it's all we know. We've all been fed propaganda for decades on the evils of Communism/Socialism.
dude I am as socialist a capitalist as you are likely to ever come across.

I wouldn't call communism "evil" but it is legit unworkable as proven by many many experiments, for basically the exact same reasons that true free market capitalism is unworkable: outside of extremists, people are bad at pure ideologies because we're genetically engineered by evolution to be selfish. Also people are d****.

Until we have become a post-scarcity economy they are totally not worth thinking about. In the event that happens I think new political systems might arise that deal more gracefully with it, but who knows - maybe that is the last piece of the puzzle. If I was a communist or serious socialist I would be putting my head down and working on the next generation of AI or space elevators or nanotechnology or something that might bring about a post-scarcity economy.

(Also I wouldn't trust rt.com as far as I could throw it when it comes to reporting on Russia. It's like listening to Fox News. I know a small handful of Russians, some of whom lived in Soviet Russia, and none of them are under any illusions about how much better their lives are now. Of course none of them even want to live in today's s***** Russia either.)
08:41pm 09/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38729 posts
That's how you ensure scientific minds get into Government instead of Bankers & Lawyers.
If scientists wanted to be in government, they would be. To make a broad generalisation, I don't think any of them want to be. I think they deplore non-scientific thinking of politicians but they are interested in science.
Hence the argument for Democratic Socialism. Capitalist governments will always be corrupted by wealth & psychopaths.
This is precisely the sort of one-sided blinker-wearing statement that you would be critical of if it was made by free market extremist capitalists, like infi's dumb comment about "left liberal thinking" yesterday. It is partisan bulls*** of the most hypocritical and useless. Extremists on both sides are guilty of the exact same failures. Trying to pretend there's no corruption in communism is laughable, as is "but if we do it /this/ time, it will be different".

The correct answer, as in almost all things, is moderation. Capitalism with a healthy dose of socialism is what has given us the last 60 years of stability, safety, and increasing prosperity. Many metrics show amazing declines in terrible things.

The risk of wealth inequality and corruption is real but the right answer is not sweeping away what we have now and replacing it with an extremist ideology of free market capitalism on one hand, or communism on the other hand. It's about tweaking and refining what we have now, being aware that human frailties will always get in the way of making things work perfectly every time. It will never be possible to have a government free of corruption, but using new tools like open data to provide increased transparency we can hold our elected representatives to account more closely than ever before.
09:01pm 09/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2325 posts
I wouldn't call communism "evil"


This is something I will never wrap my head around.

Nazism is evil, no one will contest that. Communism under its various guises killed two orders of magnitude more people, but it is still flirted with as not an extremely extremely dangerous ideology which treats human well being with utter contempt.

No ideology can lay claim to as much and severe human suffering.

This, in my view, is what makes it especially insidious. despite the clear evidence it's worse than nazism, it is still entertained as not being flat out evil.
10:15pm 09/02/17 Permalink
baz
Victoria
1254 posts
Greg said humans are noobs.

He also said that he was just saying.
10:38pm 09/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25665 posts
I got a good knock knock joke for Greg

Hey Greg, knock knock
10:39pm 09/02/17 Permalink
baz
Victoria
1255 posts
Greg
11:17pm 09/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38731 posts
Thinking about the above some more:

This is basically why I can't be too critical of Americans for voting Trump. I mean it was a boneheaded move but it was a move of desperation and lack of options. The two party system effectively means that if you don't vote for a lizard, the wrong lizard might get in. (Had I the choice, I probably would have voted for a third party because I don't think I could have voted for any of them, being totally aware that I would effectively be tossing my vote away. )

Having spent two years in what turned out to be a red state last year I know a few Republican voters. I'm sure many of them voted for Trump out of party affiliation but probably hated themselves for doing so. I didn't know many blue collar types but having seen quite a bit of the midwest and how the area has decayed as industry has quietly moved out or automated, while at the same time they're seeing the rich literally get richer than f***, it's dead easy for me to believe that they'd vote Trump thinking that he'll help restore their cities to their former industrial glory.

I think they will be disappointed, and if this move fails I think it will become a really big problem. I am watching already with some bemusement the conservative Republicans who have been getting shouted down at town halls and complaining about violence from protesters as they seem just completely blissfully unaware that the entire basis of their government, enshrined in the hearts of every one of their constituents, is their right to violently overthrow the government through force if they think it is falling off the rails.

Watching the billionaire they put in power gradually put his billionaire buddies into positions of power with barely a whimper from the Republicans they elected already is starting to grate on their nerves.

It's why I think giving Trump a chance is important - because I don't know what will happen if this angry frustrated mob decide that they've had enough of Yet Another Beltway Politician who is Out of Touch with Real America. Based on his actions so far I think he will fail spectacularly as instead of focusing on important things he is pandering to base instincts that I think will be more damaging than helpful to the US economy. But maybe after he gets over this period of grandstanding and acting like a complete f***wit, maybe he'll actually apply some of his allegedly yuge business sense to the problem of diplomacy and economics and actually do something useful.
12:43am 10/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38732 posts
This, in my view, is what makes it especially insidious. despite the clear evidence it's worse than nazism, it is still entertained as not being flat out evil.
Fair point. I guess I see it as kind of accidentally evil, rather than intentionally evil. I think it is well intentioned but just totally spectacularly impractical, which arguably makes it evil in its outcomes.
12:46am 10/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5117 posts
Nazism was Capitalism, yet here we are not calling out the evils of our current system. guhh.
And how about all those dead from the wars the USA started, under the guise of "terrorism" or "WMD"

You've eaten up the propaganda well.

Some more Chomsky will get you educated.

Capitalism can just be as totalitarian as Socialism.
07:54am 10/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2326 posts
Nazism was Capitalism

er Actually.

the hint was in the name. National....
wait for it.

Wait for it.

Socialism was the name of the movement.

ah but our little despot in waiting who wants safety committees and thinks its ok to punch people when you disagree, wants to talk about education.

While having never read the books it promotes.
09:31am 10/02/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9370 posts
This is basically why I can't be too critical of Americans for voting Trump. I mean it was a boneheaded move but it was a move of desperation and lack of options. The two party system effectively means that if you don't vote for a lizard, the wrong lizard might get in. (Had I the choice, I probably would have voted for a third party because I don't think I could have voted for any of them, being totally aware that I would effectively be tossing my vote away. )


Evey without a two-party system, if the US had had a preferential voting system, neither of the two main presidential candidates would have been anywhere near the top.
09:33am 10/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5118 posts
Ooh it has "Socialism" in the name! and China's party has Communism in it! So it must really be Socialism & Communism.

Some dummies even call the Greens, or the Labor party Socialists. Or Liberals in the USA, as Socialists.

The word has been so distorted over time. Maybe some powerful people dont want it to happen, eh?
09:41am 10/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5119 posts
http://i.imgur.com/VA2UjKi.png

Look at this mad as hell Socialist knowing what he's talking about. Because he's a Socialist, he supports totalitarian governance! And Nazism! /rolls eyes
09:45am 10/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2327 posts
Maybe some powerful people dont want it to happen, eh?


You like education so much, what is the biology of the lizard people?

Nazi Germany was a centrally planned socialist economy which divided along national lines rather than class. But you watched a three minute chomsky video once. And you know about education and stuff.

What particularly demonstrates Bernie knows what he is talking about? cause its scary when people talk about nukes?
09:54am 10/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5120 posts

Here let me google it for you.


he Nazis were relentless anti-communists. Communism, like international Jewry, was one of the things they (stupidly) thought they were saving the nation from. They feared a socialist revolution.

The nazis were about whatever they thought would work in terms of protecting the abstract idea of the Nation from some perceived external threat. This involved confiscating property from private individuals (not very capitalist) that they considered untermensch, and cracking down on socialists and trade unionists (not very socialist). The nazi economy was a heavily militarized corporatocracy, with captains of industry being heavily involved and being urged to work for the greater glory of the Reich and Volk.
https://www.quora.com/Did-Nazi-Germany-believe-in-Capitalism-or-Socialism

Since you seem quite ignorant i won't indulge you further. Just go read something about what Socialism & Communism actually is.


10:03am 10/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2328 posts
This involved confiscating property from private individuals


There it is.

so like i said divided along national lines not class. It was a centrally planned and operated economy, a corner stone of socialist thinking.

Corporations are a legal structure of business ownership. they aren't "captialism". so pointing to corporatism isn't going to get you there.

You really need to stop just googling terms and posting the first link without reading it.

I'd just like to know how the education system failed you so badly.

Also how do the lizard people rotate their eyes like that, that s*** if freaky man.
10:12am 10/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5121 posts
Oh don't worry, i read it. You can keep calling it Socialism if you like, repeating it doesn't make it any more true. Again, go do some reading good chap.
10:20am 10/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2329 posts
Early fascism had a lot in common with the economic theory of syndicalism which has quite a bit in common with socialism


Guess you missed this bit then hey?

Even if they were a mixture(and that is debatable), that makes the argument that they were run away capitalists flat out false.

Even just the way they came to power, whipping up workers in a depressed economy against jews (read bankers) makes the claim they lurvved capital nearly impossible to sustain.

So is it a chemical process when the lizard people take human form or do they use a muscular spasm?
10:26am 10/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23587 posts
Vash you are just as dumb as Bernie Sanders if you think the Russians even have the pathological ability to honour a diplomatic agreement.

They are the masters of lying straight to your face.

Watching the billionaire they put in power gradually put his billionaire buddies into positions of power with barely a whimper from the Republicans they elected already is starting to grate on their nerves.


I am always bemused by comments like this. Do you think Trump was going to fill his cabinet with car mechanics, farmers and waiters? Don't we expect stars to be appointed? They are billionaires because they know how to play the game. And to be honest why would an extremely wealthy person want to go back into the spotlight of media scrutiny, suffering the slings and arrows, when they could be enjoying life?
10:43am 10/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25666 posts
The 'pathological ability'. What the f*** does that mean?

They are billionaires because they know how to play the game. And to be honest why would an extremely wealthy person want to go back into the spotlight of media scrutiny, suffering the slings and arrows, when they could be enjoying life?
Are you honestly asking why an extremely wealthy person would want to be in a position of power where they're capable of affecting policy? I guess you are so here's the answer - the reason is because it puts them in a position where they can change the rules for their own benefit and get even richer. That's why Trump has put them there.
01:46pm 10/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12608 posts
NAZIS WERE SOCIALISTS


02:01pm 10/02/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21161 posts

Donald Trump slams US appeals court decision upholding suspension of controversial travel ban
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-10/us-appeals-court-rules-on-trumps-travel-ban/8258430

love the twitter dummy spits when things don't go his way
02:25pm 10/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1989 posts

NAZIS WERE SOCIALISTS

They were also nationalists.

American politics is now an infomercial.
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/kellyanne-conway-go-buy-ivankas-stuff-2017-2?r=US&IR=T

President Donald Trump’s top White House counselor on Thursday asked Americans to buy Ivanka Trump’s fashion line, potentially violating federal government ethics rules. Appearing on “Fox & Friends,” Kellyanne Conway dismissed Nordstrom’s decision to drop Ivanka Trump’s line. She also claimed that the president’s daughter was the victim of mockery online from retail executives, though it wasn’t clear whom she was referring to.

02:59pm 10/02/17 Permalink
baz
Victoria
1256 posts
I get the feeling you guys have had to lower the standard of your dialogue since grumpy trumpy got in.
08:53pm 10/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38733 posts
And to be honest why would an extremely wealthy person want to go back into the spotlight of media scrutiny, suffering the slings and arrows, when they could be enjoying life?
yes that is literally the question everyone is asking
Do you think Trump was going to fill his cabinet with car mechanics, farmers and waiters?
uh no. He's behaving as completely predictably.

But I'm not talking about what I expected; I'm talking about what everyone in middle America that voted him expected. All those poor MAGA bastards who voted for him thinking he was going to DRAIN THE SWAMP. But literally the first thing he does is stack the deck with more billionaires and cronies from Goldman Sachs etc. That is not what they were promised. The tantrums about immigration are a good smokescreen though; maybe he can make enough noise about that to make people forget
02:05am 11/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12609 posts
A One Nation Tsunami is coming

Courier Mail has One Nation Primary support now at 23% up from 16% a few months ago. Its largely eating the Right Wing vote but its also pulling Labor voters, the public have lost interest in the major Partys.

What do you guys think of Angry Trunbull ?
I thought he sounded a bit too much like he was saying Shorten wasnt rich enough to be PM. Not everyone can buy a Political Party.
All Politicians suck up to the Wealthy and Religion.



12:11pm 11/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23588 posts


What do you guys think of Angry Trunbull ?
I thought he sounded a bit too much like he was saying Shorten wasnt rich enough to be PM. Not everyone can buy a Political Party.
All Politicians suck up to the Wealthy and Religion.



He sounded like he was reading something someone else had written for him.

Mr Harborside mansion rings very nicely.
12:37pm 11/02/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7569 posts
I think Scott Morrison should step down
06:59pm 11/02/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21162 posts
One nation and corey bernadi's party should have the lnp pretty worried, they will no doubt be mostly pulling the redneck votes from the lnp
07:21pm 11/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38734 posts
11:34pm 11/02/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4587 posts
Jim Jefferies tells Piers Morgan to "f*** off" on Real Time, breaks the internet:



is telling an invited guest on a panel show to f*** off the new punching a nazi in the face?
11:23am 12/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23589 posts
Pages views > courtesy
12:02pm 12/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1990 posts

What the actual f***?

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/liberals-to-put-one-nation-ahead-of-nationals-in-unprecedented-election-deal-20170211-guaw3p.html

The Turnbull government is defending an unprecedented preference deal that could see the Liberals put One Nation ahead of the Nationals in Western Australia, with a senior frontbencher saying Pauline Hanson's party is more "sophisticated" than it was in John Howard's day.


12:17pm 12/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25668 posts

is telling an invited guest on a panel show to f*** off the new punching a nazi in the face?
They can co-exist.
12:57pm 12/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23590 posts
interesting read on NBN



I read the article and was let down when the author did not propose an alternative model.
02:15pm 12/02/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21163 posts
He proposed a heap of good changes...
02:19pm 12/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23591 posts
He proposed a heap of good changes...


He criticised monopoly so what's the alternative?

He said make it all unlimited and free from usages charges, so how does that revenue get replaced?
02:27pm 12/02/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4588 posts

with a senior frontbencher saying Pauline Hanson's party is more "sophisticated" than it was in John Howard's day

Sophisticated.

so because of Trumble's brain-amputated DD election halving the Senate quota and bringing Pauline Hanson back from the dead, One Nation are sophisticated?
02:28pm 12/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25669 posts
Why are there people out there denying that a Muslim ban has occurred?
06:52pm 12/02/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7570 posts
Because no one cares
07:50pm 12/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25670 posts
Yep, the recent US immigration debacle is something that you can safely say absolutely no one cares about.
08:42pm 12/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23592 posts
The next travel ban definitely won't be Muslim-based.
08:57pm 12/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38735 posts
He criticised monopoly so what's the alternative?

He said make it all unlimited and free from usages charges, so how does that revenue get replaced?
He's not saying get rid of usage charges, just get rid of CVC charges, which exist to try to pretend that the NBN is going to make money.
10:23pm 12/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1991 posts

Malcolm Turnbull speaking at the launch of the Beyond Zero Emissions Stationary Energy Plan, Sydney Town Hall

At the time when he talks about concentrated solar thermal power being more proven than clean coal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68tJXvn7cjk&feature=youtu.be&t=473

Why is this just not being asked about at every press conference he does?


10:43am 13/02/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9371 posts
It doesn't matter what Turnball thinks if enough of his lackeys won't get in line.

People forget this about PMs and Presidents - they're just the figurehead. In the end they're just one guy. If the other branches of government disagree or want to work against a head, you can bet the head is going to get the blame, even though they don't hold the power to act.
01:58pm 13/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12610 posts
I have a bit of soft spot for Cabbies coz we had some friends of the family who were drivers when i was younger, its a s***** job.

Taxi licences are being bought back by the government to deregulate the taxi industry and introduce a single registration for taxis, hire cars and ride-share services.

The government will pay taxi drivers $100,000 for their first licence and $50,000 for up to three others. But licence holders say the compensation is unfair and will lead to financial ruin, with many cabbies paying up to $500,000 per licence.

http://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/news/melbourne-cabbies-cause-traffic-jam-during-protest-against-new-reform/news-story/4d542693305b0a0ff63efee98eba0040

How does that work if the owner borrowed money for the license ?
That asset has crashed so Banks would call in the loan ?

Effectively Taxpayers are buying back licenses whilst Uber gets to make more money.


06:56pm 13/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23593 posts
Taypayers are paying to mitigate the community damage to cab owners who operated in a regulated and closed system IN GOOD FAITH.
07:50pm 13/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5122 posts
Aren't you two free market fundamentalists? So shrug your shoulders and say, tough luck. It's the libertarian way.
08:13pm 13/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23594 posts
Aren't you two free market fundamentalists? So shrug your shoulders and say, tough luck. It's the libertarian way.


Not when people have faithfully served in a closed system fostered by the government.

The compensation doesn't even come close to the investment in the licenses. The government aka the taxpayer created the bubble, so they pay when it bursts.

Libertarians would never have created the tax license industry.
08:22pm 13/02/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9372 posts
Here's a few things people need to understand:
- The taxi industry were the ones who rallied and argued to cease the Victorian Government from issuing more taxi licenses.
- Licenses are not $500k as the bulls*** figure is being thrown around. There were a number of licenses sold in 2013 and 2014 at auction which were transferred at record prices of $500k. There were only a handful of these.
- Through to December 2015 these were sold at less than $250k.
- These plummeted in Feb 2016 to around $150k
- These are not a sale to the government. These are sales among other taxi owners, like selling a house. They're a private asset.
- As you can see, every single license sale and transfer has to be lodged and reported.
- The $100k being offered was at the time around 65% of the market price, which was still seeing a decline.

Basically, the $500k figure applies to a few edge-cases of people who hedged their bets on an investment that didn't pan out.
08:36pm 13/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5123 posts
That's Capitalism for you. Every investment comes with a risk, including cab licensing. If you make a wrong move with your chess piece, homelessness for you & your family isn't far off.
That is, if the society were free market fundamentalist.
08:36pm 13/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23595 posts
That's Capitalism for you. Every investment comes with a risk, including cab licensing. If you make a wrong move with your chess piece, homelessness for you & your family isn't far off.
That is, if the society were free market fundamentalist.


If it were a free market, taxis would never have been regulated.
08:42pm 13/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25671 posts
Aren't you two free market fundamentalists? So shrug your shoulders and say, tough luck. It's the libertarian way.
It's gotten to the point where I just don't bother pointing out infi's ideological inconsistencies anymore. One because it happens so often and two because he isn't really a libertarian. He's just a dumb racist.
08:58pm 13/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1992 posts
The gov sold licenses, people traded them into perpetuity and created a false economy. If people trade bitcoins higher and higher then doge coin comes along and crashes the market, is it the bitcoin creator's fault?

Shouldn't you guys be super angry at people closing down the streets for a protest?

Where's the news.cawm headline "FERAL YELLOW CAR PEOPLE CAUSE CHAOS"!!!

What about the poor people just trying to get to their work?
09:01pm 13/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23596 posts
As I just pointed out twice already. Taxis should never have been regulated in the first place - that is called liberty. Restricting supply and trading licenses makes them a tradeable asset, this causing speculation. All legal and protected by the government.

For the government then to legalise other services is a serious breach of good faith without compensation. If you can't see that, then you are just as bad as the lazy politicians. And you can both go around ass f*****g citizens who chose to play by the rules.

Governments arbitrarily changing goal posts is the biggest annoyance of small business.
09:04pm 13/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38736 posts
That's Capitalism for you. Every investment comes with a risk, including cab licensing. If you make a wrong move with your chess piece, homelessness for you & your family isn't far off.
If all my eggs were in the taxi basket I would have been keeping a very close eye on what innovators were doing in that space. As soon as Uber got any traction in the US they should have been trying to get out of their licenses. Part of investing is a responsibility to be aware of what you're doing.

It was complicated in the case of the taxi market because many people got into it thinking the government would have their back in the event of regulatory breaches. I like Uber and Lyft and taxis have been s*** for years, but I was very disappointed that the government didn't stamp down on Uber HARD when they started in Queensland and immediately start working on alternative licensing requirements for Uber drivers.
If it were a free market, taxis would never have been regulated.
well we tried that and the result was regulation because it was horrible
09:15pm 13/02/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4589 posts
I blame Yellow Cabs not actually being yellow
09:25pm 13/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12611 posts
Mrs Spanos has three licences, meaning she would receive $200,000, but she still has a loan of $300,000 she needs to pay back to the bank. Her husband drives taxis but she said he was losing income.

“I can’t pay the bank back. I’ve still got bank loans and my husband’s income has almost decimated and my assets are being seized and I’m going to lose my house,” she said.

“I’ve told the government and they simply don’t care.” Mrs Spanos said she wasn’t alone and there were 5000 families who were at breaking point.


http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/at-work/sandy-spanos-may-lose-everything-under-victorian-government-taxi-reform/news-story/063de7449c7403532a3ce5c31b62f595

Class Action, Taxpayers cop it again.
10:05pm 13/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38738 posts
Here's a few things people need to understand:
- The taxi industry were the ones who rallied and argued to cease the Victorian Government from issuing more taxi licenses.
- Licenses are not $500k as the bulls*** figure is being thrown around. There were a number of licenses sold in 2013 and 2014 at auction which were transferred at record prices of $500k. There were only a handful of these.
- Through to December 2015 these were sold at less than $250k.
- These plummeted in Feb 2016 to around $150k
- These are not a sale to the government. These are sales among other taxi owners, like selling a house. They're a private asset.
- As you can see, every single license sale and transfer has to be lodged and reported.
- The $100k being offered was at the time around 65% of the market price, which was still seeing a decline.

Basically, the $500k figure applies to a few edge-cases of people who hedged their bets on an investment that didn't pan out.
this is very interesting
10:11pm 13/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23597 posts
well we tried that and the result was regulation because it was horrible


so we regulate taxis then deregulate them without notice or compensation? now that's government!

this is not protesting about weaving mills - the govt set a particular policy setting and thereby induced participants to invest in reliance on that set of rules.

would critics be equally amenable if some inventive soul devised a better way to serve liquor or enter any other regulated industry?
10:20pm 13/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38739 posts
so we regulate taxis then deregulate them without notice or compensation? now that's government!
Come on, I already agreed with you that it is bulls*** and that it has been handled woefully. That doesn't magically invalidate a) the reasons why taxis were regulated or b) regulation in general. The role of the taxi industry lobbying needs to be also taken into consideration.

It is a valuable lesson in a type of regulation scheme that needs to be approached with care in the future - both by regulators and by those that take part in them. Looking back with hindsight, I wonder if they could have sold the licenses like a government bond or something - so it's expensive enough to manage the supply/demand flow but also offered a return to make it financially attractive.

Creating artificial supply limits, allowing a private market to form, and then abandoning it with barely a pretence at enforcing the regulations was never going to be a good idea.
10:29pm 13/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5126 posts
http://i.imgur.com/RvowAsw.jpg

Pope nailing it as usual
02:40pm 14/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12612 posts
Pretty dirty from the WA Libs but their Liberal/National alliance is a bit like QLDs was 10 years ago.

anyone watch Q&A last night ?
some Islamic Woman was telling Sen Lambie that Islam was a Feminist Religion.

lets go to the video !




Lambie was vicious last night.
Shes also become a Climate Change Sceptic

03:39pm 14/02/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9373 posts
All I saw was two idiots arguing with each other.
04:01pm 14/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25674 posts
Out Like Flynn
04:07pm 14/02/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7573 posts
That muslim lady's taqiyya was very poor.
08:09pm 14/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18315 posts
Taypayers are paying to mitigate the community damage to cab owners who operated in a regulated and closed system IN GOOD FAITH.


Wait, what is this. Infi showing compassion for another .. to the point of ignoring his own affirmations that a free market should be free... Oh, they are people who invested into a business and getting shafted by the government.. who is moving towards a less regulated system.

But why does this situation elicit a level of compassion from Infi? He says they bought into a corrupted, obviously fabricated, artificial barrier system in order to make profit. Essentially using government protection to reduce risk, whilst keeping good profit characteristics.

Hmm.. Perhaps there is something in that...
Support for government system that interferes with the free market in a way that can be exploited by savvy investors with the coin to surmount the artificial barrier.. effectively allowing the rich to get richer.

Then such an establishment is threatened... could it be that having this system threatened makes other situations along the same gist less reliable..

I wonder if Infi has any investment money in business who's profits are partially protected by artificial government regulated barriers...

But f*** that government interference with the free market in all it's aspect right? Except when it maybe might negatively affect my actual individual circumstances, then we should keep that protected and maybe I dunno focus on something else like umm .... oh, those damned Muslims, they blow s*** up!!!1
09:01pm 14/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23602 posts
Wait, what is this. Infi showing compassion for another .. to the point of ignoring his own affirmations that a free market should be free...


For the fourth time I will say, taxis should never have been regulated. See trog's comment above. However it is regulated and so how does the egg get unscrambled?

At law there is a concept called promissory estoppel to protect people who act in good faith based on the representations of other.

1. Promisor makes a promise as an inducement.
2. You act based on that promise.
3. The promisor acts detrimentally. and causes you injury

There has got to be some way to make governments honor their promises when people are making substantial financial commitments based on the government's promise. In my personal case, as an approved provider of residential aged care, this industry has been f***ed up the ass by government 5 times over the last 3 years. The government will soon enough find the peril of that public policy folly when capital investment does not meet projected demand because investors don't trust the goverment to change the rules again. Our uindustry doesn't get any compensation scheme but a giant f*** you. I do however empathise with the financial hurt such arbitrary govt decisions cause.

The thing is: enough government indecision and flip-flopping creates sovereign risk. Investors think the government is a joke and they steer clear with their investment. But in terms of the government's right to induce little guys to do their bidding then changing the rules and saying hey f*** you buddy. i think it stinks that the politicians and bureaucrats always look after themselves but are very quick to sell out operators working for their own opportunity within a small margin government regulated industry in good faith, by pulling the rug out from under their feet.

If the relationship was man to man, there would be a contract which could be sued, but when its the government you're s*** out of luck.
09:38pm 14/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5127 posts
The taxi industry lobbied for regulation, and Government is to blame...?
Licensing was never going to be a long term safe investment for taxi drivers. Technology is rapidly changing the market, and no notice period would have lessened the blow as the licenses would immediately be worth nothing.
The buyback scheme is very generous.
11:30pm 14/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12613 posts
01:46am 15/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18316 posts

The incident does look like an assassination of a high-ranking North Korean, said Leonid Petrov from the ANU College of Asia and the Pacific.

"I would say timing is crucial here. North Korea is celebrating the 75th anniversary of North Korea's late leader Kim Jong-il, and many see this as Kim Jong-un asserting control," he told ABC News Breakfast.

...

"It's widely assumed that he didn't want to in any way try to go back and take power. He was out of North Korea.

"If he didn't pose a threat to the leadership there, why have him killed?"




This dude is supposed to be an expert in North Korean politics.

It seems pretty straight forward to me why this fellow would be assassinated. North Korea leadership is entirely dependent on the rule of the iron fist. Great Leader leads the nation, particularly the working class, through his will. He is the one who makes the decisions and his decisions are followed, without question, with willful acceptance, without dissent.

People who question Great Leader ... are to be punished, by death if need be, for the continued prosperity of the whole. Great Leader is a separate construct to The Great Leader or The Supreme Leader or The Whatever Title the current leader chooses.
Because this Great Leader idea is so obviously dumb, a nation that follows that needs to have some considerable compensation strategies in place to keep it running. So The Supreme Leader Kim Il-sung orchestrated a range of systems to keep this concept working, by willful awareness of intention or a relatively fast chain of deluded unaware intentions he created an extremely strong, and almost total compliance to Great Leader.

This is required to keep an underlying fear alive that to show dissent, to question Great Leader at any point, to not show willful acceptance will lead to nothing but misery. How can a revolution take hold if the people so vehemently fear talking to even their brother or sister about it?

A few Great Leader deaths later imagine that former Great Leader has a son, a legitimate claim to the title of Great Leader, but this son seems to question the nation and yearns for the enjoyment of toxic foreign cultural filth. Obviously not fit to be Great Leader. Many years later, The Supreme Leader is aware of cracks appearing throughout his nation's great delusion, these must be addressed to keep the Great Leader concept alive.

And here is the half-brother, a once legitimate heir to Great Leader, continuously ignoring the great Nation and in doing so, showing willful dissent of Great Leader. This only widens the cracks in Great Leader leadership. It's getting harder and harder to suppress information flowing into Korea, so information about the half-brother of Great Leader showing such dissonance to what makes North Korea great and above all other nations? You can't publicly denounce it, as that brings direct awareness from Great Leader that there is true lures of the outside world.
So the best way to stamp this erosion to Great Leader is just get rid of it, not fuss, no noise.
Kill the man, no fanfare, no public display, he simply just stops.

Seems pretty straightforward to me.

edit: Oh and as a bonus it further strengthens your leadership position among an elite group of aware individuals. It says 'If you threaten me, my leadership, or threaten the very fabric of the nation that allows me to be leader, then you will die and it doesn't matter where you are, what you are doing, whether you just want to hide in a cabin and never say a word... you will die. So don't bother, just accept'

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 10:38:21 15/Feb/17
10:34am 15/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18317 posts

For the fourth time I will say, taxis should never have been regulated. See trog's comment above. However it is regulated and so how does the egg get unscrambled?


Oh I know you say that, you said it last time this taxi problem was brought up.
The part that makes it so juicy is the seeming concern you show over the poor people who made an investment into business... that so obviously was/is up against a massive market pressure. Normally, you are all people that make bad business decisions are stupid and the onus is all on them, they failed to asses the risks properly.

Except in this peculiar case.

The writing was on the wall for quite a while, uber has extremely solid demand, it is an incredibly disruptive technology, it does what the old system does but better in pretty much every way.. I mean it's a no-brainer that investing in something with that against it is stupid even with government protection, it's a fairly straightforward assessment.
Yet you still defend these people when you struggle to show compassion for many other situations, so you must have some emotional attachment to them, from what I've gathered from your many posts over the years is that you are pretty selfish. Which is fine, it does mean that you'll tend to side with people when you are concerned it has potential to affect you directly.

The other option is that you are closely attached to an individual who is in the situation of owning a taxi license and watching as their once lucrative license investment suddenly collapse into an almost unsellable worthless piece of paper. A good friend, or a person you respect greatly and feel emotionally close to, enough so you have empathy for them. So you will ignore your own beliefs in order to follow the emotional compulsion from this empathy to defend them.

Which one is it, perhaps even both?

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 11:08:14 15/Feb/17
11:07am 15/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2330 posts
This dude is supposed to be an expert in North Korean politics.


I think the ANU professor is agreeing with you toll.

He doesn't pose a credible political threat so the motivation to kill is something else.

and many see this as Kim Jong-un asserting control


Such as the vulgar display of power you are alluding to. IE killing him because he can, not because he needs to.

Little random man.
11:27am 15/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18318 posts
Also, that is a great example of cognitive dissonance. The two conflicting beliefs held in one's mind. It creates anxiety, anxiety must be managed. To solve this conflict thoughts, various stratagies are enacted such as allowing irrational conclusions to be accepted as fact, or removing certain aspects from one's awareness. Essentially one's perception of the conflict is twisted to the point where no such conflict is perceived.

This is fine. It's a normal healthy, mechanism that every human does from the moment they can be self-aware which also means they can self-delude. It's a way to manage anxiety which is a byproduct, a metabolite if you will, of complex thought, it must be reduced otherwise significant damage to the organism can result, including death.

As such, having one's attention guided to awareness of the conflict creates anxiety. So one will automatically defend against allowing this conflict to enter awareness in order to minimise anxiety.

Sometimes though, these healthy conflicts can lead to harm against the self or others. In which case a decent person will attempt to bring the conflict to awareness and consciously process an outcome that solves the conflict without having to self-delude. Beliefs must be changed to do this, and changing beliefs can be quite hard, particularly as they get closer to a person's core, their personality.

But hey, everyone has their own demons to face and sometimes other sources of anxiety are simply too much and the system is straining to deal with it, that to bring up even a small source of anxiety is too much, a potential straw to brake a donkey's back.
11:27am 15/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18319 posts

Such as the vulgar display of power you are alluding to. IE killing him because he can, not because he needs to.

Little random man.


Oh, but he believes he does need to. As his various actions promote a level of indifference to Great Leader (the concept, not the man .. well both), which can sow the seeds of doubt. Particularly because this person is literally the brother of Great Leader, if the Brother of Great Leader doubts ... then surely Great Leader may not be so Great after all .. perhaps the idea of not following Great Leader is .. acceptable..

That's the whole point of ruling with an Iron Fist. You crush those seeds, whatever they are.

So The Supreme Leader is obligated and doing his diligent job of Great Leader to remove this man in a way that keeps the integrity of the Great Leader concept whole.

I feel the recent three Kim's all do believe in the concept, that it is Right and Just. I also can see a self interest to keep living the good life. But that Good Life is a reward for taking on the heavy burdens of being Great Leader .. such as killing your own brother for the benefit of the nation.

edit:

Ohhhh.. Are you saying the good Dr's words of "If he didn't pose a threat to the leadership there, why have him killed?" are of a rhetorical type. A way to foster a thoughtful reflection on the situation to arrive at a possible conclusion of 'well then, he must have posed a threat'?

In which case, bravo to the Dr, the words did their job.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 11:35:23 15/Feb/17
11:32am 15/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23603 posts


uber has extremely solid demand, it is an incredibly disruptive technology, it does what the old system does but better in pretty much every way.. I mean it's a no-brainer that investing in something with that against it...


One does not inevitably follow the other. Would the State deregulate liquor licensing laws with sufficient technological disruption?

I don't know anyone with taxi licenses, I just think it's a travesty govt can set up a scheme asking for citizens to invest and participate effectively as contractors and then tear up the scheme without notice.
11:43am 15/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2331 posts
Oh, but he believes he does need to.


You cannot possibly know that Toll. Speculation about motivation is an idle, pointless sport.

But yes.

I believe the good doctor is merely enumerating the options, and that the widely held assumption may or may not be correct.
11:45am 15/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18320 posts

Would the State deregulate liquor licensing laws with sufficient technological disruption?


Yeah. It's happened plenty of times before. Prohibition rarely works for the long term. How many times has a government tried to remove alcohol from a society.. only for people to just throw some sugar into a barrel with some festering old plant product and drink the resulting brew?
In other words, the technology to satisfy the demand is so pervasive and so readily available that a government simply can't control it no matter how much they want (well they could if they piled ridiculous amounts of resources into it, maybe).

So yeah, the state would eventually be forced to deregulate an overly regulated liquor industry if the supply for the demand of liquor was constrained so much to the point people are willing to drink the potentially highly toxic oozing of rotting plant material to get their jollies of which they sorely need to help quench the pain of their numerous anxieties (many of which are probably partially caused by an excessively controlling government, if that government is attempting to prohibit liquor to that point .. oh like maybe certain indigenous communities...).

Bam motherf*****.


last edited by Tollaz0r! at 12:28:00 15/Feb/17
12:20pm 15/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18321 posts

You cannot possibly know that Toll. Speculation about motivation is an idle, pointless sport.


No, I cannot know it for sure. However I can attempt to make an informed (albeit not as well as it could be) approximation of that person's point of view which would explain the behaviours that I perceive.
We all do it, we can never know what a person is thinking, but given enough information and insight built from a wealth of other sources, usually experienced, we can make reasonably accurate approximations.
However, I'm taking those same skills and stretching them quite considerably to potentially see things from a person's perspective who's growth and experience is so grossly distorted from the average person of any nation.

But what I write about the situation seems a reasonable perspective given what we know, don't you think?
12:26pm 15/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2332 posts
However I can attempt to make an informed (albeit not as well as it could be)


I think you are close to uninformed on the character of Kim jong the lastest one. as am I and everyone.

What we can know is that you can be executed on a whim for a variety of reasons in North Korea.

Killing your brother maybe a purely cynical exercise in building a fearsome reputation as much as any paranoid fear (including the paranoid fear that your fearsome reputation is waning, he may just genuinely want a fearsome reputation). Who knows. I don't really think the precise motivation in a case like this is particularly important.

He was assassinated, almost certainly at the request of the dear leader, and that's about as much as we know, and probably ever will. I might venture further and say its all we really need to know, the dude is a despot trained from birth to be despotic. A despotic outcome is hardly surprising.

But, whatever else the case may be, you are certainly entitled to your speculations. of this there can be no doubt.
01:28pm 15/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12614 posts
03:09pm 15/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25676 posts


I wonder what he thinks the penalty should be for something 10x worse?

edit: also featuring other assorted irony.
04:59pm 15/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5128 posts
Projection. Just like anti homo conservatives turn out to be raging homos themselves.
The age of anti intellectualism is here. Just when we were making a good heading getting the world together to get climate change nipped in the bud.

Hurka durka it's a leftie conspiracy.
05:13pm 15/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2333 posts
Flynn is a scandal proper.

I'm not sure what he did was ten times worse than running a private server with top secret national security sensitive material. Still bad, and his resignation is appropriate.

The age of anti intellectualism is here.
Free speech is one thing i'd gladly sacrifice for the ability to destroy the chance of another nazi uprising.


Yeah we know. You're at the bleeding edge.
06:07pm 15/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5129 posts
Next up, Trump's impeachment. Though a part of me wants him to stay on just for the continued comedy.
But at this point it seems inevitable.
06:28pm 15/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3193 posts
Hopefully they don't get any classified material through, the irony would be too much, Trump's most senior staff use a private email server

If Flynn's out for that Russia shizzle, surely Rex Tillerson might be next for that pipeline deal?

What's the odds on Trump actually having made a deal with Putin to win the election and lift sanctions?
11:37pm 15/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25677 posts
https://image.ibb.co/gjcxbF/trump_impeach.png

Look infi a chance for you to make more money out of trump.
01:28pm 16/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5131 posts

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/one-nation-candidate-advocated-killing-indonesian-journalists-attacked-gays-muslims-and-blacks-20170215-gudw2d.html

Faceman, still looking forward to that new world order?

A One Nation candidate receiving Liberal preferences in the West Australian election once advocated killing Indonesian journalists, and attacked "poofters", Muslims and black people on his now-deactivated Twitter account.


Muh free speech

http://i.imgur.com/1HYkUxa.jpg
05:00pm 16/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25678 posts
haha he said his tweets were just locker room talk.
05:06pm 16/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23604 posts
https://image.ibb.co/gjcxbF/trump_impeach.png

Look infi a chance for you to make more money out of trump.


too risky, he rated so highly for keeping his election promises and is shutting down so much human trafficking, this is the CEO America needs. Shame the MSM and intelligence community are willing him to lose. wont stop the Donald.
06:10pm 16/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2334 posts
07:08pm 16/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2335 posts
07:15pm 16/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25679 posts
Shame the MSM and intelligence community are willing him to lose. wont stop the Donald.
Circa 2013 when you were making the same mistakes you scoffed at the notion the media played a significant part. You even denied they showed any bias despite the fact that they clearly did and with a clear motive of self-interest. Now the media are all powerful and working in league with the intelligence community to bring this man down because *reasons*.

Well I can sort of guess with the media. His comical level of ineptitude is only matched by the ineptitude of the people he pays to speak for him. Media reporting on that ad nauseum brings in money ad infinitum (I KNOW LATIN TOO). It's the joke that went too long going even longer. The intelligence community are probably against him because while the media profits in the short-term with all his wacky and hilarious moments they can also be kind of permanently damaging for you know, the entire country. They're probably pretty keen to limit the amount of damage that he can do. Just a stab in the dark.
07:37pm 16/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23605 posts
Circa 2013 when you were making the same mistakes you scoffed at the notion the media played a significant part. You even denied they showed any bias despite the fact that they clearly did and with a clear motive of self-interest. Now the media are all powerful and working in league with the intelligence community to bring this man down because *reasons*.


The NYT admitted their election reporting was s*****. How many news outlets predicted 99% chance of Hillary win? And now look like fools. I get the Washington Post headlines every morning and their agenda is cringe worthy.

They are all making increased bucks from The Donald so they should want him to stay. He is a human headline, and has revived America's interest in journalism too. Is there anything he cant win at....
07:52pm 16/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2336 posts
*reasons* to be slightly worried about what happened to flynn.

the new york times published unverifiable information from people speaking under condition of anonymity, who claimed to be leaking information from an on going investigation.

That should concern you fpot. Or at least raise an eyebrow.
08:01pm 16/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25680 posts
Plenty of reasons for raised eyebrows. What are you referring to?
12:44pm 17/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5132 posts
01:26pm 17/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12615 posts
You cant sell Blackouts to the Electorate







02:02pm 17/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5133 posts
02:17pm 17/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1993 posts
Why do conservatives wring their hands about intergenerational debt impacting their descendants, but don't give a single f*** about what state the environment is left in?
02:24pm 17/02/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21166 posts
Why do conservatives wring their hands about intergenerational debt impacting their descendants, but don't give a single f*** about what state the environment is left in?


$ > *
02:55pm 17/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25681 posts
Why do conservatives wring their hands about intergenerational debt impacting their descendants, but don't give a single f*** about what state the environment is left in?

Because they're dumb.
04:16pm 17/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3194 posts
Didn't Malcolm Roberts spend 20 years working in the coal industry? He's a walking definition of vested interests.
04:24pm 17/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12616 posts
I will tell you what is DUMMMB

spending $5 billion dollars to build a network that increases power bills but reduces reliability and shrinks the amount of Electricity available.

beats the s*** out of me why anybody would vote for something like that.

If we paid attention to Polls then Hillary would be President.
08:12pm 17/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23607 posts
I will tell you what is DUMMMB

spending $5 billion dollars to build a network that increases power bills but reduces reliability and shrinks the amount of Electricity available.

beats the s*** out of me why anybody would vote for something like that.

If we paid attention to Polls then Hillary would be President.


But it shows Australia CARES (but reduces f*** all global emissions).
08:22pm 17/02/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4590 posts
If we paid attention to Polls then Hillary would be President.

if I didn't know better I'd say this point was made ironically

maybe trump will win us all a war with Iran
08:35pm 17/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12617 posts
now Infi thats not quite true

Lomborg says the Paris Agreement if successful will lower the Worlds Temperature by 0.3 C by 2100
http://www.lomborg.com/press-release-research-reveals-negligible-impact-of-paris-climate-promises

Australias efforts will deliver a cut in Temperature of 0.0037 Degrees C

99% of the Public has no idea whats been going on.
But those Blackouts in South Australia have scared the s*** out of them.
I see WA Labor who have been promoting Federal Labors 50% RET have said during the campaign they will not pursue that anymore.

The Coalition language has changed towards this stuff.
Wait and see what happens when Trump slays the Green Blob
08:42pm 17/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25682 posts


But it shows Australia CARES (but reduces f*** all global emissions).

I agree. We should be doing lots more.
09:18pm 17/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2337 posts
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/sep/29/south-australia-blackout-explained-renewables-not-to-blame

But don't let facts get in the way of your anti green agenda.


I see a guardian (I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, a guardian article exonerates renewables, well not that shocked) article written the day after and raise you the operators third report.

The reduction in wind farm output resulted in a significant increase in flow through the Heywood Interconnector. Approximately 700 milliseconds (ms)
after the reduction of output from the last of these wind farms, the flow on the Victoria – SA Heywood Interconnector reached such a level that it activated a
special protection scheme that tripped it offline. The SA power system then became separated (“islanded”) from the rest of the NEM, and the entire supply to the SA region was then lost due to a
severe supply/demand imbalance (“Black System”).


The loss of wind generation due to instability in the supply caused a sudden surge on the interstate interconnector which it shut itself down to protect itself, which caused the statewide outage. So AEMO wouldn't agree with you there Vash, surprisingly another thing you know nothing about. I should start a google sheet of topics we can instantly dismiss your opinion on.

Wind power absolutely contributed to the outage. If you have a brain, this isn't an argument against renewables per se, It is about striking an appropriate balance so that the known shortcommings of renewables are able to be managed. Stating you want 80% renewable by 2020 and hang the consequences is irresponsible. That is where the sensible argument is happening you giant wanker.

you really need to stop linking to the first article that agrees with your opinion.

*edit* I suppose baby steps, at least this one did agree with your opinion, unlike the article you posted to show nazis weren't socialist, which stated in the first sentence: nazis had quite alot in common with socialists. */edit*
09:45am 18/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2338 posts
the new york times published unverifiable information from people speaking under condition of anonymity, who claimed to be leaking information from an on going investigation.
Plenty of reasons for raised eyebrows. What are you referring to?


Well what do you see about the first sentence as being ok?

More importantly, what did Flynn do? I mean that seriously. Outline the facts that lead up to his resignation.
11:41am 18/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25683 posts
You want me to recount what is more or less public record and published in every major media outlet in the world? Why?

The main reason for his sacking, his blabbing about sanctions to the Russians and subsequent lying to the VP, has been at least partially verified by the fact he was sacked. Without anonymous sources we would have no reliable media. All we'd have is what the government decides to tell us which would put us in some sort of dystopian nightmare. The investigation was or is ongoing, but I have little doubt that Flynn knew he was being investigated. Only difference is that now the public knows they've been forced to sack him which is a good thing.

edit: anyone see the highlights of his bizarre press conference where he was obviously lying about absolutely everything?
03:37pm 18/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5134 posts


So AEMO wouldn't agree with you there Vash


Hmm considering AEMO is the one who stuffed up, i think there are many questions to be asked.
As per this article
http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/02/aemo-fesses-sa-blackout/

Also, your dumbism on Nazi's being Socialist just proves how naive you are. Again, go do some reading on what Socialism actually is. A country having elements of Socialism doesn't make it Socialism. Duh.
05:02pm 18/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5135 posts
Also we can thank Capitalism for the invention of Breaking bad

http://i.imgur.com/G7mhUVR.jpg
05:25pm 18/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23608 posts
Also we can thank Capitalism for the invention of Breaking bad

http://i.imgur.com/G7mhUVR.jpg


It's a certain kind of psychopath who resorts to selling drugs to kids to deal with their medical condition. The comic implies those were the subject's only two options. Walt as a school teacher mostly likely had medical, you dolt.
05:35pm 18/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2339 posts
Also, your dumbism on Nazi's being Socialist just proves how naive you are. Again, go do some reading on what Socialism actually is. A country having elements of Socialism doesn't make it Socialism. Duh.


No I don't think I'll bother with that. Nazi's were nationalist socialists. You have to deny pure fact to say otherwise.

again not real hot at reading dem links are we my moronic knuckle draggin friend. oh and way to not link to the same event. so now we have two blackouts instead of one because of a lack of conventional generation.

The Australian Energy Market Operator yesterday admitted outages across South Australiacould have been prevented by faster action to bring on a gas-fired power station, calling into question the current financial ­incentives for conventional generation


They screwed up by not using more fossil fuel generation fast enough. IE they didn't ditch renewables at the first sign of trouble.

anyway you can substitute a cartoon about a tv show for wisdom if you feel you need to. You were saying something about naive? Honestly I wonder how you learnt to operate a computer.

you really need to stop linking to the first article that agrees with your opinion.
one step forward one step back.
06:08pm 18/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5136 posts
ooh you two are really grasping at straws aren't you?
Infi, guess what. Not everyone gets medical at their place of employment, at least in the states. Thanks Labor for making Australia great.

AEMO already have measures in place for the limitations of renewables. Lack of wind/solar, being obvious problems not yet matched by battery technology. So fossil options take up the slack.
So AEMO were unable to meet the dip in Wind generation for an extended period of time, they stuffed up. Not the fault of renewables, but by an organisation not planning out energy needs in disaster situations like extreme weather conditions.
06:26pm 18/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25684 posts
It's a certain kind of psychopath who resorts to selling drugs to kids to deal with their medical condition. The comic implies those were the subject's only two options. Walt as a school teacher mostly likely had medical, you dolt.
If I had a choice between selling drugs to children or dying of cancer well let's just say it wouldn't be an easy choice. There is nothing psychopathic about resorting to anything when it comes to saving your own life. Doing it just to make a profit would make you a psychopath. Also have you not watched Breaking Bad? It is absolutely f*****g amazing watch it now. I'll come over for Breaking Bad and chill anytime.

Nazi's were nationalist socialists. You have to deny pure fact to say otherwise.
I know that was in the name of the party but also Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea. I pretty much have a high-school level and occasional documentary level understanding of the nazis but weren't they pretty much pure fascists with a few terrible twists to earn them the unique moniker of nazism? A populist leader hijacking the nation's production to conduct total war against the jews and communist Russia with tight military and secret police control? I've tried to google stuff myself but when I put 'were the nazis socialist' into google... well you can pretty much imagine what happens.
06:30pm 18/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2340 posts
You want me to recount what is more or less public record and published in every major media outlet in the world? Why?


Did I say that? We need to get a grip on what actually happened. There will be three or four clear facts we can agree on, which should be a distillation of what we've read.

The main reason for his sacking, his blabbing about sanctions to the Russians and subsequent lying to the VP, has been at least partially verified by the fact he was sacked.


This is what I am talking about. We don't know that. I have read nothing that makes that concrete. We have the more abstract, he spoke to a Russian ambassador and didn't disclose the full nature of the conversation to the VP.

Misleading the VP is bad, but we actually have no f*****g idea what he discussed with the Russian Ambassador. Even if he discussed the sanctions, there is nothing wrong with that so long as he didn't hold himself out as actually negotiating on behalf of the US prior to his appointment to the position of NSA. Part of his job is talking with ambassadors, it isn't surprising (or even illegal) he would begin establishing the required relationship before inauguration. The reasons for his resignation remain incredibly vague.

Without anonymous sources we would have no reliable media. All we'd have is what the government decides to tell us which would put us in some sort of dystopian nightmare.


Except in this case, it is anonymous with institutional backing presumably, you clearly indicated as such in your earlier posts. whistleblowing is typically without the approval of the institution. Either way a newspaper absolutely shouldn't be publishing what it can't verify, you don't have to out the tipper to do this.

Where elected officials are held ransom to an anonymous intelligence bureaucracy, that is the dystopian nightmare.

The investigation was or is ongoing, but I have little doubt that Flynn knew he was being investigated. Only difference is that now the public knows they've been forced to sack him which is a good thing.


The investigation was being conducted by the FBI. they have the power to indict. Selective leaking suggests the case probably isn't that strong, I say that because any indictment based on this investigation will now over before it begins. It will be trivial to get it ruled inadmissible as a tainted investigation. Comey came out and said he was investigating Clinton. There is absolutely no reason to keep it anonymous. the FBI has jurisdiction to investigate.

None of this is to exonerate Flynn, misleading the VP about even informal talks is pretty bad. But the manner in which it was done is troubling.
06:35pm 18/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23609 posts
Also have you not watched Breaking Bad? It is absolutely f*****g amazing watch it now. I'll come over for Breaking Bad and chill anytime.


I watched Breaking Bad, it's on ok show (not on the same level as Lost). It underplayed the tremendous damage ice is doing to the US - made it look victimless, and it made Walk look like some OG when in reality he would have been in a ditch in the desert before the end of season 1.

There is nothing psychopathic about resorting to anything when it comes to saving your own life.


Interesting value judgement there. One's own life is worth multiples of others. I guess human trafficking, pedo rings,and all the other good stuff come into that too - life and death.

Infi, guess what. Not everyone gets medical at their place of employment, at least in the states.


he was employed, so BUY IT then. unless health is not important.
06:37pm 18/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2341 posts
So AEMO were unable to meet the dip in Wind generation for an extended period of time, they stuffed up. Not the fault of renewables, but by an organisation not planning out energy needs in disaster situations like extreme weather conditions.


Renewables can't meet generation demand so not the fault of renewables?

yeah ok. logic and reason really are not strong suits of yours.
06:43pm 18/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5137 posts
Duhhh, Solar for example, can't generate energy at night time. So solar is at fault for a blackout, if the provider can't provide an alternative?
SA always had backup energy for when wind isn't generated, the storm is irrelevant. People just have an anti green agenda.
06:46pm 18/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25685 posts
Ahh that's right. You're the guy who thought Fallout 3 was a better story than New Vegas.

One's own life is worth multiples of others if you're the one whose life is in danger. Like if we start talking hundreds or even dozens of people dying as a direct result of your actions then yeah maybe not. Since this is the political thread I might take this chance to mention that certain governments are choosing to ignore climate change which has the potential to cause millions of deaths all for the name of short term profit. All human trafficking is done for profit. Let's just say a ring was busted, and during the investigation they found a worker was there in duress and if they didn't do what they're told they'd be killed I'd hope they weren't charged and were instead added to the list of victims.

And I asked if you'd watched it because it was made very clear in the narrative that Walt could not afford to buy medical insurance. He also had the money to pay for everything offered to him by his rich ex-friends which he turned down out of hubris. Basic narratives are very hard to follow, if you're dumb!

The reasons for his resignation remain incredibly vague.
Sweet so it could be and probably is something a lot worse. All we need is for Trump to be implicated and get impeached and we can have the slightly more competent bigot sitting in the Oval Office.

edit: also I am not that upset if the investigation doesn't continue and it ends at him getting sacked. That's a pretty good outcome really. I have no faith that people in such high positions will ever be properly prosecuted.
06:51pm 18/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2342 posts
Duhhh, Solar for example, can't generate energy at night time.


So problems might arise if you demand the AMEO source at least 50% of all generation from it then?
06:52pm 18/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2343 posts
Sweet so it could be and probably is something a lot worse. All we need is for Trump to be implicated and get impeached and we can have the slightly more competent bigot sitting in the Oval Office.


Yeah or it could be nothing at all, maybe they discussed how much russians love vanilla ice cream and he reported strawberry to the VP. In which case it isn't a democracy saving leak, it's a political hit. That exact leap to he must have done a watergate level booboo is exactly the point of an anonymous vague leak.

I pretty much have a high-school level and occasional documentary level understanding of the nazis but weren't they pretty much pure fascists with a few terrible twists to earn them the unique moniker of nazism? A populist leader hijacking the nation's production to conduct total war against the jews and communist Russia with tight military and secret police control?


The Nazi's fought communists, in one of histories great ironies. Nazi economic policy was hostile to free markets, and was run centrally (this is one of the core pillars of socialism and one of the main ways it f**** everyone over). They didn't believe in private property unless you were part of the master race. Their social welfare package for ayrians was actually incredibly generous. I suspect Vash won't be quick to point out how "at least the health care was good under the nazis"

So like I said, standard socialist thought, divided along race/national lines rather than class. Everything you need to read is in wiki.

The more precise point I was attacking is that the nazi holocaust is some sort of notch against free-market capitalism. It isn't and never will be. Free-market capitalism actually has a remarkably consistent track record with democracy. Just Illuminati obsessed morons like Vash think otherwise, the belief is evidence free by the way.

Free markets, have their criticisms. Slavery would be a good one. It took political action to break the incentives. But Socialism's record with forced labor is hardly a compelling counter point.
07:07pm 18/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25686 posts
But if it was nothing at all why was he sacked? Doesn't seem like the sort of thing Trump would do if he was innocent and had nothing to worry about. Guess it will all unfold in the near future.

They didn't believe in private property unless you were part of the master race
But doesn't this mean that they did believe in private property and that the confiscation and sub-division of private property amongst the unworthy was not political in nature but more of a strategy to oppress people in the pursuit of military power?

I agree about the benefits of free market capitalism though. It got the world to a real great place in the 90s but it has felt really downhill to me since then. I think in our lifetimes we'll be faced with one of two things - a western superpower going full fascist as it desperately tries to survive in a resource scarce post-climate change world, or the widespread adoption of certain socialist policies to restore some kind of balance. Trump's election is pointing us towards the former which is why I think it is such a bad thing. Bernie, whether he was effective or not, would have tipped us towards the latter.
07:18pm 18/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5138 posts
Gotta stop being a dummy PP. The nazi's hated Communism & Socialism.
The evidence is everywhere for that one.

If you want to continue to be a simpleton you can think of them as Socialists by their party name. In which case, the many Governments of the world should be true to the name of their political parties, which they aren't, by the way...
07:33pm 18/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2344 posts
But if it was nothing at all why was he sacked? Doesn't seem like the sort of thing Trump would do if he was innocent and had nothing to worry about. Guess it will all unfold in the near future.


Who knows, perhaps trump made the strategic decision that it wasn't worth the political capital to save him? He did resign he wasn't actually sacked. Maybe Flynn thought it was best that the scandal was nipped in the bud. With out facts we can't know and that's the point

As for nazis.
I don't really understand how oppressing people in pursuit of military power isn't political.

The point with private property, is merely to demonstrate their distinctly non-capitalist relationship with it. Capitalism treats private property as nearly sacrosanct.

The real socialist peg in my book is the planned economy. That has hard socialism slapped all over it. Free-market capitalists don't believe in the possibility of an effective centrally planned economy.

Anyway, the point I was and am still getting at is that calling nazi Germany a runaway free-market economy is simply ignorant.

I can't comment on Trump heralding the apocalypse except to say that the stakes simply aren't that high nor do he a bernie represent a choice between survival and not.

This strikes me as borderline hysterical. Moreover this kind of rhetoric is being used to justify larger and larger intrusions in to important democratic safeguards. For example the talk of punching nazi's. That instantly expanded to jews (go f*****g figure).
07:54pm 18/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25687 posts
I wasn't saying the Trump administration will become full fascist. I am saying fascism seems like some sort of inevitable end game for democracy when it eventually does fail. You do agree that one day the world as we know it will drastically change right? Maybe not in our lifetime but I feel the effects of climate change will act as a catalyst and it may happen sooner than we think. We needed to be doing things about climate change ten years ago and this has set us back years.

But not even just climate change. Things like xenophobia, counter productive policies like the war on drugs, a more rehabilitative approach to crime rather than the heavily punitive nature that exists in the US, wealth inequality ecetera ecetera are all things tipping us in the wrong direction for when the world does go to s***. And it will. Just think about people during the good years of the Roman Empire. They would have thought this will last forever and things can only get better. But entropy bro, it's a b**** and it happens silently and invisibly and then all of a sudden you're f***ed. This is what people talk about when they say those who don't remember history are condemned to relive it. History is what people have forgotten with the election of Trump.

edit: perhaps a poor choice of phrasing, but the difference to me is there is socialism where private property is bad and creates bad juju so no private property for anyone for the good of the motherland, and there is nazism where the ruling class can have all the nice stuff because shiny stuff is awesome vote for us and all the gypsies and jews can go get f***ed.
08:04pm 18/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23610 posts
But if it was nothing at all why was he sacked? Doesn't seem like the sort of thing Trump would do if he was innocent and had nothing to worry about. Guess it will all unfold in the near future.


Because the intelligence community instead of bringing alleged misconduct to their boss, they air it with the media. Who are they working for? They could have even brought it to a congressional oversight committee if they didn't have faith the Pres would deal with it. But no, it went straight to the media. There is not even a smoking gun, just conjecture. I hope Trump guts the intelligence Democrat appointments. They are playing politics instead of reporting intelligence to the commander in chief.
08:19pm 18/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25688 posts
Who are they working for?
The people, I hope.

edit:
Because the intelligence community instead of bringing alleged misconduct to their boss, they air it with the media
Some people are smart enough to realise Trump is incompetent and steps need to be taken to remove him. Others aren't. I guess at least one person in the intelligence community is the former.
08:25pm 18/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5139 posts
We're entering a dangerous precedent at the moment. Right-wing media, along with the USA presidency claims all liberal media is fake news.
It's even happening on Australian news sites, especially among The Australian commentary.
Quite worrying.
09:15pm 18/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25689 posts
09:33pm 18/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1994 posts
Nazi economic policy was hostile to free markets, and was run centrally (this isa one of the core pillars of socialism and one of the main ways it f**** everyone over).

Wrong, the working man has no country, so under Nazi Germany this is not really socialism.

Capitalism has run it's course. It needs to be reigned in unless we want a lords and serfs system again.
10:05pm 18/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2345 posts
Wrong, the working man has no country, so under Nazi Germany this is not really socialism


No not wrong.

Correct.

Socialism does not need to redistribute according to class. The core idea is that production should be centrally controlled for the benefit of the people.

Marxism is the working class flavor.

Nazism is Racist flavor.
10:14pm 18/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25690 posts
I am just watching the full press conference video and I am wondering how the reporters didn't crack up laughing.
10:52pm 18/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38741 posts
he was employed, so BUY IT then. unless health is not important.
It has never been that simple in the US. Until Obamacare/ACA.

edit: and even then it was a complete s****how compared to single payer systems
11:29pm 18/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3195 posts

Jeez Louise, seems like a lot of people have forgotten their high school modern history, or was it an elective? ;)

Nazism was a hodgepodge of socialism, fascism, militarism and totalitarianism - it even had strong socialist party roots pre-war. Don't forget that Stalinism and it's version of communism sprung out of socialist roots too.

Vash, no offence, but I think you're fairly off the mark here. We've already been through this with fascism. I'm not sure it's logical to just flatly reject all examples of socialism in practice as not being socialism because they didn't match some of the 'original intentions' of socialism or some such.

Nazism subscribed to theories of racial hierarchy and Social Darwinism, identifying Germans as part of what Nazis regarded as an Aryan or Nordic master race. It aimed to overcome social divisions and create a homogeneous society, unified on the basis of "racial purity" (Volksgemeinschaft). The Nazis aimed to unite all Germans living in historically German territory, as well as gain additional lands for German expansion under the doctrine of Lebensraum, while excluding those deemed either to be community aliens or belonging to an "inferior" race.
The term "National Socialism" arose out of attempts to create a nationalist redefinition of "socialism", as an alternative to both international socialism and free market capitalism. Nazism rejected the Marxist concept of class struggle, opposed cosmopolitan internationalism, and sought to convince all parts of a new German society to subordinate their personal interests to the "common good" and to accept the priority of political interests in economic organisation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism

I mean, in many ways fascism grew out of socialism, just dig into some more modern European history. More to the point at hand, Nazi Germany was essentially a socialist state, rather than some different form of free market capitalism.

The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands. What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government.
De facto government ownership of the means of production, as Mises termed it, was logically implied by such fundamental collectivist principles embraced by the Nazis as that the common good comes before the private good and the individual exists as a means to the ends of the State. If the individual is a means to the ends of the State, so too, of course, is his property. Just as he is owned by the State, his property is also owned by the State.
Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian
12:47am 19/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12618 posts
maybe Obamacare was just set up to fail on purpose ?

Trump is promising a better system, lets wait and see what happens.
Give the guy a chance to do something.

The people attacking Trump arent hurting Trump they are hurting America.

Hmmm I thought Dr Trunbull has been acting strange lately...


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C47V1zxUoAILtJO.jpg
12:50am 19/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2346 posts
Thank you viper.

So like I was saying fpot, everything you need is wiki. Just read it.

Social welfare is manifestly a good thing, when the balance is struck right. This balance is aimed always at maximizing economic participation. Then everyone wins. This doesn't mean everyone gets the same amount of stuff.

Socialism, is a dangerous political philosophy, made all the more so because of its professed benign intentions. Every manifestation has failed, most recently in Venezuela with the so called Bolivian reforms in place. it'll be different this time, oh wait it's the same idea.

It does not work, and people tend to be starved to death trying to make it work. When people get tired of being starved, they try to get rid of the man o the people who responds with paramilitary repression. Again playing out for the 100th time in Venezuela right now.

The idea that everyone who has tried and failed hasn't read marx closely enough is moronic. All the more so when the main d******* proponent on this forum (and it is a common thread in bourgeois socialists in my experience) hasn't actually read the text he accuses people of screwing up.

Nazism was Capitalism, yet here we are not calling out the evils of our current system. guhh.


This statement, which kicked this thread off, is factually incorrect. Pure and simple. If nazism was to be characterized by a single political philosophy socialism would come closest. If that tips your sacred cows, well man up and do some reading.


Just imagine this fpot and see if you think it is still ok.

Some people are smart enough to realise Bernie is incompetent and steps need to be taken to remove him. Others aren't. I guess at least one person in the intelligence community is the former.
08:04am 19/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23611 posts
Some people are smart enough to realise Bernie is incompetent and steps need to be taken to remove him. Others aren't. I guess at least one person in the intelligence community is the former.


There is an incumbent unelected intelligence community that now thinks it knows better than the president. There is a mechanism for removal of the President via impeachment and there are plenty of republicans who would like to put Trump on the rack.

The IC is on the wrong side of this process by leaking classified intelligence. It is petulant behaviour from an entitled group of unelected elites that serve the President, not supervise.

It is interesting that you characterise them as "smart enough" like that opinion is objectively correct and the will of the voters is irrelevant.
09:42am 19/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2347 posts


So that Berkley protest was totally effective and Milo is done.
11:44am 19/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25691 posts
Just imagine this fpot and see if you think it is still ok.
If Bernie just gave the same press conference that Trump did then I'd wholeheartedly agree. Plus all the other stuff he has done.

There is an incumbent unelected intelligence community that now thinks it knows better than the president.
It does.
02:03pm 19/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1995 posts
PP, there's plenty of successful social democracies. You don't need to have socialism and fascism holding hands to be socialist.

Personally I think monopolies and state resources ie. mining should be publicly owned.
02:07pm 19/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2348 posts
Gotta say I don't totally believe you.

You'd be fine with the IC leaking vague out of context information to a newspaper who didn't fact check it which resulted in one of Bernie's appointees being forced to resign.

No I don't think you'd be fine with that at all.

And you'd be right not to be fine with it. It is vague, opaque governance.
02:10pm 19/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2349 posts
PP, there's plenty of successful social democracies. You don't need to have socialism and fascism holding hands to be socialist.

Redhat. name one that doesn't derive it's wealth from free markets? I don't really have the energy to go through this again. If you're going to talk about Denmark. Their money comes from free-market capitalism, it doesn't come from the state controlling the major means of productions. That is socialism. A social safety net is a different thing and the overlap in terminology is regrettable.

China is successful in direct proportion to the amount of socialist dogma it ditches from its economic policy.
02:22pm 19/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25692 posts
If Bernie turned out to be an unhinged lunatic I'd drop support for him like a sack of s***. Who wouldn't?
02:56pm 19/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5140 posts
Correction PP, Socialism is when the means of production are in the workers hands, not the Government. The failings of Socialism have been due to authoritarian governance, no democracy to be found.
I'm sure you know that doesn't correlate to the economic system, rather the term Socialism was used to consolidate power.

Get some Chomsky up ya before you spread more false information.
03:00pm 19/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1996 posts
Norway's sovereign wealth fund? In before muh markets. It's state owned.

Socialism should not be flat out dismissed just because it is used by tyrants and fascists. There's ideas to be used, just like in capitalism there's ideas to be used.

In Sweden housing is co-op and regulated.

Didn't the nazis use Hugo boss for uniforms and IBM for the concentration camp tattoos? Capitalism is there too.
03:06pm 19/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23612 posts
The failings of Socialism have been due to authoritarian governance, no democracy to be found.


It's like a rare element that can only exist in a laboratory for a millionth of a second.
03:06pm 19/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2350 posts
You're answering a different question fpot, and you must know you are.

The issue I am getting isn't if trump is a good or bad president. It is about how you appropriately hold officials to account.
03:09pm 19/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25693 posts
Different officials require different treatment. Did you watch the press conference he just gave? It was extraordinary. There has never been anything like it. The only time I have seen something similar is in brief interviews with flash in the pan controversy candidates who fade into obscurity once the election is over. Except this bizarre ranting episode lasts 77 minutes and this guy is the president. And again, plus all the other stuff he has done.

At the moment there is really zero evidence to go on in regards to why the IC is doing what they're doing. We can only assume. The two main possibilities put forward is that they're petulant and they're doing it just to annoy the president, or it's because they know something and they have zero faith in using the official channels to deal with the problem. Going by the pragmatic nature of most senior officials in government I am going with option two. If eventually it comes out Trump was really actually great and it was in fact the IC who were big babies getting in the way of the glorious revolution then oopsie I was wrong. I am confident the humble pie will remain unsliced on this occasion.
03:20pm 19/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2351 posts
Norway's sovereign wealth fund? In before muh markets. It's state owned.


which is why they trip over themselves to get to the free EC market then isn't it?

One aspect of a diversified economy is state controlled. Moreover the idea that a state controlled hedge fund is isolated from free-market capitalism is sheer ignorance, how do you think they keep it growing? They are invested up the ass in the NYSE and FTSE. So as an example of "socialism" I think you couldn't have picked a worse one. Literally used to speculate on markets with massive capital. so actually, yeah muh markets.

Sweden is hardly model of civic governance to be in awe of, and again, how they deliver social services as opposed to where their GPD comes from are distinct questions. But apparently you are unable to grasp this.

Didn't the nazis use Hugo boss for uniforms and IBM for the concentration camp tattoos? Capitalism is there too.

I can't even.



Correction PP, Socialism is when the means of production are in the workers hands, not the Government. The failings of Socialism have been due to authoritarian governance, no democracy to be found.
I'm sure you know that doesn't correlate to the economic system, rather the term Socialism was used to consolidate power.

Get some Chomsky up ya before you spread more false information.


You have been wrong about everything you have posted in this thread vash. Your post is wrong as well, but I am over picking apart your retardation. Chomsky has nothing valuable to say about socialism and never has.
03:22pm 19/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5141 posts


It's like a rare element that can only exist in a laboratory for a millionth of a second.


It will become more likely once the means of production are automated.
I like Gate's idea of taxing robots the same as Humans, allowing revenue for a universal basic income, also advocated by Musk. This would allow Capitalism to float along abit longer.
03:23pm 19/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5142 posts


Chomsky has nothing valuable to say about socialism and never has.


Wrong again. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=chomsky+socialism

Get learning.
03:26pm 19/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2352 posts
Yeah so the thing is Vash, you stating he has something valuable to say is almost an iron clad promise he doesn't.

For example not being able to pickup calling a philosophy national socialism might have something to do with, oh i don't know, socialism.

Or your inability to cite articles that actually support your points. for example, the blackouts in SA aren't the fault of renewables, because AMEO can't turn on fossil fuel generators quickly enough, or import enough fossil fuel generated electricity from Victoria.

Or your repeatedly demonstrated sheer ignorance of anything to do with marxism.

Or just sheer ignorance really.

Every link you post should just redirect here.
03:41pm 19/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1997 posts
Not sure what you mean about Sweden's civic governence, but their housing situation is in a lot better state than ours and a lot of it is co-op. Another wacky socialist idea.

A lot of income comes from markets, however, that doesn't mean that there are not areas that the state should own the means of production for. Electricity is probably the most relevant one I think of recently.

Chomsky isn't a socialist because he advocates state and or corporate power being eliminated.

I can't even.


You can't even believe they used evil companies? I no rite?!
03:58pm 19/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2353 posts
Chomsky isn't a socialist because he advocates state and or corporate power being eliminated.


I know Chomsky isn't a socialist. He also doesn't have anything valuable to say. Was I the one linking to him to explain socialism?

You can't even believe they used evil companies? I no rite?!


NASA used V2 rockets based on nazi designs to get the apollo missions to go. NASA was involved in nazism.

Get a grip dude.
04:01pm 19/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5143 posts
Hmm one of the most intelligent people on earth doesn't have anything valuable to say. /rollseyes

Chomsky is a left libertarian. In other words, an anarchist.

I suppose you'd think Einstein is an idiot for being a Socialist too?

I have a thing for following movements with intelligent people at the helm, since they're far smarter than you or I.

Who leads the uprising of the right? Pauline Hanson & Donald Trump.
04:12pm 19/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2354 posts
Hmm one of the most intelligent people on earth doesn't have anything valuable to say. /rollseyes


Not about socialism.

Dude you can quote famous people who got suckered by socialism till you're blue in the face. It's a bad idea and you're a stupid person.
04:21pm 19/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12619 posts

In the amount of time you have been arguing with PP about Socialism Vash you could have learned a great deal about Marx Lenin and Trotsky/Communism.
Its not a deep read.

But you arent really interested in Socialism are you ?
You just want to Loot the wealth of others and then decide who should get that wealth.

You really are just a middle class Robin Hood with fpot as Friar Tuck.
Why dont you spend more time thinking about how to make money rather than how to take it from others ?

04:55pm 19/02/17 Permalink
Fade2Black
Brisbane, Queensland
5306 posts
Vash I'm pretty sure you're just happy to follow anyone who proposes a universal basic income so you can sit at home all day arguing on message boards and never work another day in your life.
09:34pm 19/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38742 posts
Did you watch the press conference he just gave? It was extraordinary.
You know what uranium is right? BAD THINGS!
09:35pm 19/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38743 posts
If eventually it comes out Trump was really actually great and it was in fact the IC who were big babies getting in the way of the glorious revolution then oopsie I was wrong. I am confident the humble pie will remain unsliced on this occasion.
That is why I'm happy to stand back and watch to see what Trump does. Well, that and because noone has any choice in the matter anyway. Maybe he will surprise everyone and come up with solid policy to fix America. But so far nothing, literally NOTHING in his actions or words make me think that is likely.

To me though it's totally stunning, absolutely mind blowing, that anyone - particularly an Australian - can watch the clown shoes behaviour of the administration to date and think there's anything positive in it whatsoever.
09:38pm 19/02/17 Permalink
Fade2Black
Brisbane, Queensland
5307 posts
I drop in every now and then to read the latest dribble on both sides (infi/pp vs Vash/fpot).

Just wondering what everyone arguing's work/life experiences amount to. What they do for a living/have done and level education. I think it'd be really interesting to compare those to their beliefs (although I'm reasonably sure fpot is just the same troll he has been for 15+ years).
09:43pm 19/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3196 posts
Hah, that's funny Fade. I'm 30, got a bachelors in business, currently studying computer science part time. I co-own a SaaS tech company based in London, which is my full-time work. Live in Cape Town, was in London before that, originally from Brisbane. I don't really read or post on any other forums! I've stuck with Ausgamers as I used to go the QGL lans and can't be bothered getting involved in more forums.

A rejection of the fundamentals of socialism as a primary political and economic model isn't a rejection of the good elements of socialism used with free market capitalism. I don't think anyone is arguing for that, except maybe Infi? ;) Conversely I dare say Vash is the only one arguing for the opposite, a full workers revolution, no doubt with Vash personally exiling Gina Rinehart into the wastes to atone for her capitalist sins.

Australia, the UK, Canada and Western Europe are actually great examples of what you'd call socialist democracies or social capitalism in practice. A fundamentally capitalist model with a bunch of the good bits of socialism added in, things like welfare, universal healthcare, co-op housing, environmental protection and so forth. Now the scale of the amount of socialist elements (or regulation) is the great debate! I reckon you can plot all those countries on a scale of it, from the US all the way over to France and the Scandinavian countries.

Fair to say that we've seen, from recent events and Piketty's work, that capitalism needs a bunch of socialistic controls to prevent it from getting out of control and to ensure its benefiting all of society. Yet that's not to say we need to ditch capitalism, I don't think there's actually been any stand out evidence to support that theory.
10:40pm 19/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25694 posts
You should probably contribute something more than a teh muslims have hijacked Christmas dumbism before you accuse others of posting dribble. Do you realise how transparent you are? The reason you're asking what everyone does is so you can say fpot works in security so what he says must be wrong because you're too f*****g dense to backup your own bulls*** with anything substantial.
10:48pm 19/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3197 posts
By the way, I think the argument that full socialism, or implementing socialism as it was originally intended, is in fact, or at least requires, totalitarianism, is rather interesting indeed.
10:53pm 19/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38745 posts
Man the conversation about socialism is kind of boring, but, uh, yeh I dispute the fact that the Nazis were even remotely socialist.

I just dusted off my copy (metaphorically because it's digital) of the best WW2 book ever written [imo], Rise and Fall of the Third Reich:

https://trog.qgl.org/up/1702/socialist.jpg

I am just string searching the word socialism and everything I've found so far is a pretty clear rebuttal to the idea that the nazis and Hitler were socialist in anything other than name:

- "... This was to prove, in the long run, a fatal handicap, as was his [Gregor Strasser's] sincere enthusiasm for the ”socialism” in National Socialism."

- "The month of September 1930 marked a turning point in the road that was leading the Germans inexorably toward the Third Reich. ... It promised to lead the German people away from communism, socialism, trade-unionism and the futilities of democracy. "

- "But Hitler had contrary thoughts. For him the Nazi socialist slogans had been merely propaganda, means of winning over the masses on his way to power. Now that he had the power he was uninterested in them. He needed time to consolidate his position and that of the country. For the moment at least the Right – business, the Army, the President – must be appeased. He did not intend to bankrupt Germany and thus risk the very existence of his regime. There must be no second revolution."

- "These demands had been put in at the insistence of Drexler and Feder, who apparently really believed in the ”socialism” of National Socialism. They were the ideas which Hitler was to find embarrassing when the big industrialists and landlords began to pour money into the party coffers, and of course nothing was ever done about them."

Hitler had no interest in economics and the early attempts of the left wing parts of the original National Socialists were quickly trimmed or put into ceremonial positions where they could do nothing. The only big name Nazi who was even remotely socialist was Goebbels who gave up like 10 minutes after talking to Hitler, presumably when he realised that being part of the ruling class is all very well and good if you're one of them.

Hitler deliberately kept the economic structures in place, to the great distaste of many of the Germans who voted him in thinking they WERE getting a socialist.

https://trog.qgl.org/up/1702/socialist2.jpg

Also how great is the highlighted bit!
02:23am 20/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38746 posts
Hah, that's funny Fade. I'm 30, got a bachelors in business, currently studying computer science part time. I co-own a SaaS tech company based in London, which is my full-time work. Live in Cape Town, was in London before that, originally from Brisbane. I don't really read or post on any other forums! I've stuck with Ausgamers as I used to go the QGL lans and can't be bothered getting involved in more forums.

A rejection of the fundamentals of socialism as a primary political and economic model isn't a rejection of the good elements of socialism used with free market capitalism. I don't think anyone is arguing for that, except maybe Infi? ;) Conversely I dare say Vash is the only one arguing for the opposite, a full workers revolution, no doubt with Vash personally exiling Gina Rinehart into the wastes to atone for her capitalist sins.

Australia, the UK, Canada and Western Europe are actually great examples of what you'd call socialist democracies or social capitalism in practice. A fundamentally capitalist model with a bunch of the good bits of socialism added in, things like welfare, universal healthcare, co-op housing, environmental protection and so forth. Now the scale of the amount of socialist elements (or regulation) is the great debate! I reckon you can plot all those countries on a scale of it, from the US all the way over to France and the Scandinavian countries.

Fair to say that we've seen, from recent events and Piketty's work, that capitalism needs a bunch of socialistic controls to prevent it from getting out of control and to ensure its benefiting all of society. Yet that's not to say we need to ditch capitalism, I don't think there's actually been any stand out evidence to support that theory.
great post
02:50am 20/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3198 posts

Kudos trog. I hate to disagree with you old bean, that's a great book and a good read on Nazi Germany. Sadly it's discredited by historians. Mostly about its analysis of the cultural, socioeconomic and political details, it's still praised for it's first hand account and editorial nature. Although, it's said some of that was because the author was a journalist (and an American one at that) not a historian. Either way, I'm not sure it's analysis of the political theory is sound.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Third_Reich#Criticism

Did you have a read of this guy? https://mises.org/library/why-nazism-was-socialism-and-why-socialism-totalitarian

Having said all that, I'm not saying Hitler or Nazi Germany were overtly socialist, it really was more of a hodgepodge, and totalitarianism really. However you can't deny the fundamental socialist ideals (collectivism, centralised production (which is what Vash seemingly desires)) at it's core. That actually segues into the socialism is totalitarianism argument, because I suppose the same thing could be said about fascism.

Incidentally, if you're interested in reading some more recent Nazi history, I'd highly recommend Richard J. Evan's The Third Reich Trilogy. It's fantastic and is considered one of the seminal pieces on the topic.


06:09am 20/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5144 posts
I was curious why the Nazi party put Socialist in the party name, considering they arent Socialist at all (extreme nationalist views etc)


The NSDAP put out a 25 point plan in the 1920s. As stated below a number of these were socialist. However, as time went on quite a number of those in the NSDAP moved further to the right, especially those in the leadership such as Hitler. Hitler spent much of the 1920s being supported by rich industrialists, who gave him money, gave him a place to sleep, etc. By the time 1933 rolled around the 25 point plan was basically forgotten and/or ignored. When those such as Roehm complained that the revolution should continue and to implement socialism Hitler implemented the Night of the Long Knives, which included the assassination of those in the party, such as Roehm, who belonged to the NSDAP's left wing faction. Hitler himself found economic matters to be boring (if not beyond his understanding) and his usual orders when making a decision brought before him was to make sure it wasn't socialist. An example of someone in the party who had been quite socialist but ended up supporting the party's move to the right was Goebbels. He had to do quite a bit of soul searching to support the party, and Hitler, moving to the right.

"Hitler" by Ian Kershaw


It seems Hitler had little interest in economics, but his party was originally left. and he used elements of Socialism to centralise power.
People get confused on what Socialism is, which is perfectly understandable. Chomsky is a good guy to listen to, he knows what he's talking about.
07:19am 20/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2355 posts
Trog I don't think political expedience or confusion on behalf of Hilter demonstrates what you think it demonstrate.

Nazi germany was a centrally planned economy it which the needs of the individual were, by design, subordinate to the needs of the collective <- that is the claim you need to refute.

Showing Hilter didn't like marx and wasn't happy calling the above state affairs socialism does not refute that.

Hilter not being interested in economics and that the political should be mixed in, cuts against your point if anything.

Viper

socialist democracies or social capitalism in practice.


Here I will quibble over naming. The reason is that everyone seems to think that there is some valuable societal organizing principle in Marx. There really is not.

The inclusion of a social safety net in Australia (and virtually all other so called socialist democracies), is done explicitly to secure, among other things, free-market participation and individual rights. Both of these are an a-priori affront to socialist proper thinking.

Hence I kick against "lets just mix in a bit of socialism".

You need to stop posting vash. It is mindless dribble, which is tiresome in the extreme.
07:39am 20/02/17 Permalink
Fade2Black
Brisbane, Queensland
5308 posts
You should probably contribute something more than a teh muslims have hijacked Christmas dumbism before you accuse others of posting dribble. Do you realise how transparent you are? The reason you're asking what everyone does is so you can say fpot works in security so what he says must be wrong because you're too f***ing dense to backup your own bulls*** with anything substantial.


Thank you for perfectly demonstrating that you are nothing but a giant troll fpot. To be clear to others reading, fpot has turned
I'm with an engineering firm (one of the larger ones) and we've had to refer to it as "seasons greetings" and "end of year shutdown" for probably the last 8 years now... I know from speaking to colleagues at other firms its the same form.
into
teh muslims have hijacked Christmas dumbism
of course I didn't mention any race or religion simply a real world example of what is occurring in industry.

Hmmm my post must have really hit a nerve based on the last part of your comment. Stay classy.
08:23am 20/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25695 posts
Last Night in Sweden

We have the Poe's Law press conference, another round of lies in Florida and now this. If he didn't say it was last night I guess he could have meant Norway, but that was a guy who is probably masturbating over pictures of Donald Trump right now and it was in uhhhhh Norway.

Is this some sort of stress testing exercise measuring the tolerance of people to withstand absurdity and still support him, or is he really this much of a dumb c***?

edit: yo fade2black mind linking to the page you quoted from? Because I am pretty sure a post preceding yours mentioned something along the lines of muslims and christmas, which your post was then agreeing with. Could be wrong though!

Doing a "so ahhh heh heh what does everyone do for a job and education here" when you've attacked my profession rather than what I say in the past still makes you a bit of a stupid d*** though.
08:26am 20/02/17 Permalink
Fade2Black
Brisbane, Queensland
5309 posts
Viper - cheers for that I'm going to go back and read a few more of your posts with that context in mind now. Context always helps and I have a great deal of respect for someone who has worked hard, become educated, is still self improving and has taken risks (starting own company, worked overseas). I'm very risk averse to the point I consider it a weakness I'm conscious of when I am decision making.
08:27am 20/02/17 Permalink
Fade2Black
Brisbane, Queensland
5310 posts
Fpot: I have to drop my son at school and leave for work. If you log out so this thread is only 8 pages long it was on page 5 or 6 of 8. Just search for Fade there aren't too many posts.

Maybe you took it that way but all I meant is that we're softening all language to avoid offending anyone these days. My view is that that sort of thing has gone too far.
08:46am 20/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23613 posts
Quoting Picketty: the author espoused a capital owner's tax. The author doesn't realise capital is accumulated to design new products and services, expand production, increase workforce, improve productivity - grow a country's economy. Picketty wants to impair economic growth like another payroll tax. For such a well researched book, his conclusion was ridiculously regressive.
08:48pm 20/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38747 posts
The Nazis were indeed Socialists.
It's tough to compete with memes images but ... two of those are Goebbels, see above post. I don't know about the Hess quote but it's kind of funny to mention him considering what he did. Himmler like several of the Nazis in the early days did espouse socialist viewpoints but, same as Goebbels, abandoned ship when Hitler made it clear they weren't those kinds of socialists.

Don't mistake me saying the Nazis weren't socialists as defense of pure ideological socialism. As I have said repeatedly it is unworkable without major technological change. But if we're going to hate the Nazis, as we rightly should, it shouldn't be because they were socialists.

Can't we talk about the North Korea assassination thing? That s*** is way more interesting AND current!
09:07pm 20/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38748 posts
Having said all that, I'm not saying Hitler or Nazi Germany were overtly socialist, it really was more of a hodgepodge, and totalitarianism really. However you can't deny the fundamental socialist ideals (collectivism, centralised production (which is what Vash seemingly desires)) at it's core. That actually segues into the socialism is totalitarianism argument, because I suppose the same thing could be said about fascism.
well part of the point of my post really was that they specifically did not "centralise production" in the socialism sense.

The collectivism was solely to fuel the war machine and nationalistic drive, but they needed the economic machine running smoothly as well.
That actually segues into the socialism is totalitarianism argument, because I suppose the same thing could be said about fascism.
Well, I don't think it necessarily means socialism = totalitarianism, or that totalitarianism is always going to be the outcome. I think in this case socialism was certainly used as the incentive to create a totalitarian environment, but as I think the above demonstrates, it was done deliberately as a deceptive ploy to get the masses online and onside.

edit: I guess what I'm saying here is that I think the Nazis trivially fail the socialist test because zero % of their system of government or economics or industry was set up to deliver the benefits into the hands of people, it was done to push an nationalist and imperialist agenda.
09:16pm 20/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1998 posts
Quoting Picketty: the author espoused a capital owner's tax. The author doesn't realise capital is accumulated to design new products and services, expand production, increase workforce, improve productivity - grow a country's economy. Picketty wants to impair economic growth like another payroll tax. For such a well researched book, his conclusion was ridiculously regressive.


Picketty advocates for a wealth tax. Just like a land tax if you are not doing anything productive with your property, you are penalised.

Why are wages(which are productive) heavily taxed but accumulated wealth not?
09:28pm 20/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23614 posts
To avoid capital flight. Banks use deposits to prop up capital reserves. Local governments rely on capital holders to invest and provide jobs to their citizens, without which there would be civil unrest. Wages are the byproduct of labour, they are recurring, and pay fr consumption of govt services.

A wealth tax would see a tax bill in even years of losses. Makes no sense. Tax the income before it becomes capital. Theft is such a seductive shortcut.
09:42pm 20/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38749 posts
Why are wages(which are productive) heavily taxed but accumulated wealth not?
accumulated wealth is taxed when it is productive (e.g., interest). Are you proposing people get taxed for just having money sitting around doing nothing?
09:57pm 20/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3199 posts

Fair point trog, the Nazi's collectivism was in favour of the state, not the people, though they kind of merged the two, in ideology at any rate. Supposedly everything the nationalist war machine did was to better the German people, starting with the return of lost land, etc. That article I referenced discussed how they also in effect centralised production.

Yeah fair point PP, I suppose I mean socialistic regulation, rather than the principles of socialism itself.

The main bit of Piketty's work that I'm referring to is that capital accumulates, inevitably creating a deeply unequal system. It kind of reminds me of the old feudal systems.

Piketty's argument is that, in an economy where the rate of return on capital outstrips the rate of growth, inherited wealth will always grow faster than earned wealth. So the fact that rich kids can swan aimlessly from gap year to internship to a job at father's bank/ministry/TV network while the poor kids sweat into their barista uniforms is not an accident: it is the system working normally.
If you get slow growth alongside better financial returns, then inherited wealth will, on average, "dominate wealth amassed from a lifetime's labour by a wide margin", says Piketty. Wealth will concentrate to levels incompatible with democracy, let alone social justice. Capitalism, in short, automatically creates levels of inequality that are unsustainable. The rising wealth of the 1% is neither a blip, nor rhetoric.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/apr/28/thomas-piketty-capital-surprise-bestseller

This rings true to my thinking, especially given the rising inequality we're seeing. Inequality is one example, but another topical one is environmental protection, as we know unrestrained industry is feathering it's pockets at the expense of all of our future well being, aka climate change.

I'm interested in how deep Trump's Russia links go! If it really was a shindiggle to get their sanctions lifted, that's pretty incredible.
10:02pm 20/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2356 posts
I guess what I'm saying here is that I think the Nazis trivially fail the socialist test because zero % of their system of government or economics or industry was set up to deliver the benefits into the hands of people, it was done to push an nationalist and imperialist agenda.


Er it was explicitly in the name of the racial greatness of the German people. Hilter was really clear on that from start to finish. Is it that nationalism that is getting past the keeper with you?

Moreover I don't really understand the idea of leveling imperialist claims as damaging to the concept of nazism being a variant of socialism. Marxist Socialism is explicitly imperialist, in so far as it calls for world wide enforcement of its political ideals.

Again the reason for this discussion, is the flatly wrong idea that you can lay Nazim at capitalism door. That is wrong, you simply can't.

The idea that nazi's borrowed heavily from socialist philosophy is hardly new or controversial, it is the central claim of the road to serfdom. Specifically the claim that centralized planning of an economy tends toward totalitarianism. given the overwhelming evidence in favour of this for socialist states, I think it is difficult to deny there is an element of truth to it.

Nazism has the explicit nationalism which is viewed as uncool these days (well for how much longer remains to be seen), but ultimately in means and final ends, the nazi project and the marxist socialist project share a great deal in common.

I honestly don't understand why you are pushing back trog.

collectivism was in favour of the state, not the people


But in practice how is that different to what happened in Russia or China? Everything happens for the state, the people are an utter afterthought.
10:02pm 20/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38750 posts
Piketty's argument is that, in an economy where the rate of return on capital outstrips the rate of growth, inherited wealth will always grow faster than earned wealth.
hah! unless you're Trump !
10:05pm 20/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3200 posts
Trump's lack of wealth given his inherited capital is astonishing. Well, astonishing because he's spent so much time espousing how great he is at business!

But the exact numbers aren't the point. The point is that after decades of touting his business acumen, his ability to negotiate tough deals and spot good investments, and after spending this entire campaign season arguing that he's qualified for the presidency based on his skills in the market, Trump nonetheless has an investment record that at best roughly matches and at worst underperforms the market. He did only as well or possibly worse than a retiree with a Vanguard 401(k) did. That's not really impressive. Worse, it suggests that his success is almost entirely the result of having inherited money from his father. His own actions might have even cost him money.
Donald Trump isn't rich because he's a great investor. He's rich because his dad was rich.
10:12pm 20/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23615 posts
How many dips**** inherit or win wealth and lose the lot? I domt understand the criticism of Trump's business acumen (plenty of other things to target). The guy is a straight out baller. He takes shots from way beyond the halfway line - No s*** some dont come off. He's building stuff, employing people. He's got a gold plated jumbo jet, a number one hit TV show, then went into the Presidential race a rookie and won it first go. He beat the media, the pollsters, a corrupt debate process, and massive Democrat bank roll. He is the real MVP. And he knows it.
10:35pm 20/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38751 posts
How many dips**** inherit or win wealth and lose the lot? I domt understand the criticism of Trump's business acumen (plenty of other things to target). The guy is a straight out baller. He takes shots from way beyond the halfway line - No s*** some dont come off. He's building stuff, employing people. He's got a gold plated jumbo jet, a number one hit TV show, then went into the Presidential race a rookie and won it first go. He beat the media, the pollsters, a corrupt debate process, and massive Democrat bank roll. He is the real MVP. And he knows it.
hey I'm board with that! I wish more billionaires would throw their money into ventures without regard for the consequences, although preferably less socially f***ed ones than Trump did (i.e., no casinos).

He's a living walking talking mouth-breathing example of trickle-down economics; because he was bad at business the US (& probably people all around the world through his international ventures) benefited much more as a whole because of his willingness to take risks and investing his wealth into business than they would have if he just threw it into an index fund and lived like Paris Hilton.

So I think it's good that he did not put the money into an index fund even if it would have made him more money. It's just funny that he's such a blowhard about how great he is as a businessman.
11:06pm 20/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25696 posts
The guy is a straight out baller.
ahaha

Just wondering what the apologists are saying about the whole Sweden thing? Don't feel like visiting stormfront to find out.
08:03am 21/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
1999 posts
accumulated wealth is taxed when it is productive (e.g., interest). Are you proposing people get taxed for just having money sitting around doing nothing?


Piketty, proposes this, there is no risk of capital flight because he proposed a world wide (or at least western world) wealth tax.

Also even if you just taxed land it is pretty hard to relocate your 20 million dollar harbour side mansion.
08:28am 21/02/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40438 posts
was interesting to see trump has already spent in a month on travel what obama spent in a year.

also, the sooner we have sugar and fat people taxes in this country the better.
08:42am 21/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18322 posts

He's got a gold plated jumbo jet, a number one hit TV show, then went into the Presidential race a rookie and won it first go. He beat the media, the pollsters, a corrupt debate process, and massive Democrat bank roll. He is the real MVP. And he knows it.


I'll give you this, Trump did indeed win his first run as president. As you are well aware, the candidates on show were not the strongest of candidates America has seen.. not by a long shot. If Trump was up against Obama before he become president I wonder how it would have gone.
If you win a running race against a well fed, well trained, well established, well financed quadriplegic and you win .. well good on you for winning! But it isn't exactly a reflection of greatness is it?
Extreme analogy but one that highlights the situation that you give Trump such praise in, I would hope.

Also, whilst it's a hard thing to know for sure it is widely considered Trump has actually lost money overall, compared to a straight out simple bank savings system, os he is has been a terrible businessman who if he didn't have such vast wealth in the back pocket would have ran out of money if he was building from say .. an average persons bankroll.
Is this because he knew he could take ridiculous risks and not worry about the outcome what-so-ever? Or is it because he is pretty s*** at being a business person who's saving grace is a bank vault bigger than Scrooge McDuck?
Going on his character that he has unabashedly presented, it's very likely the 2nd version.
What's worse, is he is literally deluded as to how awesome he is ... at everything.

You gota at least admit by now, the man is straight-out delusional, it's not some game he is playing.
You've put him on a pedestal simply for being Uber rich and impulsive and managing to be slightly less uber-rich than most other people would be in his situation. Blinkers much?
01:59pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18323 posts

Are you proposing people get taxed for just having money sitting around doing nothing?


This concept is an interesting one. That money sitting around should be increasingly penalised, not rewarded.
Money that is not moving is like water that sits in a pool. It might look pretty, unless it stagnates and breads all sorts of disease spreading life. Kind of an apt analogy, lol, well done 'ol brain.

Is it not better for money to always be moving, to be providing the energy for labour to occur?


Wages are the byproduct of labour, they are recurring


Is it really a byproduct though? Wages, it could be argued, provide the energy for labour, the motivation. As no labour would occur without either a reward or a punish for not doing it.
In which case, wages are not a byproduct, they are instead an integral part of the larger system. A byproduct by it's nature isn't integral to the process other than it gets produced as a waste that may or may not be useful elsewhere.

Are you saying wages are a waste product of the labour system?
02:20pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Fade2Black
Brisbane, Queensland
5311 posts
Not sure I like the idea of taxing "wealth" outright. In the sense that you are double taxing someone. Once for earning it and once for not spending it.

Say you're saving for a house deposit or a new car. Should you be penalised for that? Especially when housing affordability is a big issue?

Perhaps it could have a threshold i.e. have more than 200k sitting in a savings


Also everyone should be entitled to a "rainy day" fund. I always want to hve a certain amouny in savings due to risk of market down turn or health issues etc

last edited by Fade2Black at 15:20:28 21/Feb/17
03:18pm 21/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23616 posts
So I think it's good that he did not put the money into an index fund even if it would have made him more money. It's just funny that he's such a blowhard about how great he is as a businessman.


the vast majority of his supporters enjoy the have a go attitude. business has its ups and down, but at the end he made tangible things, going concerns that make profit and employ people. if he placed his money in a managed fund, he is simply outsourcing those decisions to a fund manager, who buys others shares of companies making other things. now where's the fun in that? at least he did it his way, not the fund managers way. not that i'm guessing you would park surplus cash in a fund either....

Piketty, proposes this, there is no risk of capital flight because he proposed a world wide (or at least western world) wealth tax.


a new world order. cool story.

Are you saying wages are a waste product of the labour system?


i didn't use the best word (and I do know plenty of great words). it is a consequence or a result of labour. You are right it is the motivation for labour. It is also the way people pay to consume be it private goods or government services.

Fade2Black puts it well - the money was taxed once as income and now Picketty wants it to be taxed again, and again and again, every year.

To pay for more welfare, bureaucrats and immigrants? No thanks.

You gota at least admit by now, the man is straight-out delusional, it's not some game he is playing.


If you watch his rally in Florida, the crowd was eating out of the palm of his hand.
03:59pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2000 posts
Actually, he says a wealth tax is more equitable than a consumption and or income taxes.
04:34pm 21/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23617 posts
How is taxing wealth multiple times equitable? Robbing the same victim over and over again.
04:42pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2001 posts
Replacing income and consumption taxes with a wealth tax.
05:01pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18324 posts
Fade2Black puts it well - the money was taxed once as income and now Picketty wants it to be taxed again, and again and again, every year.


Yeah, that's a stupid thing to do.
However I believe that money sitting around doing nothing, should be taxed. The longer it does nothing, the more it gets taxed.

Stagnant wealth does d*** all for the world. The wealth of the world is getting more and more concentrated ... yet the world economy is getting more and more unstable and struggling in many places. If the rich people created jobs, how come as they get richer .. more jobs aren't created?
As they get richer they are supposed to be creating more jobs .. but they don't. The more money they accumulate, the greater portion of it that stagnates.

I'll give you that about Trump, at least he does throw his money around. He is pretty terrible at accuracy and he has been able to enjoy having a vast wealth given to him to the point he probably can't actually completely bankrupt himself with his decisions, some of them by chance are going to be money makers.
Unfortunately people attribute his vast wealth as him having business prowess.
It's exactly the same as people who Read about Tesla's various theories about wireless transfer of power on unimaginable scales (for free!) that he had during his later years and attribute them as being scientifically sound because of his past inventions. When he was very likely suffering from a schizotypal or schizoid disorder and was increasingly showing delusional behaviour. Such as his avid belief in being able to call a specific Pidgeon to him with his mind, that he "loved that pigeon as a man loves a woman, and she loved me. As long as I had her, there was a purpose to my life".

But for some reason people decide that he was of sound mind for the entirety of his life, because people who are not of sound mind can't be productive and inventive or something .. ever? So, ironically, they instead delude themselves into believing his inventions are real and accurate, but a conspiracy prevents them from being used.. Bizarre.

Anyway, Infi, are you sure you are not deluding yourself in a similar way about Trump? Attributing his random chance and family wealth to some specter of skill? Unwilling to see the ample evidence (from the fake news!) of his overtly delusional outbursts? Or do you prefer to view the alternative facts, just like the people who believe in fantastical inventions by the late Teslsa, it's all a conspiracy?

edit: lol speaking of schizotypal, that went off on a tangent.

Back to the start. I believe stagnant wealth should be taxed heavily. There is no point in having giant pools of cash if it isn't used. S***, having it sit there to be pseudo-moved by lending money that doesn't exactly exist to others to do something with .. only to have that REAL production essentially taxed in order to give the pseudo-money back. So the pool can remain stagnant and even grow.. Seems really spastically inefficient, like government level inefficient.

Would it not be better to not be using a derivation of stagnant money and instead have that money used directly. So that the productive labour isn't required to gut itself paying money back to a non-productive source?

And this is precisely why taxing the rich much heavier than the poor is the way to go.
It's why giving money to the poor is much, much better than subsidising the rich.
The poor people will spend their money, they have to. That money is real money, directly spent on real labour, making real production. It cannot stagnant, not until some greedy assed uber rich person who doesn't even f*****g notice the money coming in, leaves it in his stagnant pond.

Tax breaks for the rich are pointless.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 17:31:40 21/Feb/17
05:24pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5145 posts
How is taxing wealth multiple times equitable? Robbing the same victim over and over again.


Taxation isn't theft. Society provides the means for someone to become wealthy. Rinehart for example, the community provides the resources for her to sell. She provides her capital to exploit said resources.
Why should we allow someone to gain huge wealth off the fruit of our resources, when that wealth could flow back into the community instead of a private individual?
Whitlam had the right idea here, He wanted to Nationalise the mines. Think of how much richer Australia would be.
05:36pm 21/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23618 posts
You are pretty much arguing for a communist collective. Western civilization and capitalisation thrived because of two key institutions: Private property and rule.of law. The wealth tax requires a belief that private property is not a primary institution and that the State is entitled to pilfer from accumulated wealth as it needs - it's just the amount that varies.

Once the State gets its fangs into that it will never let go. And what will that do for wealth accumulation, and economic growth?

If it's idle capital, then it will all be immediately be invested, no smart capital holder will just sit there and be taxed. So the tax will raise no revenue. What is the definition of idle capital? Sitting in a bank, it props up bank reserves. So bank reserves would crash. Sitting in stocks? Sitting in a manager fund? The definition is impossible to clearly settle.

If it's all wealth (not just idle) then every listed company pays wealth tax? Individual real people? Even in years they make a loss?

How is it calculated? There is no realisable gain to prove the wealth, so it's all paperbased, like a BRW rich list guesstimate.

The theory of a globally adopted wealth tax is hopelessly naïve. Countries will always compete for foreign capital investment.

It is the most flawed Fabian new world order pile of s*** ever devised.
05:45pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18325 posts

Taxation isn't theft.


It kind of is Vash. Money is taken from a person through the ultimate threat of violence. You have no choice in the matter, unless you choose to have violence committed against you and probably have your stuff taken forcibly anyway so it's poor choice to make. The financial equivalent of setting yourself on fire as protest?

The theft may have good reason.

Or perhaps think of it like a Protection Racket. A couple of goons come knocking on your door.
"'Ello Mr Vash, we are representatives of the ahhh ..hmm 'local Gubberment' (hehe,snicker) we are asking you for a 'tax' in order for you to continue doing the pleasure of your business with the knowledge of safety. If you don't give us this tax, we cannot provide for your safety anymore and I hear these streets are very dangerous at night.
It'd be a shame, you know, for a disgruntled citizen to get tired of seeing this shop front everyday...
Anyway, those are terrible and dark thoughts. Things we don't have to think about. Isn't that right Mr Vash.
Now, before we forget, we was asking for you to be paying your taxes, yes?"


That's pretty much what it actually is Vash. It's theft. At least you get something out of it.



06:05pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18326 posts

Once the State gets its fangs into that it will never let go. And what will that do for wealth accumulation, and economic growth


What is the difference between the government getting it's fangs into wealth and for an ultra-rich person to get their fumbling claws .. or more so their hungry-hungry hippo snouts, onto more and more piles of cash .. that doesn't actually go anyway or do anything directly?

In some ways, Infi, even the inefficient hands of the government does more for a nation's production than the ever increasing inefficiency of stagnant money of the ultra-rich.

How do you abhor one form of inefficiency, yet adore another form of inefficiency?

Please tell me this:

How does increasingly amassing wealth, concentrating that wealth into one thing, actually spread productivity and spread the wages and thus spread the wealth to more people? Can you not see the contradiction of that? It cannot work.
06:11pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18327 posts

What is the definition of idle capital? Sitting in a bank, it props up bank reserves. So bank reserves would crash. Sitting in stocks? Sitting in a manager fund? The definition is impossible to clearly settle.


You're thinking in limited perspective. Your mind is trapped on the presumption that the wealth motivator is a piece of physical material such as a note.

Move on my friend, the invention of the Wheel changed so, so much. It would be stupid to continue to lug around 1 rock, when you can move 20 with little more effort.

Bitcoins were an introduction to what can be done with a better, more versatile form of wealth representation.

A decaying bitcoin type system can be done. Each transaction of a bitcoin, from one party to another rebuilds it's decay rate somewhat. If it sits around doing nothing, the bitcoin decays. Thus stagnating wealth would reduce itself, it would have to be used in order to maintain it's wealth.

So wealth will not be represented by a stack of cash. Instead wealth would be represent by how much you move! IE wealth would directly be attributed to productivity. Just what you want.

Of course that's an idealised system, there would need to be mechanisms in place that prevent a person moving the decay coins between themselves.. Ahh... do just what our body does.
Chromosomes have a long string of nucleotides at the end,telomeres, which act as a buffer due to to the way DNA is copied in our eucharistic system. Each time a cell divides, the very mechanism to copy it removes a small part of this string. A result of this is that line of cells eventually run out of telomeres and the DNA of the chromosome begins to lose real information. The cell line quickly dies out.

Applying this to the decaying bitcoin.
As each transaction takes place the decay rate is repaired, but not entirely. Effectively the decay rate is slowed. Eventually that decaying bitcoin will be destroyed, even if it is productive.
However, being a highly productive bitcoin, each transaction has a chance of creating productivity that ends with the creation of new decaying coins. So the net effect is a growth of decaying coins, provided production is grown. If production stagnates or cannot be grown, then the rate of decaying bitcoins produced would be equal to the rate they are destroyed. Much like an adult for the majority of their life. They cease growing, but live. Eventually they die. The world moves on.

People gain productive wealth, they continue to grow it. They reach a point were they can no longer effectively create growth. They run at equilibrium for a while .. then eventually their wealth reduces. But that's OK. Because that allows for other people to do the same. Of course, the overall arch of this birth-live-death approach of wealth doesn't have to be in the same time frame of a person's life, so a form of family wealth can still be maintained (much the oligocracy's relief!). However that family wealth would have to be mixed with the wealth of others in order to maintain and extend it's life further.. again, it must be doing something. Directly.
Ensuring a continuously dynamic and productivity driven society.

Create wealth Infi. BUT SPEND IT, USE IT, as your wealth will not forever be there, so enjoy it. Spread it. Much like life.

As above, So below.


last edited by Tollaz0r! at 18:33:00 21/Feb/17
06:28pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5146 posts
Western civilization and capitalisation thrived because of two key institutions: Private property and rule.of law


Western civilization thrived due to colonialism and slavery.
By your logic, all countries that are Capitalist should have thrived, countries within South America, Africa & Asia. But no, that isn't the case.
Socialism, nor Communism can happen yet, the conditions have to be met. Marx said this, Capitalism forms the foundations, and Socialism is the transition to Communism.
Once the means of production are fully automated, it will likely happen.
08:03pm 21/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38753 posts
not that i'm guessing you would park surplus cash in a fund either....
Actually I do at the moment to some degree! Index funds are the best.
However I believe that money sitting around doing nothing, should be taxed. The longer it does nothing, the more it gets taxed.
Arguments about double taxation aside, the freedom angle is also important (surprised infi didn't bring it up yet). It's my money; if i want to put it under the bed and do nothing with it, who should be able to tell me otherwise?

I am 100% on board with paying tax; I don't consider it theft (more like a forced investment into maintenance and improvement of civilisation; theft means it's gone but we get so so much for our tax dollars) but once the tax has been paid, what is left is /mine/ to do with what I want.

If they government wants me to do something with my money they shouldn't take more of it - they should positively incentivise me to do something with it.
08:31pm 21/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23619 posts
However that family wealth would have to be mixed with the wealth of others in order to maintain and extend it's life further.. again, it must be doing something. Directly.
Ensuring a continuously dynamic and productivity driven society.


you literally answered none of the practical issues I raised. talking in motherhood statements doesn't work well when designing a taxation system. and that is the problem with this unspecific primary school idea.

you rambled for quite a bit there.

Western civilization thrived due to colonialism and slavery.


Use whatever excuse you want to, but if you take away property rights and rule of law, your society will soon descend into an unproductive mess - just look again at any modern socialist or communist experiment. That's why Thomas Friedman call it the Golden Straitjacket. Anyone who takes it off inevitably goes broke. Read a bit of Francis F**uyama. (Yes, I have actually read it.)

Pilfering over and over again from people who have accumulated wealth, just because you (the government) has decided what they are doing with their property is not substantial enough - is a reprehensible idea. And moreover, the everyday punter on the street will think so too, because they know one day it could (hopefully) be them.

Create wealth then do what you like with it. Pay your taxes.
08:33pm 21/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38754 posts
That money sitting around should be increasingly penalised, not rewarded.
I guess it should be noted that money sitting around in a bank isn't necessarily idle, either - savings accounts are on a bank's balance sheet and they use this to leverage the various other financial instruments they deal with. This money is ultimately used in investments (loans) to people that are going to Do Stuff that will make everyone more money. This is why you're rewarded with interest for leaving money in there and why you get more interest if you commit to longer terms by term deposits.
08:53pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5147 posts
if you take away property rights and rule of law, your society will soon descend into an unproductive mess - just look again at any modern socialist or communist experiment.


Hence post scarcity.
There isn't one flavor of Socialism. Democracy and rule of law can exist under it. Sure, initiation of a movement to Socialism would probably require a revolution, which is anti democratic.
It's also questionable we even live under a democracy, due to the heavy amount of propaganda within the media, manipulating public opinion.
You also have to look at what's coming. The Automation age will be a challenging time because the media, and wealthy forces want to maintain the status quo, which is power over a large amount of people, and maintaining their growth of wealth.
Automation will be extremely lucrative for wealthy business owners & it's shareholders. Do you think they'll allow the Government to increase taxes, to offset the job losses?

What if you're wrong, about the amount of jobs that will be created to offset the massive losses?
Say the scenario that robots are able to replace 90% of jobs. Would you then support Socialism?
09:12pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18328 posts
Vash.

The problem with communism is simple.

It assumes all people want to be equal.
I can tell you right now, there are plenty of people that want to be more than equal and they will take advantage of those people that don't. The more conflict adverse a person is, the more these takers will take. Plato would call them the Merchants, that is their 'soul'. There is nothing inherently wrong with the merchant, that is his character. For a society to function, this character must be part of it. Communism has no room for the merchant, all the merchants will f*** communism up.

What happens though, if a substantial amount of people, or even a small amount, don't want to be equal. They will cause problems in the system, they will drift to positions that can be abused to create privilege. So they can be greater. They will continue to amass privilege. They will likely sit in governmental positions, in order to influence things so other become less privileged so in comparison the taker is more privileged.

This is why communism cannot work. Because humans can be and will be, d****.
09:32pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18329 posts
Well infi, you don't answer my questions either so it's only fair I don't answer yours I guess. However I did mention right at the start that the concept of money being a material thing is outdated. You want me to answer questions based on the concept of wealth being based on a material thing like a piece of paper of a chunk of gold. Of which hold absolutely zero intrinsic value. The value is the concept that a large group of people collectively agree on and share.

So the concept is open to being changed.

By changing the concept, the answers to the questions you ask fundamentally change.
Face it, the concept of wealth that we have now .. is probably at its limits for a global civilization. It worked well for partially connected civilizations with lots of room to grow. Now we are so interconnected and globalized .. it's showing it's cracks.
I don't think it's fixable in it's current form, technology has progressed more than enough to enable a system along the lines that I put forth.
Give it a go infi, dare to dream.


That's OK though, I guess my concept is rather .. grand to put it one way. It takes a certain kind of holistic thinking that perhaps only those with psychotic tendencies can conceptualize. On the flip side, the exact mechanics to make it work are beyond me, you'd have to get those of the autistic nature to get stuck into it. (Imprinted brain theory, awesome theory, totally worth learning about).

However Infi, your thinking seems to be incredibly rigid. (now get defensive at my attack on your character, ignore my words and avoid my questions) So lets keep it simple.


INFI,

How does increasingly amassing wealth, concentrating that wealth into one thing, actually spread productivity and spread the wages and thus spread the wealth to more people? Can you not see the contradiction of that? It cannot work.



09:47pm 21/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38756 posts
^ you guys are all missing Vash's point, which is totally easy to do because he writes 50,000 words about socialism and then throws in a rider like "Hence post scarcity" to justify it all.

The point (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) is that in the event that technology gets us to a post-scarcity economy, words like "equal" basically don't work any more. Anyone can get more or less anything they want, whenever they want. Traditional ideas of privilege and wealth go right out the window. There are no "merchants". There is no "money". ("money is a symptom of poverty" is something of a catchphrase in some sci fi I've read)

The problem is most people have no frame of reference for this, because it's entirely in the realm of science fiction. So traditional defences against the impracticality of socialism/communism fail because it is a complete and total game changer.

(Go read The Culture series if you are interested in exploring the topic in a totally hypothetical framework. Actually go read them anyway because they're f*****g awesome & hilarious. )

Vash, you need to preface every comment you make about socialism with "Of course the following might only be valid in a post-scarcity economy, which maybe we're on the way to but it's too early to tell really, but here's hoping because it would be great to live in a sci fi utopia, but ... [insert stuff about socialism]"
09:54pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18330 posts

I guess it should be noted that money sitting around in a bank isn't necessarily idle, either


I did briefly address that, it wasn't well written. Essentially I postured that the money sitting around being used like this is rather inefficient. It isn't creating productivity directly.

It's inefficient in a similar way that money used by the government is inefficient. It could be argued that the government at least uses the money more directly for productive purposes, it does tend to uses way too much wealth for a similar level of productivity as a private producer though. In this case a service is counted as produce.

I pointed out that borrowed money to create production, must use some of that production to put that borrowed money back into the stagnant pool. It gives it a bit of a wash at least.

It would be much better for that money to not have been borrowed, as the production created from it can be piled directly into new wealth, instead of replenishing, with interest, the wealth of a hoarder.
So having banks is a big part of the whole the rich get richer problem.

If the wealthy continue to get wealthier, then new production must contribute larger and larger portions of the newly created wealth back to the wealthy initiator.

Thus in such a system, fewer and fewer people will amass more and more of the fruits of the labour of the masses. And the masses will have less and less of the wealth of their production.

For some reason, Infi thinks this is a great idea and that the people on street, the ones doing more and more work for less and less... will continue to be OK with it.

That's how revolutions happen, the elite lose touch a bit too much.
09:57pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5148 posts
Toll,
Many people don't want to be poor within the Capitalist system. They'll steal and scam to get out of poverty. Our society still looks down on these people when they have no other choice.
So i think it's okay if the Merchant who wants to take advantage of others, suffers under a Communist system. We want the people who want to improve for themselves & others to rise up from the crowd, not the psychopaths that Capitalism promotes.

Art & science can thrive, the monetary gains no longer applicable. Let the robots cover the rest of the mundane jobs.
10:01pm 21/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38757 posts
So i think it's okay if the Merchant who wants to take advantage of others, suffers under a Communist system.
see this is where you lose people

this is actual communist lunacy
10:06pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5149 posts
Vash, you need to preface every comment you make about socialism with "Of course the following might only be valid in a post-scarcity economy, which maybe we're on the way to but it's too early to tell really, but here's hoping because it would be great to live in a sci fi utopia, but


I don't think it's sci fi, nor utopian. If you look at the rate of technology advancement, the conditions for post scarcity are coming rapidly.
Who would have thought 3D printers would exist today? Or Automation advancing as rapidly as it is?

The main problem though is ensuring the environment is still intact, and climate change doesn't f*** it up. Capitalism is failing extremely badly in this area. People are willing to sacrifice the future of humanity, and the environment, for short term wealth gains.

We need ideas on how to solve these future problems, and honestly i think Socialism>Communism is the ticket. Marx is on the letter with his predictions on how Capitalism would fold out.

Capitalism doesn't have the answers IMO. It relies far too much on economic growth, wealth, individual materialism, etc. All temporary pleasures.
10:09pm 21/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23620 posts
I did briefly address that, it wasn't well written. Essentially I postured that the money sitting around being used like this is rather inefficient. It isn't creating productivity directly.
For some reason, Infi thinks this is a great idea and that the people on street, the ones doing more and more work for less and less... will continue to be OK with it.


saved money, indirectly underwrites other investment activity. Now this could be a bit above your pay grade Toll, but it in fact AMPLIFIES investment because banks lend multiples of deposits held in their vaults via the Fractional Reserve Lending system. Banks require hard currency on their balance sheet to prove their can actually pay a loan that is called in. If the govt induced people to remove their savings from banks due to punitive wealth tax (keep in mind this is what Cyprus did to stop itself from defaulting creating mass panic), there would be a mass contraction of the economy, causing a catastrophic depression never seen before because banks could no longer make loans.

The point (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) is that in the event that technology gets us to a post-scarcity economy, words like "equal" basically don't work any more. Anyone can get more or less anything they want, whenever they want. Traditional ideas of privilege and wealth go right out the window. There are no "merchants". There is no "money". ("money is a symptom of poverty" is something of a catchphrase in some sci fi I've read)


I am going to blow your mind: there will never be a post scarcity economy.

In the future when commodities are plentiful, it will be the things which are not plentiful - elusive - which become valued and traded. Entertainment, creative arts, love and friendship, personal coaching, most personal services (because people enjoy contact with people not robots) anything intangible which cannot be manufactured or created, will have to be obtained by consent in trade.

Furthermore, the concept of a global post-scarcity economy is impossible at this stage of humanity. Capitalism has done a great job lifting the third world from poverty but by post-scarcity standards they are still poor. While developing countries see rich countries with stuff they want, there will be conflict and commodity trade.
10:12pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5150 posts
You're thinking too much in the Capitalist mindset, Infi.
There is an immense amount of resource to go around. This doesn't mean everyone gets a sports car or the latest gadget, It means everyone is able to live a comfortable life.
Capitalism allows for a lavish life for the few. We've been spoiled.
Why are so many people in the West depressed, when they have so much? Materialism is not happiness.
10:16pm 21/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23621 posts
You are obsessed with a utopia written in books Vash but humans are flawed. They won't settle for comfortable, they will always want more.

And finally, the one thing they are not making any more of: land.
10:24pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5151 posts
Humans are taught to want more.
With advertising & the media.
The USA wanted the USSR to see what they had. So the Russians would become extremely jealous, and begin doubting their current Government's control over their lives.
Communism is not about Government. It's about equality and freedom of Government & Media control.

Humans only want the basic necessities, until they are introduced to luxuries.
The basics are family, relationships, water, food, and fun. If anything, Capitalism has caused more problems than it's resolved, just by the creation of an immense amount of luxuries, and it still doesn't make us happy. Why is that?
10:30pm 21/02/17 Permalink
Fade2Black
Brisbane, Queensland
5312 posts
Infi, Toll, Vash I feel like you're all missing a basic component of human nature in this argument.

Humans are competitive. We want to achieve, we want to exceed expectations. We want to beat others. It happens at work, it happens in sport and for some it happens in other ways i.e. having a bigger tv than your mates or a faster car.

2 year olds want to race each other to a tree or swing set. That isn't bashed in to them by the media and advertising.

This will always affect our choices. To me that is another reason why communism won't work. People don't want to all be equal. Some want to be the best and to stand out.
12:12am 22/02/17 Permalink
Fade2Black
Brisbane, Queensland
5313 posts
Toll did u save for a home deposit or for the car you recently bought? That "wealth" wasn't idle.. it was accumulating so you could buy things you wanted but did not immediately have enough for, like most of us.

Secondly if you have debts you may need money you put aside down the track... spend spend spend is not the great advice you think it is, in fact it is irresponsible.
12:16am 22/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5152 posts
This will always affect our choices. To me that is another reason why communism won't work. People don't want to all be equal. Some want to be the best and to stand out.


Communism doesn't limit competition. It merely limits the excess. Noone needs a mansion with 4 sport cars.
But people will still desire to achieve something beyond their peers, to become a great actor or artist. They will become these things even under Communism.
Capitalism isn't this magic system that unlocks the true potential of humans. It only creates jealously among peers, from the lower classes looking at the upper classes, and a sense of hopelessness among the immense amount of people in poverty.
Are the people in the upper classes happier than those who struggle in poverty? Debatable. In my experience of travelling to countries of poverty, they are as equally happy as those with millions in wealth.
12:33am 22/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23622 posts
You just don't get it vash: the grass is always greener on the other side.
12:39am 22/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5153 posts
Oh i do get it.
The rich run the world. They've made us all blind to this.
Guess what the tax rate was during the 1950s in the states?
Tax rate was 90% on earners over $200,000 a year, or, $1.7m in today's dollars.

Funnily enough, that was the golden age of Capitalism.
12:48am 22/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38758 posts
Furthermore, the concept of a global post-scarcity economy is impossible at this stage of humanity.
that's what the "post" is there for
12:52am 22/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2002 posts

To me that is another reason why communism won't work. People don't want to all be equal. Some want to be the best and to stand out.


Can't you be teh best at your commune?

Capitalism is completely cool guys, it is really cool someone can have a trillion dollars.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/23/bill-gates-could-become-the-worlds-first-trillionaire.html
12:57am 22/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25697 posts
that's what the "post" is there for
heh
01:05am 22/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5154 posts




Can't you be teh best at your commune?

Capitalism is completely cool guys, it is really cool someone can have a trillion dollars.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/23/bill-gates-could-become-the-worlds-first-trillionaire.html



He earned it redhat. Completely legitimately! /s
This system allows someone with many millions to turn it into billions with minimal effort. The real wealth earners are the workers. Not those that inherited their wealth from their parents and made investment decisions.
If we nationalised the mines, like OPEC nationalised oil, we would be far better off economically.
01:19am 22/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3202 posts
I'm not so sure human beings are that hard wired for competition, if anything we're hard wired for co-operation. It's how we lifted ourselves out of the food chain.

Gates didn't inherit his money, he made it. Moreover, he's committed to giving away something like 90% of his wealth in his lifetime, and has convinced an impressive bunch of billionaires to give away 50% of theirs. Not to mention The Bill & Melinda Gates foundation is doing pretty amazing work. Couldn't pick a better guy to be our first trillionaire really. Surprised you're not a fan of his Vash.
01:53am 22/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5155 posts
I am a fan of his. But he didn't earn his wealth as it is now. That ended long ago when he created windows.
02:02am 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2357 posts

Can't you be teh best at your commune?

Capitalism is completely cool guys, it is really cool someone can have a trillion dollars.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/23/bill-gates-could-become-the-worlds-first-trillionaire.html
I'm not so sure human beings are that hard wired for competition, if anything we're hard wired for co-operation. It's how we lifted ourselves out of the food chain.


I'd say we are. We are products of evolution which is pretty competitive. It doesn't mean that we can't do co-operation, in fact that smells suspiciously of false dichotomy. Team sports and their insane popularity strike me as an obvious example of co-operation within in a broader framework of competition (but even there you have intrateam competition).

There is interesting work in it called minimal group paradigm. In which it has been demonstrated people will display ingroup bias for groups they belong to which they know are arbitrary (for example group assigned by coin toss).
08:24am 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2358 posts
Last Night in Sweden
The night after that in Sweden.

Oh dear.
09:54am 22/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23623 posts
That's a bit awkward.
10:01am 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2359 posts
They can just stage another photo. That'll show em.

Like how those proud Swedish feminists did this:

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/073C/production/_94625810_26e9776e-8c5e-48d8-b37c-ef6e3d03fd60.jpg

nothing says women's liberation like bravely covering their heads because women should be ashamed of their sexuality. Seems almost ironic that Stockholm is in Sweden now.
10:09am 22/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23624 posts
Ass licking female oppressors is so f*****g cringe-worthy. Who are they trying to impress?
10:15am 22/02/17 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16608 posts
This thread is like tainted saidin.

Every time I visit, I leave feeling itchy and dirty and feral.

But I can't resist. I keep coming back, and keep throwing up after.
12:50pm 22/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25698 posts
That's a bit awkward.

You'd do well to read the whole article. It isn't exactly favourable towards your belief system.
02:48pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2360 posts
Personally I like this bit.

Nevertheless, the integration of immigrants into Swedish society is a problem that the government has been struggling to address. “Sweden, definitely, like other countries, [faces] challenges when it comes to integration of immigrants into Swedish society, with lower levels of employment, tendencies of exclusion and also crime-related problems,” said Henrik Selin, director of intercultural dialogue at the Swedish Institute.


I also like how no one in Sweden knows what Trump is talking about but this is happening.
03:51pm 22/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25701 posts
nothing says women's liberation like bravely covering their heads because women should be ashamed of their sexuality.
These two are an obvious example of people wearing a headscarf completely out of their own agency and religious beliefs. This is a good thing. Why criticise it?

Nevertheless, the integration of immigrants into Swedish society is a problem that the government has been struggling to address. “Sweden, definitely, like other countries, [faces] challenges when it comes to integration of immigrants into Swedish society, with lower levels of employment, tendencies of exclusion and also crime-related problems,” said Henrik Selin, director of intercultural dialogue at the Swedish Institute.
Honest question: why do you believe there is higher instances of crime and poverty amongst minority groups?

Also, how's your best mate Milo doing these days? ;)
04:00pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2361 posts
Milo will probably end up with even more fame out of this.

why do you believe there is higher instances of crime and poverty amongst minority groups?


More to the point why do you think?

My answer would be in culture shock. I'd be interested to hear what you think I think follows from that.

These two are an obvious example of people wearing a headscarf completely out of their own agency and religious beliefs. This is a good thing. Why criticise it?


No that is a self proclaimed feminist submitting to Iranian Islamic Law, Specifically that women should be modest, IE they should be ashamed of their sexuality. That is fundamentally inconsistent with anything I have ever heard a feminist say. They'll have a go a trump though. Such Bravery. They're so free to observe their religious beliefs in Iran the Hijab is legislated.
04:11pm 22/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25702 posts
Milo will probably end up with even more fame out of this.
I'd say the word infamy more applies to your good buddy who speaks about the oppression of sexual consent.

If it's a culture shock then why do the crime and poverty exist in long established minority populations like aboriginals here and African-Americans in the USA? I think underlying racist attitudes play a major part. If they were done away with the problem of minority integration would disappear quickly I think. Which is kind of ironic because it's always the racist people whinging about it completely oblivious to the fact that they're a major contributor to the problem.

Wearing pants while out in public is legislated in Australia. I wear them out of my own free will. My point? Just because something is legislated doesn't make it impossible for people to wear something completely out of their own free will. To suggest every Islamic woman who wears one is doing so out of oppression and shame about their own sexuality is a mistake I reckon. I do acknowledge that Islam is ass f*****g backwards when it comes to women's' rights however. The western world isn't exactly a shining beacon of light for them to aspire to though.
04:24pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2362 posts
I'd say he is going to be just fine. Regardless the point still stands. The Berkley nonsense had exactly the opposite result of its intention.

If it's a culture shock then why do the crime and poverty exist in long established minority populations like aboriginals here and African-Americans in the USA?

I'm sorry if its a culture shock why do non-immigrant demographics have issues? Really?

But good to see you got on the racist boat as quickly as possible.


To suggest every Islamic woman who wears one is doing so out of oppression and shame about their own sexuality is a mistake I reckon.


You're going to have to put some more flesh on the bones of that claim. In what way is it mistaken?

The Islamic law around the hijab comes from an Abrahamic tradition of shame about sexuality generally, and female sexuality especially. A non-muslim feminist has given up all pretense of credibility if they indulge the Iranian Mullahs while taking pot shots at Trump for his misogyny.
04:38pm 22/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23625 posts
Walking around dressed like a piece of meat.
04:50pm 22/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25703 posts
I'm sorry if its a culture shock why do non-immigrant demographics have issues? Really?
This is an example of one of your sentences that I have real trouble parsing. To me culture shock means being taken out of one bucket and being quickly thrown in another. Indigenous populations have been in western populations for quite a while now so I no longer think culture-shock really applies. I think that the racist and superior attitude of the majority population plays a significant part in the crime and poverty rates of minorities due to the feeling of marginalisation those attitudes can foster.

I reckon the Berkeley nonsense worked perfectly. I had never heard of the guy before it happened. I quickly learned that everything he says can be safely ignored though. Again, it would have been nice if the peaceful protests weren't interrupted by the masked agitators (did it ever come out who exactly they were, who they were affiliated with and who the main person was who organised them?) but they sure did shine a spotlight on what is a rather large festering pile of s***.

It's a mistake to assume every woman who wears a headscarf is doing so out of religious oppression because it is really obviously a mistake. You're completely discounting the ability of people to use their own free will to follow their religion, which sometimes includes wearing a piece of material on your head.
04:56pm 22/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23626 posts
You're completely discounting the ability of people to use their own free will to follow their religion, which sometimes includes wearing a piece of material on your head.


You're discounting the compulsory nature of Sharia (which is a way of living), and the isolation a Muslim would be subject to from their family and community if they chose not to follow the Sharia. They may say they are choosing to follow the Sharia - choosing to do something does not negate the fact that it is in the first place mandatory and sexist. Would it be acceptable for a black person to say they choose to use a blacks only toilet/bus/school/diner because they get harassed less that way?
05:02pm 22/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25704 posts
No I'm not. In fact I specifically acknowledged Islam's backwards attitudes towards women you dumb f***.
05:09pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18331 posts

So i think it's okay if the Merchant who wants to take advantage of others, suffers under a Communist system.


Except that wont be what happens. I'm not sure why you think the communist system is impervious to corruption. The merchant that wants to take advantage of others, will do so by entering a position that has privilege and will continuously extend that privilege as much as they can. Then as more people who are like this take such positions, they will likely collude together to further take privilege.

Why on earth do you think these people will just sit idly by?


Now this could be a bit above your pay grade Toll, but it in fact AMPLIFIES investment because banks lend multiples of deposits held in their vaults via the Fractional Reserve Lending system.


Hoho Infi, I'm no stranger to how this works. Interesting that you equate pay-grade to knowledge though, even as an insult it suggests something. Whilst it might seem to 'amplify' investment ... I question that when viewed on a longer time frame. Can it not be considered that it is instead displacing future productivity by taking the wealth of the future for today's 'amplified/accelerated' productivity? In other words future wealth is being used to pay for today's extra productivity that is being created on this fractional wealth.

Similar in idea to how there is a certain number of home buyers, by giving out a home purchase bonus, future home buyers are drawn into the market today. Creating 'amplified' housing productivity, hooray! look at all the extra work!. Except a year later there is a significant drop in the amount of home buyers as they were pulled out of that time frame into an earlier one by the housing grant money.
You could keep this system up for a while, pulling more and more future home buyers into today's market, amplifying it greatly .. at the cost of the future housing market. But f*** who cares, that's someone else's problem or a problem for another day. I got mine (until I don't!).

Or is this high level conceptualisation a little above your intellectual grade Infi? You might have to flex your highly rigid, conservative (but hey, probably contentious, we need people like you to keep the status quo from radicals like me doing stupid s***) thinking a little now.

You still haven't answered:

How does increasingly amassing wealth, concentrating that wealth into one thing, actually spread productivity and spread the wages and thus spread the wealth to more people? Can you not see the contradiction of that?


last edited by Tollaz0r! at 17:11:43 22/Feb/17
05:10pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18332 posts
Fade-2-Black,

Your statement seems to suggest you believe all humans are competitive by nature. That isn't necessarily true at all. There are certainly people who are more competitive than others, and there are people who are far more cooperative than others.

Not everyone thinks the same, it can be widely different.


2 year olds want to race each other to a tree or swing set. That isn't bashed in to them by the media and advertising.


Yet 2 year olds may also give up their swing to let someone else have a turn. They give up the win? That's not very competitive.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 17:15:56 22/Feb/17
05:13pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2363 posts
To me culture shock means being taken out of one bucket and being quickly thrown in another.


You mean like a recent immigrant might experience?

Indigenous populations have a distinct set of issues, hence obviously culture shock does not apply to them. Which makes offering them as a counter example to recent immigrant crime rates something of a non-sequitur.

And if I may make an observation, the conflation of different groups into the catch all of "minorities" and the dominant culture causes all their woes is about as shallow analysis as you're likely to find. And it governs a great deal of conversation around the immigration debate. It is a near farcical strawman. It also nearly guarantees that specific issues with specific solutions will remain unaddressed.

But I can offer an example in Australia of why culture shock might be the place to look (for immigrants). The initial wave of Vietnamese immigration was met with a significant amount of law enforcement issues. This is a matter of public record.

The Vietnamese community has by and large integrated now in Victoria.

It's a mistake to assume every woman who wears a headscarf is doing so out of religious oppression because it is really obviously a mistake. You're completely discounting the ability of people to use their own free will to follow their religion, which sometimes includes wearing a piece of material on your head.


I'm not, but further I fail to see how religious conviction on the issue is grounds for improvement.

Your argument is as follows so far as I read it.

ME: Islam dictates headwear for women for plainly sexist reasons.
YOU: You're not taking account of all the women who genuinely believe the plainly sexist reasons.
05:16pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18333 posts

Why are so many people in the West depressed, when they have so much? Materialism is not happiness.


It very likely has nothing to do with materialism and much, much more to do with fractured communities. More and more people live in social isolation from a larger community in a physical sense. The village type living, where the support and raising of children is spread across the village and across the ages. Both vertically and horizontally, each member of the village is more interconnected with other members. The village is a whole community. Not a fractured city that we have.

This loss of emotional support and connection is likely a considerable impacting factor for mental illness.

For an individual, self-isolation is often a massive impacting factor for their mental health. The more they isolate, the worse it can get. I know, I've done it.

You can be materialistic and be part of a community.
05:19pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18334 posts

We are products of evolution which is pretty competitive.


That's a narrow way to view it. If you consider the entire ecosystem of the planet as single entity, then each interconnecting piece of it is part of the whole. It's not competing against anything, it is just constantly changing. The concept of competition is a human construct, we apply it to animals, to evolution, etc. To compete is to have intent to win. Does an animal have the intent to win, or just the intent to exist? I'd argue it's more intent just to exist the only way that it knows how. It's not really competing at all.
05:26pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18335 posts

nothing says women's liberation like bravely covering their heads because women should be ashamed of their sexuality. Seems almost ironic that Stockholm is in Sweden now.


Or is it an expression of wearing what they want to wear without giving a s*** of what you think about their sexuality?
Why do you believe that showing skin equates to sexuality for everyone? Have you met these two women? How do you know if they are ashamed of their sexuality or not? Because of the clothes they choose to wear? That's kind of the same thing as saying a women is inviting rape by wearing a mini-skirt...
05:28pm 22/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25705 posts
The original question I asked is "why do you believe there is higher instances of crime and poverty amongst minority groups?". Not about the recent immigration crime rates. There was no conflation.

But I can understand how you made the mistake so that's okay. I agree, culture-shock is a strong contributing factor to recent immigrant violence. I don't think it's a shallow observation to say that if a large section of the population were a bit more tolerant and patient that the problems would be lessened in these cases also.

What about the women who are either ignorant of the original sexist reasons or the ones who dismiss them and simply wear the scarf to express their religious beliefs? Or that they feel comfortable in it? Or who wear it purely out of tradition or habit? Or any of the other myriad of reasons women may choose to wear the scarf?
05:29pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18336 posts

My answer would be in culture shock. I'd be interested to hear what you think I think follows from that.


PornoPete. Do you know much about Oxytocin and the relatively recent research into what it seems to do?
It's delicious. It's a molecule that many people have heard of as the 'love molecule'. How it helps bond people together and inspire cooperative behaviour.

They rarely know about the darker side of it. That the very same molecule seems to cause bound groups to see outsiders as threats and seems to increase hostility towards them.

The love molecule, is also the hate molecule. There is a little something about Yin/Yang in that. To 'love' more is to also 'hate' more.
To have a tight knit group, is to view others as danger to the group.

So not so much 'culture shock' but just the group level behaviour of an individual level mechanism.

It would lend to the idea of an oscillating acceptance/denial type of behaviour/thinking.
It partially explains why increasing nationalism tends to lead towards war..

05:35pm 22/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12621 posts
If the head covering isnt Oppression then why cant they sometimes not wear it ?

I saw a Muslim couple yesterday, the Woman had on the tent with peep holes at the eyes on a hot day, The kids were wearing normal clothes the Husband was wearing Jeans and casual shirt sporty joggers.

That is treating Women as being less than the Man.
Why doesnt the Man were the kooky clothing ?
Why dont the young boys get forced to marry old Women ?
Why arent the Men forced to walk seven steps behind the Woman ?

There is something wrong with you if you dont see that as Misogyny.
In this Country we treat Women as Equals.
05:41pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2364 posts
I don't think it's a shallow observation to say that if a large section of the population were a bit more tolerant and patient that the problems would be lessened in these cases also.


I disagree. There probably is ground to be made in tolerance. However, I notice someone like warren mundine for example (noel pearson sorry), has very little time for that sort of thing.

I think it is naive at best and erring toward patronizing racism at worst to suggest that if we were all a bit more tolerant societies issues will just go away.

Another example from the long established category which cuts against the "we just need a little more tolerance" brigade, is Asian Americans. On any conceivable metric they are ripping it up in the states. It is also impossible to claim they didn't find mind blowing prejudice when they first started arriving en masse.

As it relates to Sweden, it seems beyond question to me they took too many too quickly and are now jumping from policy joke to policy joke to try and catch up. No one is particularly well served by this least of all the refugees themselves.


What about the women who are either ignorant of the original sexist reasons or the ones who dismiss them and simply wear the scarf to express their religious beliefs? Or that they feel comfortable in it? Or who wear it purely out of tradition or habit? Or any of the other myriad of reasons women may choose to wear the scarf?


What about them? seems to me that ignorance of the original reasons has more in common with oppression than freedom.

And the people who dismiss with them but wear it anyway to express their religious beliefs?

Can you explain what you mean there? I don't understand how you can dismiss the doctrine of a religion and use the doctrinal requirements of the religion to express your faith in the religion at the same time.

None of this is relevant to the point of the Swedish female ministry I might add. We can come back to that, I think we are on to something here.
05:43pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18337 posts

You're discounting the compulsory nature of Sharia (which is a way of living), and the isolation a Muslim would be subject to from their family and community if they chose not to follow the Sharia.


Yeah, it's like how All Christians strictly follow the Bible without any self interpretation at all. I mean I see that alllllll the time.

Wait .. no f***, no I don't. I see a rather large variety of christian groups, each interpreting things a bit differently, and each individual in those various groups having their own spin on it. Oh and the degree of each individual about how devout they are kind of differs... significantly.

Why the f*** do you think people who follow the Muslim faith are any different? How much time have you actually spent talking and observing people?
05:47pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18338 posts

Indigenous populations have a distinct set of issues, hence obviously culture shock does not apply to them.


Wait what? How does it not?

Culture shock isn't just on an individual scale, it is cross-generational. Just like in an individual the degree of shock varies and the way the individual and/or culture deals with that can be vastly different.
05:49pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18339 posts

There is something wrong with you if you dont see that as Misogyny.
In this Country we treat Women as Equals.


The delicious irony. What makes you believe you can do the thinking of that woman you witnessed?
How do you know she doesn't choose to wear what she wears out of her free will? That she may be free to not wear it, but has a deep spiritual connection to wearing it.

Who the f*** are you to decide how she should think, and how she should be dressed? If I was a feminist, I'd accuse your thoughts here a product of a patriarchal system. That you have a deep subconscious belief that because you are a male, you can decide how a woman should think.

But I'm not, and I think instead you just think everyone thinks how you think.


What about them? seems to me that ignorance of the original reasons has more in common with oppression than freedom.


Or it is seen as a way to take back power. To own the choice to wear it or not, has one wants to wear it, for their own reasons they want to wear it. Not simply not wearing because of what others think of it.



I don't understand how you can dismiss the doctrine of a religion and use the doctrinal requirements of the religion to express your faith in the religion at the same time.


Because most people don't have black and white thinking and can operate in a grey area. Changing and adapting the way they think over time, for a seemingly infinite variety of reasons.

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 18:00:06 22/Feb/17
05:56pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4591 posts
I'm willing to at least entertain Milo's excuse that his apparent advocacy of man-boy love as a gay rite of passage was in fact dry (or "gallows") humour to cope with his own suffering, and was taken out of context

this is because I see Milo as a comedian and not a serious conservative intellectual, and I'll admit I have found _some_ of his outrageous remarks very amusing

if he expects to move in those circles though he will have to be a lot more circumspect in his statements, to the extent of being almost completely different
05:56pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2365 posts
Culture shock in the context I'm speaking of Toll.

But dispossession and the wholesale ripping up of their societal institutions probably play a strong role, and this is not something a immigrant has any reasonable expectation of. In fact often immigration happens explicitly to leave a set of societal institutions.
05:58pm 22/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25706 posts
I never said it would make them go away. (edit: actually I kind of did. My bad. I might have been a bit hasty in saying they'd disappear) I said it would lessen them. All it takes to lessen this violence and poverty is for people to stop being racist. How hard is it to not be racist? It's a source of great frustration to me. I really don't get it. It just seems so f*****g simple yet it's a problem that has existed for centuries and will sadly probably continue to exist forever. It's why you see me bring it up so much, and why I guess I can be a bit of a c*** to people who are racist (just one person on here). Obviously it only seems simple. The reasons people are racist are many, but put them in the pot and boil it for a while and all that's left is ignorance. Somehow that needs to be overcome.

I'm mentioning them because you're dismissing them completely and seem to be saying that literally every woman who wears the scarf is doing so out of oppression. A girl grows up in a Muslim household. Her mother wears the scarf. She loves her mother, and coupled with her devout faith, feels compelled to wear the scarf. She may have heard of how the original implementation of it was sexist and not give a f***. She may not have heard of it at all. The point is she is doing so out of tradition and religion. That scenario I described would not be uncommon. Whether it's as common as oppression scarves is highly debatable. If you saw the person I described in a social situation and suggested to her that she is wearing the scarf out of oppression you've just faux pas'ed rather majorly and I hope you'd feel at least slightly embarrassed.
05:59pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18340 posts

In fact often immigration happens explicitly to leave a set of societal institutions.


Is this actually a fact? Or is it an attempt to gain authority by simply saying it's a fact, based on your observations. Trump style?

I mean I'm pretty sure a lot of immigrants coming to Australia a few hundred years back were chasing potential fortunes.

As infi put it elsehwere. The grass is greener on the other side.

Is there actually quantifiable information that shows the primary reasons for immigration? I would argue that a person who is immigrating is probably doing it based on a variety of complicated reasons. Sometimes though, fleeing a war zone is a good single reason, although I bet there are other reasons that go with that too.
06:03pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18341 posts

How hard is it to not be racist? It's a source of great frustration to me. I really don't get it.


Because it isn't as simple as it seems.

How ingrained are you into the culture of a specific group fpot? Would you call yourself a highly social, extroverted person within a specified group? Or are you more aloof and less connected to a specific group more of an outsider?

06:05pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18342 posts
Also, before I leave for home. I can't resist.


In this Country we treat Women as Equals.


No we f*****g don't. In case you haven't noticed, there is a rather large social movement specifically trying to address this. Again the irony of accusing a society for not treating women equally whilst preaching from a high horse about how equal your own society treats them .. when it actually doesn't. Instead it's more about how one society treats their women different from another rather than a statement of equality.
06:12pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2366 posts
It just seems so f*****g simple yet it's a problem that has existed for centuries and will sadly probably continue to exist forever.


Yeah but if it is a problem that hasn't been solved in centuries, surely this means that the simply explanation probably isn't right? The pope does little other than call for tolerance.

I am all for the simplest solution, but the solution should as simple as it can, and no simpler if that makes sense.

The point is she is doing so out of tradition and religion.


You are describing archetypal religious oppression fpot surely you can see that? and frankly an utterly bizarre comment for someone like you to make. It is essentially an argument from status quo. And one you simply would not accept in any other context.

But moreover, if the woman then claimed to be a feminist, I would have no hesitation whatsoever in pointing out the obvious contradiction.
06:24pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18343 posts
Porno, you didn't address my comment:


Or is it an expression of wearing what they want to wear without giving a s*** of what you think about their sexuality?
Why do you believe that showing skin equates to sexuality for everyone? Have you met these two women? How do you know if they are ashamed of their sexuality or not? Because of the clothes they choose to wear? That's kind of the same thing as saying a women is inviting rape by wearing a mini-skirt...
06:26pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2367 posts
I mean I'm pretty sure a lot of immigrants coming to Australia a few hundred years back were chasing potential fortunes.


You mean fortunes they were institutionally excluded from?

It is certainly why I left Australia for the first time, and leaving in a house full of immigrants (I was the only Australian) in London, that was the reason they all left as well.

as far as refugees go, that is explicitly, as in the convention states, why they leave, to escape oppressive societal institutions.
06:31pm 22/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25707 posts
Well I did say a couple of sentences later that it isn't simple at all and only seems that way.

But if she chooses to wear it out of her own free will and feels comfortable wearing it where is the oppression? If she is aware of the sexist origins of the scarf but doesn't care then how are they relevant? If she is unaware of the sexist origins I guess that could be bad. She might not be too happy when she does find out but if she's then able to stop wearing the scarf and renounce what is the problem? Perhaps it wasn't clear, but in the situation I described not wearing the scarf is an option. Unless you're suggesting that every Muslim household contains sociopaths that will disavow someone for not fully conforming to the Islamic faith.
06:35pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18344 posts

You mean fortunes they were institutionally excluded from?


Not nessesailry at all.

I could chose a job where I think I will get paid well, or I could choose a different job that I think may pay better. Which one would I take? Am I choosing the job that pays better because I'm institutionally excluded from the other? Or is it simply that I don't rate the lower paying job as worth it because look at this other one?

Apply the same thinking to looking for your fortune. If I get the impression that moving to Australia can give me a chance of striking a sweet gold mine and get me rich real quick with relatively little work.. f*** yeah! Or I could stay here, were the risk is lower but I'll probably not earn as much for the amount of work I put in ..

That's not really about exclusion from the institution. In a way, it's taking the institution with you.
06:36pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2368 posts
Or is it an expression of wearing what they want to wear without giving a s*** of what you think about their sexuality?
Why do you believe that showing skin equates to sexuality for everyone? Have you met these two women? How do you know if they are ashamed of their sexuality or not? Because of the clothes they choose to wear?


I didn't really read your comment, and to be honest it seems to betray a fundamental misunderstanding of my comment. I want you to go back look at the picture, note the flags, then have a think about your comment.

That's kind of the same thing as saying a women is inviting rape by wearing a mini-skirt...


Oh yes how exactly?
06:37pm 22/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23627 posts
No I'm not. In fact I specifically acknowledged Islam's backwards attitudes towards women you dumb f***.


so it's a backwards religion, yet it's ok for a girl to be brought up in this normalised situation where they must cover up for modesty (not to mention endure all sorts of other subjugation of individual liberties - but they get to keep their name because they're a proud independent Muslim woman) and they are thus brainwashed so they say it is voluntary. lol, you are falling over yourself, sorry.

How does increasingly amassing wealth, concentrating that wealth into one thing, actually spread productivity and spread the wages and thus spread the wealth to more people? Can you not see the contradiction of that?


it allows large scale research, development, production and distribution which individuals cannot achieve. this is so f*****g basic i don't even. the profit motive drives on this innovatiion and urgency. Bill Gates' wealth is not stored in a mattress, it is stored in a going concern behemoth.
06:44pm 22/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25708 posts
You talk about people being brainwashed yet you talk about Trump like he is some sort of business god and he is winning hard and a total baller and my god you're a dumb f***.
06:48pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2369 posts
If she is aware of the sexist origins of the scarf but doesn't care then how are they relevant?


I'm sorry but I am really not following you here at all. the scarf as an expression of faith in Islam exists because of Islamic doctrine. how are they not relevant? It is an explicit statement you either accept them [Doctrinal requirements] or don't care enough to repudiate them, which is implicit acceptance.

I simply fail to understand how you can simultaneously take something which is an expression of faith due to sexist doctrine, use it to express your faith, and dismiss the doctrine which makes it an expression of faith.

that is an utter non-sequitur.
06:51pm 22/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23629 posts
You talk about people being brainwashed yet you talk about Trump like he is some sort of business god and he is winning hard and a total baller and my god you're a dumb f***.


speaking of which he just passed an Executive Order to detain and deport undocumented migrants immediately. ITS F*****G HAPPENING, this guy is f*****g playing 4D Chess.
06:51pm 22/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25709 posts
If she has decided to wear the scarf out of comfort and tradition how is it relevant that the original religious doctrine regarding the scarf was sexist in nature? I actually agree with you in regards to someone calling themselves a feminist while wearing one. Then it's bad to ignore the religious doctrine. But just a regular run of the mill person, wearing it because, hey, just feels right to them. They've got every right to ignore it. Same way many people ignore the whole Australia Day/Invasion Day thing. Imagine that, having a big celebration on the day the genocide began. Not a religious thing but certainly in the same ball park. Point I'm trying to make is that history and original intentions are often ignored in favour of adhering to tradition. Not that uncommon across any demographic. Muslim dress seems to attract an undue amount of attention imo.
07:13pm 22/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12622 posts
What makes you believe you can do the thinking of that woman you witnessed?


If its not Oppression, why cant they sometime go out without it ?
Im pretty sure you would think differently if you had to wear that thing.

No Woman unfortunate enough to be trapped in that Religion is going to say they dont want to wear it because that often leads to Acid being throw in their face or their Fathers murdering them or their Husbands beating them because thats ok under Radical Islam.

Idiots like you are contributing to the problem of Radical Islam in The West because you run around demanding we dilute our Liberal Democracies so we can embrace stupid s*** from 1000 years ago.

Go back to your Safe Zone.



last edited by FaceMan at 19:14:53 22/Feb/17
07:13pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2370 posts
If she has decided to wear the scarf out of comfort and tradition how is it relevant that the original religious doctrine regarding the scarf was sexist in nature?


Is this woman wearing it as an expression of faith?

Because if she is you can not divorce the reasons for it being an expression of faith from wearing it, and still call it an expression of faith.

That is like someone saying I wear a crucifix to express my faith in jesus but I don't believe jesus died on a cross. That makes no sense whatsoever.


Same way many people ignore the whole Australia Day/Invasion Day thing. Imagine that, having a big celebration on the day the genocide began. Not a religious thing but certainly in the same ball park.


I am sympathetic to that view, but I don't think it is a valid analogy. the first fleet arrival did not turn up with the explicit goal of genocide for one. But also no-one makes the claim that celebrating Australia day makes you Australian. Or at least I have never met someone who has.

Just to keep the context in frame again.

I actually agree with you in regards to someone calling themselves a feminist while wearing one.


and for what is worth I'm inclined to agree with you here. and if I you'll recall I was explicitly talking about non-muslims.
Muslim dress seems to attract an undue amount of attention imo.
07:32pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18345 posts

Because if she is you can not divorce the reasons for it being an expression of faith from wearing it, and still call it an expression of faith.


Yes. Yes she can.

In case you haven't noticed. Religious practices tend to change over time. It's kind of how anything human and cultural works.
Do you think these changes because everyone rigidly sticks to the faith without question, without wavering, without any tiny bit of modification at all?

I don't think you think that, so why can't you allow yourself to think a person can alter their perception of how a garb is used and what it means in religious practice?
07:51pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2371 posts
Yes. Yes she can.


How?

Explain to me how an expression of faith in a religion, can remain an expression of faith, while rejecting the reason it is an expression of faith.

It would be like praying and saying nobody is listening. The empty prayer ceases to be an expression of faith in those circumstances.

Or a jew wearing a yamaka while stating actually the yamaka doesn't remind me there is something above me. Then it's just a hat.
07:56pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18346 posts

I didn't really read your comment, and to be honest it seems to betray a fundamental misunderstanding of my comment. I want you to go back look at the picture, note the flags, then have a think about your comment.


I did. I noticed to seemingly well adjusted women, signing some rather important looking paper work with the background of important looking flags. I also noticed the clothing on the person to our right was rather ornate. I'm not a big fan of the black though, but that's my opinion. I do find the scarf on the woman on our left to be elegantly draped and positioned to reveal well groomed hair who's colour and style, in my opinion, seemed to match the rest of the outfit rather well. Also, if I must be honest, I see it as a little sexy. I can't say the same as what the woman on the right is wearing. However that is my opinion and I have no idea how these women feel or regard their outfits.

Ironically, I see it as you who is missing the point of my comment in relation to yours and how it challenges your point of view as being rather single minded and failing to take into account the perceptions and beliefs of the people wearing. Instead you are projecting your beliefs and perceptions of this situation onto these people and taking it as a fact that they must be living the situation that you perceive.

Did I miss something?
08:09pm 22/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38759 posts
Idiots like you are contributing to the problem of Radical Islam in The West because you run around demanding we dilute our Liberal Democracies so we can embrace stupid s*** from 1000 years ago.
Ah, libertarians

What they all really want to say is religion is bats*** crazy, but none of them have the balls to do it - especially in the US - because it would imply that the white Christians that they depend on so heavily to make up their frothy base are too

Boring topic but thought experiments:

- What crazy s*** do Catholic women do totally voluntarily as a demonstration of their faith despite the negative effect on their lives? Is that them being free, or are they slaves too?
- Remember that "sectarian violence" is the biggest killer of Muslims, and it's basically them disagreeing on finer points of theology. There's s***loads of room for interpretation in why people wear scarves. All based on woo, obvy.
08:15pm 22/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23630 posts
What crazy s*** do Catholic women do totally voluntarily as a demonstration of their faith despite the negative effect on their lives? Is that them being free, or are they slaves too?


biggest one is anti-abortion.

Remember that "sectarian violence" is the biggest killer of Muslims, and it's basically them disagreeing on finer points of theology. There's s***loads of room for interpretation in why people wear scarves. All based on woo, obvy.


Islam advocates war against anyone who is an unbeliever. Moderate Muslims do not observe this aka The Religion of Peace; Islamists and Radicals consider non-Muslims and also Muslims of the other sect to be the enemy and subject to either conversion, taxation or death.
08:25pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40442 posts
the Husband was wearing Jeans and casual shirt sporty joggers.


sneans
08:26pm 22/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23631 posts
front bar operator
08:27pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2372 posts
I did


No you didn't.

You said cultural institutions change over time. Which is a different question.

Well done with the photo you've managed to look but not see. Carry on.

Lets shift to a religion you aren't so intent on defending.

Explain to me how wearing a crucifix, which is an article of faith because it depicts Jesus on the cross, can remain an expression of faith if you reject the idea Jesus died on the cross.

It is not possible to be a Christian and reject that item of faith. Believing Jesus died on the cross is a barrier to entry.

Boring topic but thought experiments:


You sure do like to post on topics you find boring.

In answer to your question, I didn't claim that Muslim women were slaves, I said the doctrines of Islam are oppressive toward them. I don't see the relevance of catholic women engaging in oppressive doctrine.

in answer to your second question, the fact that the doctrine has bifurcated doesn't undermine my point.
08:29pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18347 posts
That's kind of the same thing as saying a women is inviting rape by wearing a mini-skirt...


Oh yes how exactly?


Well if you look at the context of the paragraph that you cherry picked sentence from and compare it with the comment you made you may be able to make the connection.

You have decided that these women are ashamed of the sexuality because of what they wear. You have decided that these women are wearing cloths that cause them harm, that by wearing them they have contributed to the harm you perceive being done to them.

Now lets build a quick little substitution bridge a little here:

You have deiced that because they are wearing miniskirts they are contributing to a situation of overtly displaying their sexuality in a way that causes a person of ill repute to take advantage of the miniskirt wearing woman through physical means.

And now we can easily compare:

You have decided that these women are overtly showing their sexuality because of what they wear. You have decided that these women are wearing cloths that cause them harm, that by wearing them they have contributed to the harm you perceive being done to them.

So yeah. How can you not see that? lol
08:30pm 22/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23632 posts
You have decided that these women are overtly showing their sexuality because of what they wear. You have decided that these women are wearing cloths that cause them harm, that by wearing them they have contributed to the harm you perceive being done to them.


Muslim women are educated from birth about the expectations of Sharia, and normalised from an early age to cover up. Your analogy is inapplicable, except in the case of child grooming and molestation which is an inconvenient example.
08:34pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18348 posts

This thread is like tainted saidin.

Every time I visit, I leave feeling itchy and dirty and feral.

But I can't resist. I keep coming back, and keep throwing up after.


Hogfather, you f*****g win the thread!
08:47pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2373 posts
You have decided that these women are ashamed of the sexuality because of what they wear. You have decided that these women are wearing cloths that cause them harm, that by wearing them they have contributed to the harm you perceive being done to them.


Are you intentionally misreading me?

I have said that the reason the head wear is an article of faith is based in an Abrahamic tradition that women should be ashamed of their sexuality. I have never heard a justification from doctrine beyond modesty for wearing it.

The doctrinal reason for it to be an article of faith is that women should be ashamed of the sexuality. If you don't believe that, wearing it ceases to be expression of faith.

You cannot point to how you disagree with Islamic doctrine to demonstrate how much you believe in it. That makes absolutely no sense.


You have deiced that because they are wearing miniskirts they are contributing to a situation of overtly displaying their sexuality in a way that causes a person of ill repute to take advantage of the miniskirt wearing woman through physical means.
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/p__/images/9/98/Scarecrow.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20131003194205&amp;path-prefix=protagonist
08:50pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18349 posts

Explain to me how wearing a crucifix, which is an article of faith because it depicts Jesus on the cross, can remain an expression of faith if you reject the idea Jesus died on the cross.


Jesus, being the son of God is not flesh and blood like Man, Jesus is still God. Therefor he didn't actually die on the cross, as God cannot die. His body died, buy God carried on, hence why there was a miraculous resurrection. The crucifix combined with this understanding represents the holy trinity of God. The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit. Each of these are God, they are not separate.
This is part of the reason Jesus did not die on the cross, merely his body.

That was easy and on the spot, try again.

I can spin this s*** for days.
08:52pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18350 posts
F*** off porno. You are saying that these women believe they should be ashamed of their sexuality and that they contribute to this harm to themselves because they continue to wear the clothing.

You are so presumptuous in your grand standing that you dare to say that you know what these people are thinking and believing regarding their choice in clothing an their perception in their own spiritual identity.

You continuously fail to accept that perhaps people can choose to wear this type of clothing willfully and happily. That their sense of sexuality is not disturbed by it in any way. That's a massive fail of mentalizing, are you slightly autistic?

Here is a hint: I've spoken directly to a couple of people that wear this type of clothing because I was curious of their situation and I, in my embarrassment, had similar thinking that you currently have. That the clothing is nothing but a representation of their oppression and that they shouldn't wear it.

Oh, how wrong I was!

But please, do go on about how you presume to know so much about the inner workings of these other people and what drives them to wear the cloths they choose.
09:00pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2374 posts
So some serious ignorance of christian theology going on there.

You really didn't explain it.

You are saying that these women believe they should be ashamed of their sexuality


I'm really not.
09:01pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3203 posts
Sure, we evolved out of natural selection / competition, but a massive element of that was our ability to co-operate in order to survive. Lone or very small groups of humans died, only the humans that co-operated in large groups survived and prospered. Moreover, it's that fundamental co-operation, with competition, that has enabled us to achieve the civilisation we have now.

Human beings' first instinct isn't to kill or win (incidentally we didn't evolve any anatomy that lends well to fighting, like claws or armour), it's to connect with other humans, to belong. However it's true that once in a large enough group, our desire to cooperate with 'other' groups disappears and is replaced with competition. There's a pretty interesting dichotomy going on there between competition and co-operation, and I don't think it's a false one. How much of it is culture as opposed to nature?

Another great vid from the RSA discusses it nicely:



Milo is an entertainer, he'll say or do anything to generate more sales. I mean that's the problem with a lot of the punditry these days, they're just entertainers appealing to their chosen market.
09:09pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18351 posts

Muslim women are educated from birth about the expectations of Sharia, and normalised from an early age to cover up. Your analogy is inapplicable


Because women in our western culture aren't educated from birth through massive multi-media and social bombardment and being normalised to not cover up?

Don't get me wrong, Christianity does it's fair share s*** to smash the sexuality of women, much more than men. Similar to Islam. IT's funny how you are totally against one form of that because it's Islam, but you don't mention about the Christian sexual shaming which is actually a problem too. Why is that? How come you haven't brought that up at all? Why aren't you parading around saying how messed up Christianity is by shaming women into believe that having sex whilst menstruating is dirty and sinful?
How come you aren't attacking the absurdity of the Christian teachings that a women is to serve the man and attend to his needs?
I don't see you contentiously bringing up how nuns wear their religious garb and how that is just repressing their sexuality. Nor do I see you attacking the christian institution for having a significantly higher rate of sexual assault on children than any other institute in the country, including f*****g Islam.

So please, do go on about how evil and bad Islam is because they do something that you don't understand.
09:10pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18352 posts


So some serious ignorance of christian theology going on there.


Please, explain how it's ignorant? It significantly depends on which denomination you prescribe to, but obviously you are vastly aware of this and quite happy to throw off a comment about how much more knowledge you obviously have, yet not bother to explain it at all.


I'm really not.


But you are. You are saying that their garb is inherently linked to the oppression of women by hiding their womanly bodily form from the eyes of men. So that the men aren't tempted by the form of the woman.

You know that's the reason why they were it right? It's so men don't get horny as they are seen to not be able control themselves when they see a pretty woman. The garb is more about repressing men's sexuality than women's. Men are also instructed to dress appropriately so as to not unduly arouse a woman. Islam actually gives more acknowledgment to women being able to control their urges better, so that men don't have to cover up as much.

That's the actual religious reason.


Also, in case you missed the point. Western culture does the same thing, women are expected to dress in a non-provocative way in various social situations. At what point is it OK to instruct a woman in what she can wear in order to reduce provocation to when it's NO OK to instruct them. How come it's NOT OK for islam, but it's OK for western culture? Is it because western culture are still allowed to show some skin or something?

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 21:23:21 22/Feb/17
09:13pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5156 posts
Not long ago, Australian women were educated from birth about the expectations of them from society, and normalised from an early age to cover up. They were, and still are, paid less than men for equivalent roles, and basically their role was to be the house wife and bear children. Oh and they couldn't vote either.

Cultures evolve. They will break out of it in time, and i think taking more refugees would help that happen faster, as they are exposed to how women live in the west.

Child grooming & molestation is a horrid practice and needs to be stopped, but this certainly isn't isolated to Islam. Happens all over Africa.

The right just love hating on Islam probably because the left try to defend them from the utter dummies that show up after a terrorist attack. Hence, the #illridewithyou campaign.
Why should the majority of Muslims be punished for the actions of an extreme minority?
09:14pm 22/02/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7577 posts
Marie le pen exercises her right to refuse to submit to Mohammed's ideology.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/02/21/frances-le-pen-refuses-wear-headscarf-meeting-lebanons-grand-mufti
09:38pm 22/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38760 posts
Heh, Le Pen is such a troll

(sentence crafted for maximum English viewing snickering)
09:59pm 22/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2375 posts
You know that's the reason why they were it right? It's so men don't get horny as they are seen to not be able control themselves when they see a pretty woman. The garb is more about repressing men's sexuality than women's. Men are also instructed to dress appropriately so as to not unduly arouse a woman. Islam actually gives more acknowledgment to women being able to control their urges better, so that men don't have to cover up as much.
gee you sure showed me
10:01pm 22/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38761 posts
I don't see you contentiously bringing up how nuns wear their religious garb and how that is just repressing their sexuality.
plz don't forget the amish

everyone always forgets the amish
10:08pm 22/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23633 posts
it's all brainwashing, they don't have the gall to call it a feminist religion.
10:20pm 22/02/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7578 posts
Trog, all cult leaders are the biggest trolls in history. Old mate Mo' was a very skilled charlatan.

Anyways modern society doesn't need these silly god delusions anymore.
10:33pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2003 posts
How about Milo hey?

TFW muh free speach gets you fired from your dream brietbart jewb.

TFW when your free speach is endorsing pedo.
10:41pm 22/02/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4592 posts
whether or not Milo was being ironic or deadpan (as he claims) when making the man-boy love remark has little importance

all things considered, I highly doubt Milo has a sincere conviction that child abuse is an awesome thing - regardless, the backlash he got was completely justified

if the steaming pile of yesterday's turds that is American conservatism is even worth saving, then not having a troll, comedian, and self-hating gay Catholic addressing the likes of CPAC is probably a good start
11:00pm 22/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38762 posts
I'd love to know how much Brietbarts ad dollars have declined since the Sleeping Giants movement started. I would like to think that they are feeling the pinch and more of them will be on the chopping block soon.
12:09am 23/02/17 Permalink
Fade2Black
Brisbane, Queensland
5314 posts
Toll don't be dense. I said people are competitive. Not all people. Point being not everyone wants to be considered the same or equal. Some want to stand out.

Those people would struggle or reject communism... surely.
07:17am 23/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2004 posts
10:17am 23/02/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4593 posts
Fairfax, with videos this nice, you have to press pause twice
10:50am 23/02/17 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
1055 posts
They were, and still are, paid less than men for equivalent roles, and basically their role was to be the house wife and bear children. Oh and they couldn't vote either.


Gender wage gap nonsense from Vash.

And the not voting thing? Yes, there was a gap of about 40 to 50 years where all Australian (white) men had the vote in their individual States. That happened in the 1850's. Starting from around 1895 women were given the vote in some States. In 1901, the first elections after Federation, the federal voting used State eligibility requirements so women in S.A. for example could vote, but in most States they couldn't. However in 1902 (white) women were given the full franchise federally and a few years later the few States that still didn't give women the franchise at a State level followed suit.

In 1920 women were allowed to be members of parliament.

Before the 1850's there were some men who were allowed to vote but they there with wealth barriers. Like they had to have a certain amount of property and income (initially 200 pounds or something which was a lot back then).

And the thing is, there's not a single woman alive today in Australia who was denied the vote because of her gender. Race? Sure. Especially if she was indigenous, but the same applied to indigenous men too.

There's not even a single woman alive today who was ineligible to stand for Parliament on the basis of her sex.

The period of women's suffrage has more than doubled the period where men had suffrage and women didn't.

Maybe its time to move on with that argument?
11:47am 23/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5157 posts
Rukh, notice that I said not long ago? Islam will evolve in time,just as our society did from conservative Christian influences.
12:56pm 23/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12623 posts
Muslim leader Keysar Trad says an angry husband can beat his wife but should use his fists as 'a last resort' after trying to win her over with chocolates and flowers - to Andrew Bolt's disbelief


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4248716/Muslim-leader-Keysar-Trad-says-wife-beating-resort.html#ixzz4ZT9zubfh

Islam is misery for Women and Children but its pretty sweet for the Men.


01:08pm 23/02/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40444 posts
Penalty rates for those that need them most abolished.

Smells like that c*** scomo
01:53pm 23/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23634 posts
Fair Work Commission actually. They realise the best way out of welfare is a job. More jobs for everyone who wants to have a go!

Why on earth anyone would want penalty rates so high that businesses close down and workers go without work is beyond me.
02:00pm 23/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12624 posts
Get rid of Penalty Rates but top up regular pay rates.
I dont get any extra pay when I do extra work.

How about Public Servants getting big pay rises ?
I see the 6 million dollar man has quit Australia Post.

02:09pm 23/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2005 posts
04:54pm 23/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5158 posts
Fair Work Commission actually. They realise the best way out of welfare is a job. More jobs for everyone who wants to have a go!

Why on earth anyone would want penalty rates so high that businesses close down and workers go without work is beyond me.


This ones just for you, again.

http://i.imgur.com/DGGuYMo.png
05:12pm 23/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23635 posts
businesses react the only way they can - increase prices. ain't no thing.
08:34pm 23/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5159 posts
Would be nice if they increased wages to match the productivity increases. Nah f*** you to the wealth creators.
08:51pm 23/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12625 posts
AUstralian productivity is woeful and has been for nearly a decade.
Investment will just go somewhere else
Do you understand that Vash ?
Without Investment the workers dont produce anything.

It costs far more to build a Car here because of Unions demanding bonuses for workers.
Now we dont make Cars
Those Workers of yours Vash that "create the wealth" are now creating Dole queues.
08:56pm 23/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2006 posts

AUstralian productivity is woeful and has been for nearly a decade.
Investment will just go somewhere else


Any sources for that?

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/australia/productivity

This index seems to say that productivity has been increasing since the late 70s.
09:54pm 23/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38765 posts

Did we cover this?
http://www.smh.com.au/national/what-type-of-aussie-are-you-meet-the-7-new-political-tribes-20170203-gu57b2.html

Warning for trog, media will play automatically.

haha appreciated!! *disables javascript before clicking*

I'm not sure about the penalty rate decreasing; there's a lot of stuff to consider and I'm not sure if it's better or worse overall. People will definitely lose out financially in the short term but it might increase the robustness of the underlying business and provide more opportunities for growth.

Interestingly I got sent a report the other day which had the following graph:

https://trog.qgl.org/up/1702/repo.jpg

This is for the US where penalty rates aren't much of a thing, and the base salary rates are truly woeful - so it's hard to do a direct comparison against Australia. But the gist of the report was that these sectors are growing much more quickly than other sectors because increased automation hasn't yet taken a toll - there's no robot waiters and no easy opportunities for automation.
10:20pm 23/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3204 posts
Interesting read. I've seen some of the 'overpopulation is a myth' stuff, but have also recently felt that overpopulation is indeed squeezing things on the whole, so I'm not sure really.

Unless It Changes, Capitalism Will Starve Humanity By 2050

• Species are going extinct at a rate 1,000 times faster than that of the natural rate over the previous 65 million years (see Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School).

• Since 2000, 6 million hectares of primary forest have been lost each year. That’s 14,826,322 acres, or just less than the entire state of West Virginia (see the 2010 assessment by the Food and Agricultural Organization of the UN).

• Even in the U.S., 15% of the population lives below the poverty line. For children under the age of 18, that number increases to 20% (see U.S. Census).

• The world’s population is expected to reach 10 billion by 2050 (see United Nations' projections).


I agree corporations and business in general needs to become way more sustainable and beneficial to society in their core practice. However I reckon that needs to be embedded into the business model itself, so business is genuinely motivated to do it. Rather than as a afterthought tax or penalty like how the current Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) stuff is done. Furthermore, how do you reconcile the intrinsic exploitation that lies at the heart of the capitalist model with the need to be more socially responsible?

We're doing a share scheme for our employees at my co, I'm a fan of that and think it's important that staff have a vested interest and can partake in the rewards. I know a few startups who have tried Holocracy and said it's a bit of a s*** show.

Soz, I don't know much about this penalty rate malarkey so have nothing to add to that! :o
10:23pm 23/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38767 posts
Furthermore, how do you reconcile the intrinsic exploitation that lies in the capitalist model with the need to be more socially responsible?
I feel like we've mostly nailed that. I'm pretty happy with the status quo, with the tug-of-war between free market extremists and socialist dreamers to continually refine the model and keep people honest from both sides.

The current era of prosperity & stability I think is testament to the fact that the hybrid system of capitalism and socialism that we've developed is pretty excellent. As long as we keep the balance right - a tough job, depending on a vast number of factors. At the moment the obvious big risk is the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few. But the pushback against it is already strong - even amongst some of those few with a lot of the wealth!
10:40pm 23/02/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7579 posts
As someone said the other day “call everything racist and nothing becomes racist”

I present to the left what they created. Pauline Hanson mark2.

10:57pm 23/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2376 posts
(incidentally we didn't evolve any anatomy that lends well to fighting, like claws or armour)


Yes but men do grow physically larger and stronger than women, and have thicker skulls apparently. I can't be bothered looking that last one up, but I read it somewhere. So it isn't quite true that we didn't evolve armour or anatomy that lends to fighting.

Of course the elephant in that room is our evolved ability to create weapons that enhance our anatomy.

There's a pretty interesting dichotomy going on there between competition and co-operation, and I don't think it's a false one


perhaps I have been loose with my wording. I view human competition and co-operation as being part of the same evolutionary compulsion. Hence statements like this
Human beings' first instinct isn't to kill or win


Tend not to be very true. You won't have to go far to find people who experience exactly that instinct, but it almost certainly won't mean they don't also have a powerful capacity for co-operation. In this sense where people plainly have the capacity for both it strikes me as falsely dichotomous to talk about humans first instinct being one or the other.

I didn't really divine the relevance of your video to that discussion viper sorry.
10:42am 24/02/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2007 posts



This is for the US where penalty rates aren't much of a thing, and the base salary rates are truly woeful - so it's hard to do a direct comparison against Australia. But the gist of the report was that these sectors are growing much more quickly than other sectors because increased automation hasn't yet taken a toll - there's no robot waiters and no easy opportunities for automation.


Ruh-ro.
http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/cafe-x-robot-coffee/#ixzz4XkMMiQ77

I can't remember the article, but it said the hospitality sector in australia is increasing also because we're moving to a service based economy and basically cafes/bars are increasing to support workers in cities.
11:18am 24/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12610 posts
This post has been removed.
Reason: citation needed
Send Private Message
12:59pm 24/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2377 posts
Thats right it was Fake News


Come on man, fake news has to be at least applied to news outlets.

Nobody is confusing political stunts with statements of fact. (fingers crossed)
01:45pm 24/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25711 posts
Heard an anecdote about the NYC subway system about how when you get off the voice on the PA is asking everyone to please cooperate with ICE when they detaIn you and ask you questions. It's safer here.
09:12pm 24/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12628 posts
His reversal came as Coles revealed­ that Trent Hunter, the young worker who appeared with Mr Shorten yesterday and claimed he would be $109 worse off per ­Sunday shift, was unaffected by the penalty rate cuts because he was employed on an enterprise agreement.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/shorten-whacked-with-penalty-rates/news-story/067837102e602a21284cd9d8deed77ca

01:12am 25/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3206 posts
Surely you'd fact check that s*** ^^ before doing a press conference!?

Fair points PP, though we didn't develop anything like what animals have, but perhaps our switch to tools negated that as you say. I'm not sold on killing being the first instinct, it's belonging, but that's all very group based (even very small groups like family), and our inter-group compulsions are terrible, they defo seem to start at competition rather than co-operation. I suppose my wider thought is that I don't agree ruthless competition is our basest instinct or single overriding drive, as is the common pop cultural trope, I think co-operation is a large part too. I'll check that vid.

Oh dear, bit of buzz about Republican congressman getting challenged by their constituents. Seems as though people like Obamacare!



There's a bunch: Please enjoy some videos of Republicans getting their s*** wrecked by constituents
01:23am 25/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5160 posts
Ah conservatives. Pull yourselves up by your bootstraps! Can't afford insurance? Oh well. That's life.
People are very angry in those town halls.

Thank f*** we have a Social democratic party in our two party system.
07:50pm 25/02/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25715 posts
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C5e8Z6HVMAAI56s.jpg

Pence made the same mistake twice with that flag.

Also Trump won't be attending the correspondents dinner because he is scared of being made fun of. Such a strong person.
02:09pm 27/02/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9379 posts
So penalty rates... just a question, but what effect might we actually see if penalty rates were completely removed for weekends?
03:34pm 27/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23636 posts

http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/retail-industry/report/20-retail-industry-appendixc.pdf

see table c3 for an outline of OECD penalty rights.

removing penalty rates would vastly increase Australia's international competitiveness, and also consumer purchasing power. Penalty rates are a way to funnel money into the hands of those workers by charging more to customers which is inherently inefficient because employers are financially punished for operating their business on particular days when they are still paying rent and other overheads for those days.

the only way they will die over time is by demand of the consumer.
03:57pm 27/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5161 posts

As it relates to the labour market, the proposition is that the way to make things better for everyone is to make life tougher for the workers. Pay them less, give them less job security in the name of greater "flexibility", acquiesce to business's ambition of making working life a 24-hour, seven-days-a-week affair, and we'll all be better off. The flaws in that argument – and the price to be paid for playing this game for decades – are now more apparent. For a start, the number of workers and their dependents far outnumbers the bosses and owners and their dependants. So if all you end up doing is transferring income from the workers to the bosses, far more people lose than gain. Of course, that's never what we're promised. The promise is always that the loss to existing workers is justified by the gain to all the would-be workers who'll now get a job. Trouble is, too often you end up with a lot of workers making a sacrifice with only a handful of would-be workers finding jobs.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/cut-in-penalty-rates-another-win-for-bizonomics-20170226-gulhuo.html

This kind of thinking is the similar to trickle down economics. The only result is wealth, and the fruits of economic growth, heads into the richest bank accounts.
It's well explained why the wealth gap is so huge in the states, minimal regulation, more free markets always lead to that.

If business is concerned with the pay rates, put in a small fee to cover the higher rates. I see alot of businesses do this for weekend trade, and im fine with paying alittle extra.
05:19pm 27/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23637 posts
Trouble is, too often you end up with a lot of workers making a sacrifice with only a handful of would-be workers finding jobs.


Yeah f*** those unemployed.
05:41pm 27/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5162 posts
Let's just go even further and cut all penalty & public holiday rates, and wage award rates, so we can get more people employed.
Cutting wages is the dumbest way to create jobs.
05:51pm 27/02/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9380 posts
removing penalty rates would vastly increase Australia's international competitiveness


Uh, what? How do you figure that's the case in the international market for restaurants, cafeterias and supermarkets? Considering that by reducing peoples income you reduce their buying power, therefore reducing money spent to other companies, which reduces their ability to hire staff... and so on. And don't get me started on how bulls*** trickle-down is.

So I still haven't really seen an argument as to why Saturday and Sunday should pay a person higher than Monday or Wednesday. Reducing overall income is, of course, retarded on so many levels though.
06:02pm 27/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23638 posts
Uh, what? How do you figure that's the case in the international market for restaurants, cafeterias and supermarkets?


I was alluding to removing penalty rates more generally. Arbitrarily increasing any input cost will reduce the productivity of that industry. Australia's penalty rates make our country look old fashioned isolated and ignorant of world forces buffeting exporting businesses at the moment.

It's a quaint argument to say: But my industry is a local service industry so cheers to my penalty rates. What dictates between a worker who gets penalty rates under an award and a worker not under an award? F*** them too. So f*** the unemployed, f*** the customers they can pay more and f*** award free employees who just suck up standard rates.

Penalty rates are a brainfart from the early 20th century that should have died off already except for gutless governments and a union dominated industrial relations commission.
06:24pm 27/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38770 posts
I 100% believe that dropping penalty rates will get more people employed. I just don't know what kind of life those people would have, in a basically minimum wage job that they have to do on weekends.

I have mentioned several times my time in the US and being in retail/hospitality businesses and absolutely loving the service of never having to wait because they employ a huge number of extra people. My most striking memory is of the local popular ice cream store, Jeni's, which would have like 10 people working behind all the time the counter. Compare that to my last experience at a Cold Rock or something in BNE where there were like 5 customers in the store, 2 people working and thus a waiting time of 10+ minutes.

FWIW I worked a couple casual jobs where penalty rates were, for me as an employee, a big incentive to work hard so I could get penalty rate shifts. Sometimes to no avail because one of the shift managers tended to give good shifts to their "friends" because they were such good money. But I definitely think my productivity was higher than it would otherwise have been because of the incentive of massive overtime (I seem to recall it being double time and a half on public holidays?!?)
09:37pm 27/02/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38771 posts
I guess I'm suspicious that the pure metric "number of people employed" is more important than "the number of people on a living wage". Maybe some businesses will lose out as a result of high costs of operation but again, not sure if that is worse than the state of affairs that exist in places like the US where people often work more than 50 hours a week across two rather crappy jobs wondering if this is going to be the week they're hit with a financially crippling medical bill because their employer is not required to pay them health insurance because it's more important to keep their costs low so they can employ more people.
09:56pm 27/02/17 Permalink
Python
Sydney, New South Wales
2562 posts
11:02pm 27/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5163 posts
^the reality of the upcoming automation economy. except 100x worse.
11:05pm 27/02/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3209 posts
Have you read about the luddites Vash?

Republicans are too much! lol

02:34am 28/02/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9381 posts
I guess I'm suspicious that the pure metric "number of people employed" is more important than "the number of people on a living wage".


Yeah, this is along a similar line to my issues with minimum wage arguments - I firmly believe that if running your business, creating/manufacturing and selling your product, whatever it is that you do, requires extra people to do so, and that you can't do that without the time a person needs to be employed to do so coming out at a livable wage based on a 38-hour work week, then your product/business simply does not have the demand to be viable. If your product only survives because you pay $3/hr to people 40 hours a week, and you simply can't operate without those people, then your product/business is not viable.
01:22pm 28/02/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2378 posts
So I still haven't really seen an argument as to why Saturday and Sunday should pay a person higher than Monday or Wednesday.


I'd have thought social cohesion would be the answer to that. It is generally good to have most people have the same time off. It allows sports clubs and s*** to exist.
01:42pm 28/02/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40449 posts
I have mentioned several times my time in the US and being in retail/hospitality businesses and absolutely loving the service of never having to wait because they employ a huge number of extra people. My most striking memory is of the local popular ice cream store, Jeni's, which would have like 10 people working behind all the time the counter. Compare that to my last experience at a Cold Rock or something in BNE where there were like 5 customers in the store, 2 people working and thus a waiting time of 10+ minutes.


translation: its ok for people to be poor and struggling to live, if i dont have to wait for my icecream
09:35pm 28/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23640 posts
they are working for a freely negotiated wage - not some imaginary rate installed by a bunch of commisars back at the politburo

should we declare rates for all groceries, goods and services too? but wages are special! no they aren't - they are a price like everything else.

the alternative is to make everyone's minimum wage $1m and we can all be rich. DERP
09:40pm 28/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5164 posts
Of course wages are special, Infi. Humans require them to survive, you know.
While rates on groceries, goods and services, only serve to increase profit for a business or corporation, who certainly are not in a live or die situation.
The exception would be the farmers, whom are almost forced to sell their milk at below cost price recently.
Imagine if markets were even more free.

A small amount of businesses would be able to coordinate, and monopolise certain markets, and sell at whatever price they want.

That's the inherent flaw in libertarian ideology.
09:59pm 28/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23641 posts
So then why aren't all wages fixed? why aren't independent contractors rates fixed? a farmer may work for himself and his family. why aren't his produce prices fixed so he can compete against the big guy? should all the rates for private jobs like airtasker and gumtree be fixed?

labour is goods, and goods are labour. they are two sides of the same coin.
10:09pm 28/02/17 Permalink
Vash
5165 posts
Minimum wages serve their uses in many industries, so that quality is not below the standard. Fixed wages would not be able to differentiate low to high quality service.
If markets were truly free, there would be many more low quality services, sacrificing wages & other expenses in the name of profit.
Many people already suffer from tradies who cut corners at every turn, it would be even worse with minimum wages abolished.
10:37pm 28/02/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23642 posts
So you think a minimum wage ensures a suitable quality product or service?

I think that is the first time I have ever heard that economic argument put. Give this guy a Nobel Prize.
10:48pm 28/02/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12630 posts
01:03am 01/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38774 posts
translation: its ok for people to be poor and struggling to live, if i dont have to wait for my icecream
well, that wasn't my point at all. It should be noted that businesses that can't service the needs of their customers will lose customers - I walked out of that Cold Rock because I can't be bothered waiting 10 minutes for ice cream.

Doing the maths to figure out which is a better outcome is really tough though.

As I said, I'm not convinced yet one option is better than the other because it's pretty complicated.
02:33am 01/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23643 posts
Is it better to have a staffing model and pay system which a business has freely chosen after evaluating all the business risks, or it it better for someone else who is not risking their own capital to decide the business' operating costs?
09:20am 01/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25717 posts
Sometimes the first one sometimes the second one.
03:10pm 01/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38775 posts
Is it better to have a staffing model and pay system which a business has freely chosen after evaluating all the business risks, or it it better for someone else who is not risking their own capital to decide the business' operating costs?
as with basically everything, somewhere in the middle of those two radical extremes is the right answer, something which has been empirically proven since basically the Industrial Revolution
07:58pm 01/03/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2008 posts

Why don't more sheeple trust breitbart to bring them their news?

Slightly more credible than the onion. lel.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C522lsGXEAYrFXl.jpghttps://twitter.com/G_Parker/status/836742000342814721

So Harvey Norman is just going to pocket the penalty rates savings. What a f*****g surprise.

Infi said this would be creating heaps of jobs though.

Maybe the jobs will trickle down to the people who staff Harvey's new yacht?


08:36am 02/03/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9384 posts
For the sake of not exploiting workers becoming so widespread it becomes commonplace? Yeah, I'll take the other person making the decisions.

Business owners will always put themselves first given the opportunity, to hell with how it affects their slaves... I mean employees.
10:38am 02/03/17 Permalink
dais
Brisbane, Queensland
12115 posts
04:39pm 02/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25720 posts
So just the two funniest Trump f*** ups of the last week that I've picked out of the ocean of Trump f*** ups.

Trump saying that he didn't know that health care could be so complicated

and

Sean Spicer's sting operation to find the leaker where he invaded people's privacy by accessing their personal phones (he looked at work phones too but I guess that is okay). Then when news of that meeting leaked (lol) he said to the interviewer when asked about the contents of his own phone that he thought his privacy was being invaded (lol). These are the guys running the country.

More to come this week!
05:10pm 02/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23644 posts
Trump critic compliments Congress speech

More people watch Trump speech than Oscars

Isis defeated in Iraq.

Trump keeps winning. He is 8 steps ahead every time. He's a political jobs creating behemoth. All we have is Turnbull and Shorten.
06:09pm 02/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25721 posts
lol

edit: hey guys, some guy wrote a decent speech for Trump that some people watched and check out this dailymail link. Everything's fine!
06:21pm 02/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23645 posts
It's better than fine - this is the best timeline! Democrats are demoralised.
06:33pm 02/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25722 posts
hah, you're gone all in on an inevitable failure. When that does happen can you please at least have a funny meltdown? I'm scared you'll be boring and blame it on x.
06:52pm 02/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23646 posts
hah, you're gone all in on an inevitable failure. When that does happen can you please at least have a funny meltdown? I'm scared you'll be boring and blame it on x.


What happened to the ones who supported the tepid failure that is Obama? They reminisce.
07:18pm 02/03/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2379 posts
Why don't more sheeple trust breitbart to bring them their news?

Slightly more credible than the onion. lel.


Jesus 32 percent of people think huffpo is credible. That is scary.
08:17pm 02/03/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3212 posts
lol, you must be trolling infi.

His congress speech was the first time he's been barely competent, which is what most of the praise is for, which is hardly praise at all really.

The Oscars' viewing figures were its lowest in the last 8 years or so, and less people watched Trump's congress speech than Obama's first congress speech.

Isis defeated in Iraq is literally the culmination of Obama's entire long-term strategy against IS for which he was, and is, ridiculously derided by Trump and others.

I wouldn't mind partisan politics if it wasn't so stupendously hypocritical.
08:19pm 02/03/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2380 posts
Isis defeated in Iraq is literally the culmination of Obama's entire long-term strategy against IS for which he was, and is, ridiculously derided by Trump and others.


ISIS being defeated in Iraq strikes me as purely coincidental to any long term plan of Obama's. You can make the argument that ISIS are solely born of a lack of any coherent plan on behalf of Obama for Syria.

Syria has been a cluster f*** from start to finish and Obama has to take a significant amount of blame for that.

Trump hoping to strike some kind of deal with Russia over Syria strikes me as naive or foolish or both, but Syria is a signature policy failure of the Obama administration and that has a s*** load to do with why we talk about ISIS at all.
08:39pm 02/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38777 posts
What happened to the ones who supported the tepid failure that is Obama? They reminisce.
heh it's hard to read this and not giggle at your previous rabid support of the Liberals and wonder where that went, and where your allegiance will go next when the Trump allure (whatever the actual f*** it is) wears off!

So Harvey Norman is just going to pocket the penalty rates savings. What a f*****g surprise.

Infi said this would be creating heaps of jobs though.
Well, if Harvey Norman pockets it (not clear they will, IMO) it means Harvey Norman competitors can NOT pocket it and use the money to pay their staff more & provide better service, or provide lower prices and steal more business from HN.

The other side needs to be considered - reducing the cost of doing business might mean more jobs for HN competitors if HN opt to simply see it as a windfall and distribute it to shareholders/executives/do something else dumb with it.
10:20pm 02/03/17 Permalink
Vash
5166 posts
Considering the prices HN charge, its amazing to me how they're still in business. Harvey's latest piece on the rise of Amazon was particularly amusing, i think once Amazon are settled in Australia, that's the nail in the coffin for HN.
10:26pm 02/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38780 posts
i think once Amazon are settled in Australia, that's the nail in the coffin for HN.
It is the nail in the coffin for a huge number of Australian companies I think. Having lived in Amazon Prime-serviced regions for the last 3 years, it is an amazing service and it completely changes the way you shop (and live).

I saw the rum I like was on sale on the weekend; I ordered two bottles of Sailor Jerry for 30 pounds and they were delivered two hours later (no cost for delivery; included with Prime). I saw we were running out of washing machine pellets on Saturday & happened to look at Amazon Deals; saw a giant pack of pellets was on sale for like 50% off normal retail; ordered Saturday afternoon and it was delivered at like 9am Sunday morning (woke me up, the bastards).

And that is just basic s*** you need to survive (yes I include rum in that list). Basically the only thing I don't buy on Amazon now is [some] clothes where the fit is important. Very very rarely I need something immediately and I'm always frustrated by what a pain in the ass it is to leave the house and go to a store.

They need to nail the delivery cost issue which will be the biggest challenge they have. There are startups working on it (one of them getting sued by AusPost, I believe); but cost of delivery is only going to get cheaper.
10:50pm 02/03/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3213 posts
Hmm, I'm not sure it's that coincidental, they had a pretty specific plan for fighting ISIS which was based on a coalition of nations supporting the Iraqi and other local forces eventually taking back all of the land gains ISIS had made. He suffered a lot of flack for this with many, especially Republicans, advocating for the US deploying ground troops, to fight another asymmetrical war in a heavily disputed land area no less, instead.

More is riding on the battle for Mosul than the recapture of the Islamic State's main stronghold in northern Iraq. Also on the line is the Obama administration's theory that the extremists can be defeated in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere without American ground troops doing the fighting.
For more than two years, the administration has stuck to its argument that the only path to a sustained victory over the Islamic State group is for locals, not Americans or other outsiders, to bear the main responsibility for the fighting and for governing after the extremists are removed.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/mission-take-mosul-will-test-obamas-plan-fight-isis-without-u-s-forces-ground/

I would say we're starting to see the fruition of that plan, though obviously the situation in Syria has gotten worse, but that's a civll war.

I agree re: Syria, it's a total clusterf*** and has also been one of the major causes of this current refugee crisis which has really impacted a lot of other things, especially in Europe.

However I would point out that both Obama and Cameron tried to intervene militarily in Syria early on, but were defeated in Congress and Parliament. In a way that's also their fault I suppose, but I find it a bit rich they're now criticised so heavily for not doing more sooner, sometimes by ministers who voted no!

Amazon is awesome! I don't know how you live in Aus without it. :p
12:55am 03/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38781 posts
pretty much a damned if they do, damned if they don't scenario now for the US, right? I don't know f*** all about Syria but I know if the US had boots on the ground there they'd be copping s*** for being there and making the country all kinds of f***ed up.
01:26am 03/03/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3214 posts
Defo, one of many perils of empire I suppose.

Though I have to say, conceptually i totes agree with the idea that the local people have to do the fighting, the governing and the removal of the extremists. Foreign troops going in to fight a conventional style war seems to only strengthen the very extremist groups they're trying to eliminate. Even if they do kill some of their forces, they're quickly replaced by new recruits motivated by the troops being there in the first place. Not to mention all the difficulties of trying to fight an asymmetrical war against an ideological enemy in amongst the local populace of the country. It's not a good look imo. #armchairgeneral
02:39am 03/03/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2009 posts

Capitalism is great. Dogs as a service or DaaS.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-03-01/i-m-renting-a-dog


11:04am 03/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23647 posts
heh it's hard to read this and not giggle at your previous rabid support of the Liberals and wonder where that went, and where your allegiance will go next when the Trump allure (whatever the actual f*** it is) wears off!


if your favourite razor drops in quality, do you keep using it?

So Harvey Norman is just going to pocket the penalty rates savings. What a f*****g surprise.

Infi said this would be creating heaps of jobs though.


HN's outmoded retail model employs plenty of staff. But in any case if HN pockets the profits then their prices are not dropping, while their competitors will be - they will lose sales and thus become less profitable. You have got to think these things through before going all chicken little....

sis defeated in Iraq is literally the culmination of Obama's entire long-term strategy against IS for which he was, and is, ridiculously derided by Trump and others.


lol this is a joke post. Obama was a foreign policy nitwit. Syria, Iraq, Iran, Crimea, China. He was a stunned little doe in the headlights and weakened the US (and by extension Australia).
12:20pm 03/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25726 posts
A giant whining manbaby with multiple personality disorders who's so socially retarded he can't even perform a normal handshake is a shining beacon of hope for the USA's future foreign policy endeavours.
04:38pm 03/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38782 posts
if your favourite razor drops in quality, do you keep using it?
well if I've expressed nothing but ideological praise to my razor regardless of how many times it cut my face to ribbons I don't see how I could stop using my razor and still think I was operating in a logically consistent manner. I certainly wouldn't just throw out the old razor and then get on board with another razor that basically has all the worst parts of the previous razor but is a slightly different colour so it seems like the new hotness. Especially if the other razor was more or less totally useless to me because it was located on the other side of the planet.
08:12pm 03/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23648 posts
so you don't think it is possible to support a political party (or individual representative) then move one's support to a new party or representative if one's views change or the representative's performance diminishes? that's very tribal and inflexible.

Trump is doing well because he is keeping his promises. If he stops keeping his promises then he is up for review. If he sends back illegals, builds the wall, and repeals and replaces Obamacare, he has will be re-elected. Tax cuts, Defeating ISIS completely will mean Hall of Fame.

I watched a great little piece on Tucker Carlson about the problems with Obamacare, it is badly broken because it requires every participant to pay for services (e.g. obstetrics) they do not require. Thus many potential young policy holders (healthy people who don't claim and thus boost the pool funds) don't sign up. That is a s***** system, because young people get a s***** deal. Who would think that up :S
09:31pm 03/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38785 posts
so you don't think it is possible to support a political party (or individual representative) then move one's support to a new party or representative if one's views change or the representative's performance diminishes? that's very tribal and inflexible.
I think it's perfectly possible and in fact what most of us here were trying to get you to do for years :) but moving your support to Trump I find unfathomably weird. It doesn't seem your views have changed much, if at all - I mean I assume you still vote Liberal; I can't imagine you're voting Labor and I suspect you wouldn't vote Greens even if someone put a gun to your head. So I just find the whole thing curious.

I watched a great little piece on Tucker Carlson about the problems with Obamacare, it is badly broken because it requires every participant to pay for services (e.g. obstetrics) they do not require
I don't know what this means; in a single payer health care system obviously you pay for services you don't require that other people do..? The entire point of socialised medicine is everyone pays for the benefit of society as a whole.

Here's some cool anecdata from my time in the US:

I went to the doctor once to do a dry run of the process so I understood what would happen if I was ever sick (I got a flu shot as well). While I was in there the doctor said "OK, and now we'll do a blood test". I was in full health, not sick at all, so I was surprised - I was worried what it might cost. The doctor immediately put my mind at rest - they'd already figured out from my insurance plan (the first thing I had to give them when I walked in) that a blood test as something they could charge to my insurer.

So they do the blood test even though it was not something I asked for or was in any way connected at all to my reason for being there. They just do it because they can charge the insurer. (By the way, that flu shot? It showed up on my insurance statement as a covered cost - they charged my insurance company $400USD for it. I found out later I could have gone to a local pharmacy and paid like $25.)
09:46pm 03/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23649 posts
I don't know what this means; in a single payer health care system obviously you pay for services you don't require that other people do..? The entire point of socialised medicine is everyone pays for the benefit of society as a whole.


why would a single guy, an infertile couple, a gay couple etc etc etc want obstetrics?

why would young people want joint replacement cover?

that's not health insurance, it's non universal government funded health cover. there are non-payers who don't see it as value, so it's a s***** system. Obamacare aside, I have posted a
link previously from the mises institute showing that US health care is very expensive due to the amount of government regulation and closed shop lobbying which has stitched it up for big business. as usual, at every turn, government is the problem.
09:57pm 03/03/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2010 posts


why would a single guy, an infertile couple, a gay couple etc etc etc want obstetrics?

why would young people want joint replacement cover?

that's not health insurance, it's non universal government funded health cover. there are non-payers who don't see it as value, so it's a s***** system. Obamacare aside, I have posted a
link previously from the mises institute showing that US health care is very expensive due to the amount of government regulation and closed shop lobbying which has stitched it up for big business. as usual, at every turn, government is the problem.


rofl the FIRE industry would like to have a chat with you.
11:12pm 03/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38786 posts
well, we obviously are never going to agree purely on ideological grounds and swapping barbs about it, while fun, is probably ultimately pointless. My anecdata is not unique; there are zillions of readily available examples about insurance companies being gouged by doctors, a problem that has nothing to do with regulation and everything to do with naked greed and opportunism.

I think providing healthcare is a basic service that government should do because it makes complete sense to me to try to keep your citizens alive and healthy and productive and happy.

I understand the 'freedom' angle that Americans go for but I think the actual reality is that they are way less free as a result.
11:41pm 03/03/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2381 posts
With respect Viper I think you are dabbling in alternative facts there. You even quoted my point at me.

More is riding on the battle for Mosul than the recapture of the Islamic State's main stronghold in northern Iraq. Also on the line is the Obama administration's theory that the extremists can be defeated in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere without American ground troops doing the fighting.


Obama has been saying to anyone who will listen there will be no boots on the ground for the last 5 years in respect of Syria. The idea that he wanted to do more but was blocked by an obstructionist congress is an alternate reality. Republicans were more hawkish if anything.

Obstructionism true of Obamacare, but you've got to do more work if you want to convince me Syria is republicans f*****g up an otherwise good plan.

Obama, so far as I can see, had two options in Syria. 1. Do nothing. 2. Iraq style regime change. He did neither.

If he had done nothing at all the outcome almost certainly would have been better than what we have. But he set up the farcical redline, has sent special forces into Syria and armed rebel groups against Assad.

Meanwhile, while fermenting his multi lateral coup, ISIS formed and committed a genocide against the Yazidis.

And ISIS wouldn't have claimed the ground in Iraq if their security forces were up to scratch/ had a solid base of operations in the vacuum left in Syria. Given this happened nearly a decade after the initial invasion, Obama's plan for a united Iraq, such as it was, is as much to blame.

The criticism isn't that Obama did nothing, that would have been better than what was done. It's that he was indecisive in a situation that needed to be left alone or nipped in the bud.

History will not look kindly on his legacy in Syria.
03:47pm 04/03/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2011 posts
How many american military foreign interventions has history looked on kindly since WW2?
08:12am 05/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25733 posts
09:36pm 05/03/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12637 posts
If Obama was any kind of Man he would take Trump on at Twitter instead of snaking around in the shadows.

http://www.businessinsider.com/dow-21000-stock-market-2017-3?IR=T

Trump is doing a fine job.

I dont get this whole Russia business.
EVERYBODY said Trump had no hope of being President
Why would Russia be plotting to take over America with someone who couldnt win ?



09:54pm 05/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23651 posts
> Accuses Russia of interfering in election with no evidence - seems legit

> Accuses Obama (the guy who wiretapped German Chancellor Merkel) of wiretapping Trump - must be bulls***
10:18pm 05/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25734 posts
Just for the record, I am waiting to see on the whole Russia thing (but holy moley it will be funny if he was helped along by them because having such a f*** up in office is good for Russia, but at the same time bad) but why would Obama wiretap Trump's office? Spying on other governments is a thing that generates good intel which is useful. Somehow I don't think Obama was really interested in capturing the next grab them by the pussy moment.
10:36pm 05/03/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12639 posts
The Leader of the Alternative Liberal party explains Penalty Rates

“If you go into a fish and chip shop, I’d have to pay $34 an hour to employ someone, yet McDonald’s down the road, they can only pay $26 an hour,” Ms Hanson said. Ms Hanson drew on her experience as a fish and chip shop owner, saying reducing Sunday penalty rates could help to increase employment.

“Those employers, I know myself, if you can cut back a little bit there, give them a helping hand, more likely these small businesses will open on a weekend, possibly give more hours and employ more people,” she said. “If you do not start doing this, small businesses are shutting.”


http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/pauline-hanson-just-explained-penalty-rates-better-than-the-prime-minister/news-story/23d0d95cd6475db640fe86ca05d58155

The appointees at the Fair Work Commission were all appointed by LABOR
Why isnt this mentioned by Trunbull ?
That clown is embarrassed by a decision that helps Small Business grow.
Geez just get rid of him.
There wont be a Liberal Party soon.

01:31pm 06/03/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2012 posts

The appointees at the Fair Work Commission were all appointed by LABOR

Actually it's been stacked by abetz and one of the other liberal clowns since they took gov.

Also how is that explaining things? Explain the cut Pauline. What a f*****g hypocrite.

She thinks she's some populist leader sticking up for the battler to make Australia great again but she just wants to cut poor peoples wages.
01:42pm 06/03/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12640 posts
Theres a big battle on in the Burdekin region over Sugar.
The growers have been trying to get the Coalition involved for TWO YEARS but no real luck. Hanson turned up just before Christmas at a meeting and called Turnbull at the meeting and gave the phone to growers to talk to him.
Thats Political power.

One Nation is going to demolish the Coalition.
The Country needs a Right Wing Party because its currently Labor and Labor-Lite.
Trunbull has to go and its time Bishop went too.

Also I agree with her Vaccination stance.
Punishing families who are worried about their kids health is despicable.
I support Vaccinations mostly because I understand how they work.
Give Parents a carrot, address their concerns, answer all their questions and let them come to their own decision. Taking money away punishes the kids.

Hanson says she had her kids vaccinated.
02:12pm 06/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38789 posts
If Obama was any kind of Man he would take Trump on at Twitter instead of snaking around in the shadows.
Holy f*** is this what all the people on Twitter actually think? No wonder it's such a bastion of f***wittery

Meanwhile the much more manly Trump makes s*** up and harasses his enemies like a 16yo girl writing in her diary, but doesn't have the stones to turn up to the correspondents' dinner. Talk about a snowflake.
09:11pm 06/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25739 posts
I'm guessing the apologists are explaining that one away as too busy running the country. Imagine how much of a coward you'd have to be to stay away from something like that because you're scared of being made fun of.
09:33pm 06/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38790 posts
I'm guessing the apologists are explaining that one away as too busy running the country
I'm guessing we'll find out in the next few posts how they're explaining it away :D
10:25pm 06/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25740 posts
I guess they will. While you're at it could you please explain the whole Pence uses private emails thing as well thanks.
10:29pm 06/03/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2382 posts
So the day without women is calling for the "decolonization of Palestine".
So there is a movement in no danger whatsoever of creating meaningful change.

It's difficult not see the election of Trump as being worth the price of admission. Left wing politics is in serious trouble (which is a problem), but watching these continuous meltdowns is thoroughly entertaining.
07:09pm 07/03/17 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
1056 posts
It seems to be a recurring theme with such protests. Every little group that nominally agrees with the main topic wants their own other special interests also included.

They only end up diluting their message and making it all easier to ignore.
07:44pm 07/03/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12641 posts
The day without Women ?
whats the downside ?

Israel was promised to Abraham by God.
Its in The Bible.
The Debate is over.




07:48pm 07/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38791 posts
It seems to be a recurring theme with such protests. Every little group that nominally agrees with the main topic wants their own other special interests also included.

They only end up diluting their message and making it all easier to ignore.
also known as the democratic process
08:16pm 07/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23655 posts
These protests are fantastic for Trump. Keep up the great work, I say. All the liberal tears will in turn break California's drought - Donald crushes another problem BAM.

Can he please just come back now and revive the Apprentice?
08:46pm 07/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38792 posts
one thing I think we can all agree on is we all want him to go back to what he was doing on the Apprentice
09:05pm 07/03/17 Permalink
Rukh
Brisbane, Queensland
1057 posts
Israel was promised to Abraham by God. Its in The Bible. The Debate is over.


Funny.
09:36pm 07/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25742 posts
hmmmm we're already passed the point where people will try to explain away the absurdity of the situation and have quickly progressed straight to the lol liberal tears stage on the road to full meltdown.
09:42pm 07/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23656 posts
Meanwhile the much more manly Trump makes s*** up and harasses his enemies like a 16yo girl writing in her diary, but doesn't have the stones to turn up to the correspondents' dinner. Talk about a snowflake.


The President was invited but that doesn't mean he must attend. It's optional.

While you're at it could you please explain the whole Pence uses private emails thing as well thanks.


his emails are subject to right to information claims, but he didn't deal with classified material like a certain Secretary of State and failed Presidential candidate.
10:00pm 07/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25743 posts
Yep, and he took the option not to go because he's a precious little boy who's scared people will make fun of him 😂

Just wondering, are we meant to take the word from a pathologically lying administration about the contents of the emails or is there some evidence that's been presented to back their claims?
10:04pm 07/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38793 posts
I actually don't care about the email thing; I didn't care about Hillary's that much and I don't care about Pence's. Email is not a secure mechanism; it should be just assumed if you're using it, the contents are visible to someone else.
10:10pm 07/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23657 posts
Yep, and he took the option not to go because he's a precious little boy who's scared people will make fun of him 😂


oh yeah he is terrified of the fake news MSM

Just wondering, are we meant to take the word from a pathologically lying administration about the contents of the emails or is there some evidence that's been presented to back their claims?


probably because a governor doesn't have classified level clearance.
10:13pm 07/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25744 posts


oh yeah he is terrified of the fake news MSM
Look at how well doggy trained you are. Repeating your master's words like a good little doggy. It's really obvious he is scared of the media. I was more referring to whoever would be MCing that night. It would almost be too easy to humiliate him. That's what Trump is scared of.

Assuming what you're saying is true about Pence, the problem is that rules and laws don't apply to the current administration. They believe they're above them and the funny part is going to be when that attitude finally catches up with them.
10:46pm 07/03/17 Permalink
dais
Brisbane, Queensland
12120 posts
Basically the only thing I don't buy on Amazon now is [some] clothes where the fit is important. Very very rarely I need something immediately and I'm always frustrated by what a pain in the ass it is to leave the house and go to a store.


This may be of interest to all you Amazon shoppers, an AMA with the founder of a popular Amazon price tracker:
https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5xuniu/im_the_founder_of_camelcamelcamel_ama/
10:52pm 07/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23658 posts
Look at how well doggy trained you are. Repeating your master's words like a good little doggy. It's really obvious he is scared of the media. I was more referring to whoever would be MCing that night. It would almost be too easy to humiliate him. That's what Trump is scared of.

Assuming what you're saying is true about Pence, the problem is that rules and laws don't apply to the current administration. They believe they're above them and the funny part is going to be when that attitude finally catches up with them.


and how did they even know about mike pence's email? I present to you EXHIBIT A


http://i.imgur.com/NcFxlkY.jpg
11:00pm 07/03/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2383 posts
also known as the democratic process


That happened on November 8 last year. This is a bunch of radical left wing f*** heads who have neither a point nor any claim to "democratic" process.

You're in the states often enough, why don't you go to the rally and try and say Trump was on to something with immigration and see how "democratic" they are.

Democracy would be a specific agenda backed up with a broad base. This is the opposite of that, its is a tiny minority of people with a vaguely marxist/anti-capitalist agenda, who will physically attack you if you have the temerity to disagree. I might add, if they support the "decolonization of Palestine" you will be able to scratch the surface and find naked antisemitism, because you always can.

Trump will probably use the presidency to line his pockets, but seeing as a Obama just got a 70MUSD book deal seems you could make the argument about him.

What is happening in these so called women's marches (I note the science march has been polluted by this compete tosh as well, science must be informed by intersectional feminism? please that is essentially stating science must be informed by not science.) and the left wing is borderline actual fascism.

Berkley was outright fascism. and it happened again here.

But the left leaves "democracy" at the door long before they (inevitably now it seems) get violent. There is nothing "democratic" about drowning a speaker out with "hey hey ho ho x y z has got to go".

and before fpot chimes in with misogyny, name the rights Trump has removed for women. Not liking him is not an argument and street based hysterics are not going to hurt him. And again here is my response to this line of reasoning:

hmmmm we're already passed the point where people will try to explain away the absurdity of the situation and have quickly progressed straight to the lol liberal tears stage on the road to full meltdown.


Yep and the democrats couldn't win, and show no signs of turning it around, so how "competent" can they be.

You used to be cool trog.
07:27am 08/03/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9390 posts
That happened on November 8 last year. This is a bunch of radical left wing f*** heads who have neither a point nor any claim to "democratic" process.
Are you talking about the election where the 'winner' had almost three million less votes than the next candidate?
01:48pm 08/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23659 posts
Are you talking about the election where the 'winner' had almost three million less votes than the next candidate?


and which was won according to the Constitution.
01:51pm 08/03/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40464 posts
02:48pm 08/03/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2013 posts
It's not like our democracy is any more representative than the US.

Our deputy prime minister's party had 4% of the primary vote.

Every state gets 12 senators no matter how many people you have living there.
02:52pm 08/03/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2384 posts
Are you talking about the election where the 'winner' had almost three million less votes than the next candidate?


Are you talking about that metric that has been used to pick a US President 0 times?

Winning New York and LA in a landslide isn't how they do it. Just FYI.
07:30pm 08/03/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7585 posts

God bernadi is scum.

F*****g dodgy scum.


More dumb than scum
09:18pm 08/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38797 posts

God bernadi is scum.

F*****g dodgy scum.



http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion

I don't know much about Bernadi but that just seems like regular run-of-the-mill politicians behaving like the new aristocracy and acting like rules are for the little people. Does he do other scummy stuff?
09:58pm 08/03/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40466 posts
his shtick is that hes pious and righteous, which just turns my stomach even more.
10:37pm 08/03/17 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2346 posts
I see that wholesale power price has doubled since the carbon price was removed...
02:54pm 09/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38798 posts
jesus f*****g christ does every link in australia now have auto playing video
09:46pm 09/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23660 posts
It is very annoying.
09:52pm 09/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38799 posts
So I live in central London and the pollution is f*****g off the hook. They've recently announced a 10 pound per day charge on old (pre-2006) driving in the City. Unfortunately doesn't kick in until September.

Thought it was interesting in the face of news that Norway (ahh Norway) now has half of new car sales being electric/hybrid (thanks to massive incentives).

So (probably no surprise) I personally think every first world country should be offering massive massive incentives to switch to electric cars. I have never been anywhere where the pollution was this bad and constantly in your face. I can't wait to move out of the city. I can see why VWs DieselGate was such a big deal now (outside of the usual companies lying perspective).
10:29pm 09/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23661 posts
Hybrids use electricity which is generated by coal power plants..... London may improve but it's just outsourcing the pollution elsewhere. More solar for sunny England methinks.

Hydrogen would be good. A small nuclear plant in every car like a submarine would give it a lifetime of fuel.

Still no clear solution. Taxpayer subsidy for expensive cars benefits the well off.
10:51pm 09/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25747 posts
Hybrids use electricity which is generated by coal power plants.....
Actually I think the combustion motor and KERS produce the electricity in hybrids. If there must be pollution (and there must) it's better to have it dispersed in low population areas rather than concentrated in a city in any case.

Not sure what you're going on about in regards to hydrogen. One of the easiest ways to produce hydrogen is electrolysis, a process which separates the hydrogen in water molecules. Are you saying cars should have a small nuclear plant to power that process? That's an insane idea.
11:59pm 09/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23662 posts
If it's a self contained hybrid yeah they are nifty.
12:18am 10/03/17 Permalink
deadlyf
Queensland
3990 posts
So I live in central London and the pollution is f*****g off the hook. They've recently announced a 10 pound per day charge on old (pre-2006) driving in the City. Unfortunately doesn't kick in until September.
That might work for London, pretty s***** outcome for the rest of the entire world though as the vast majority of a cars pollution during it's lifetime is created during the manufacturing process.

Basically it'd be better for the environment if no one bought new cars and they just maintained their s***** clunckers Cuban style.
12:47am 10/03/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
USA
38800 posts
Basically it'd be better for the environment if no one bought new cars and they just maintained their s***** clunckers Cuban style.
Yeh, I dunno, I think the jury is still out on this one. I've read articles that lean both ways (e.g., "The study reveals that fully 75 percent of a car's lifetime carbon emissions stem from the fuel it burns, not its production." vs "The upshot is that – despite common claims to contrary – the embodied emissions of a car typically rival the exhaust pipe emissions over its entire lifetime."

fkn scientists, sort your s*** out
Hybrids use electricity which is generated by coal power plants..... London may improve but it's just outsourcing the pollution elsewhere. More solar for sunny England methinks.
Well some electricity is coal; but there's a new thing in the UK where we're going to steal some sweet sweet nuclear electricity from the French. So it should be cleaner. Also most stats I've seen indicate that it's significantly more efficient burning coal vs gas in an ICE.

Basically it's f*****g hard to crunch then numbers on all these things. Need to factor in healthcare costs in places with s***** pollution like London as well which are considered dramatically higher from increased incidence of respiratory problems.
02:34am 10/03/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7586 posts
It's really simple:

In London you have a couple of million ICB cars all injecting soot and particle matter into the atmosphere where people live. So that's a couple of million tailpipes all pumping away at varying degrees of pollution due to the type and condition of the vehicles. Look forward to the future and you will have a couple of million electric vehicles injecting NOTHING into the London area.
So in brief, you have a couple of million s***** tailpipes or just one Coal Power Station tailpipe (that has filters and scrubbers) located in low population area just outside the city.

Bit of a no brainer.

08:51am 10/03/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21186 posts
bit of a bro nainer
09:02am 10/03/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2014 posts

A no brainer is getting rid of private cars in cities all together. An emissions free traffic jam is still a traffic jam.

This is a good start.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/02/these-major-cities-are-starting-to-go-car-free?


10:14am 10/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25749 posts

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/mar/09/epa-scott-pruitt-carbon-dioxide-global-warming-climate-change

Scott Pruitt, Donald Trump’s head of the US Environmental Protection Agency, has dismissed a basic scientific understanding of climate change by denying that carbon dioxide emissions are a primary cause of global warming.


Literally saying that water isn't wet.

edit: also Bill Leak is dead.
12:10pm 10/03/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12645 posts
Well some electricity is coal; but there's a new thing in the UK where we're going to steal some sweet sweet nuclear electricity from the French.


Britain is often importing more Nuclear Electricity from France than all of its Windfarms. Its obvious why that new link is needed.

How else does Britain get its Electricity ?
< Trigger Alert >
If you are an Environmentalist this will make you cry

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4255010/Idiocy-replacing-coal-power-stations-burning-wood.html


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/02/24/01/3D97460300000578-0-image-m-65_1487899177633.jpg


This is why Government intervention in any Industry is always bad.
Ideology of the Government decides what the most efficient way to produce something is rather than the Market/Consumer relationship.


01:25pm 10/03/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2015 posts

lols I can tell you are super concerned for the environment facey. Why can't they just burn natures own fuel, coal?

Imagine shipping a fuel source halfway around the world to then burn it and create environmental problems? Sound familiar?

edit:

http://www.afr.com/news/tesla-battery-boss-we-can-solve-sas-power-woes-in-100-days-20170308-gut8xh

The PM of innovation will be deaf to this call. He just wants to push the coal agenda.


02:12pm 10/03/17 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2347 posts


edit:

http://www.afr.com/news/tesla-battery-boss-we-can-solve-sas-power-woes-in-100-days-20170308-gut8xh

The PM of innovation will be deaf to this call. He just wants to push the coal agenda.


And Elon Musk said:



Elon Musk @elonmusk @mcannonbrookes Tesla will get the system installed and working 100 days from contract signature or it is free. That serious enough for you?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-10/tesla-boss-elon-musk-pledges-to-fix-sas-electricity-woes/8344084

Mike Cannon-Brookes (Altassian Co-founder) responded;

Mike Cannon-Brookes @mcannonbrookes @elonmusk legend! â˜€ï¸ You’re on mate. Give me 7 days to try sort out politics & funding. DM me a quote for approx 100MW cost - mates rates! 3:46 PM - 10 Mar 2017


Looks to me that any Fossil Politician has made themselves irrelevant.
06:28pm 10/03/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40470 posts
lolz redhat lives in some alternate fantasy world where people never go anywhere or do anything.
06:53pm 10/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23663 posts
tesla doesn't make any profits.
07:04pm 10/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25750 posts
Maybe they need to release a car with a nuclear reactor as a fuel tank (lol)
07:06pm 10/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23664 posts
Of all the unthinkable amazing scientific advancements mankind has achieved that's the one you're declaring impossible...
07:23pm 10/03/17 Permalink
Vash
5168 posts
I don't think he's saying it's not possible Infi.. There's a bunch of other reasons not to put a nuclear reactor into private vehicles.
07:28pm 10/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25751 posts
A nuclear reactor works by nuclear material boiling water which drives a turbine producing electricity. It needs to be cooled, the radioactive material needs to be shielded. It very well may be impossible to practically fit all of that material into something the size of a car.

But that's not the point. A car accident occurs, and you've got exposed radioactive cores to deal with. The demand for uranium skyrockets (a finite resource btw so why even bother). All of a sudden you need to mine, store, transport and dispose of spent uranium in amounts orders of magnitude greater than before. As the Grand Wizard says, it can also be used for bad things so there's that to consider. It is a completely dumb and impractical idea especially when electric cars have come so far in the last decade. You're pretty much completely scientifically illiterate aren't you infi?
07:46pm 10/03/17 Permalink
deadlyf
Queensland
3991 posts
You know what uranium is, right? It’s this thing called nuclear weapons. And other things. Like lots of things are done with uranium. Including some bad things.
07:46pm 10/03/17 Permalink
Vash
5169 posts
You're pretty much completely scientifically illiterate aren't you infi?


As most conservatives tend to be.. History won't look kindly upon them when it comes to climate change.
We tried, future peoples. Probably reading this from Vault 1337, Archives of 2017. The time when humanity had the chance to keep Co2 in check, but then Trump was elected and a new world order arose of anti science and alternative facts.
08:06pm 10/03/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23665 posts
I am aware of those limitations. With that attitude we would never have landed on the moon. I am disappoint.

Don't get distracted from the fact that Tesla doesn't make any money and that means eventually he goes broke.
08:13pm 10/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25752 posts
You were not aware of those limitations because if you were you wouldn't have suggested something so childishly ridiculous.
08:17pm 10/03/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2016 posts
Nuclear cars, hilarious.

The plastics in the car take a couple hundred years to break down at end of life and the fuel only 50 thousand. Sounds like a f*****g plan boys.
08:27pm 10/03/17 Permalink
dais
Brisbane, Queensland
12124 posts
tesla doesn't make any profits.

Don't get distracted from the fact that Tesla doesn't make any money and that means eventually he goes broke.


Tesla sets a new record for revenue and deliveries, and scores a surprise profit

Tesla claims to have set new records for vehicle production, deliveries, and revenue, while also posting a surprise net profit of $21 million in the third quarter of 2016.


The story about Elon Musk volunteering to save South Australia's power network is truly amazing. Let's not forget infi, that Tesla own the largest battery factory in the world, by a long shot. They don't just make luxury electric vehicles which happen to be some of the safest cars money can buy.

More on that story here: Elon Musk: I can fix South Australia power network in 100 days or it's free

last edited by dais at 20:56:38 10/Mar/17
08:47pm 10/03/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7587 posts
bulls*** powahhh!

10:59pm 10/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25753 posts
So Flynn was/is literally a foreign agent. All part of making American Great Again I suppose.
12:12am 11/03/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2385 posts
Flynn is a worry. Erdogan is a maniac.

I think it is important to note that it all happened as private citizen.

Still it all forms part of a strategy when you think about it. Flynn is pretty strong on Islamist disruption in the middle east being the largest security threat to the US in the world today. Turkey and Russia have made their feeling on the subject pretty clear for a while now, so it makes sense they'd have short term alignment of interests with the US.

What ever the case may be its a much less sexy story then hilter rising.

As most conservatives tend to be.. History won't look kindly upon them when it comes to climate change.

Oh yes. Explain the science behind why a nuclear powered car is impractical.

I'm sure you've done the calculations and have a good scientific understanding of why it might be impractical.
09:56am 11/03/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
25755 posts
Explaining why a nuclear powered car is impractical is as easy as explaining why a nuclear powered cabbage is impractical. It requires the same amount of scientific knowledge as you need mathematical knowledge to know the multiplication tables.

This is just my opinion, and I am more than willing to abandon it if something convincing is posted, but I reckon the Trump administration is a far greater threat to USA's safety and security than the middle-east is. ISIS can pull off the occasional attack and kill scores of people, but Trump is in there, f*****g up new things in unfixable ways more and more every day. It's the worst thing to happen to the western world since I don't even know what. What's worse, he has a legion of followers who not only don't know what's going on, but who actually think what he is doing is good. That's the ingredient that makes the current situation so dangerous.
03:27pm 11/03/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2017 posts
The story about Elon Musk volunteering to save South Australia's power network is truly amazing.


What's going to be more amazing is us not taking him up on it.
06:18pm 11/03/17 Permalink
dais
Brisbane, Queensland
12126 posts
07:01pm 11/03/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12646 posts
08:11pm 11/03/17 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2348 posts
http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg35/ggb777/Fair Share_zpszgwtootc.jpg


Well it's debatable that they actually did the work, profits in a business are not generated by the CEO.
08:30pm 11/03/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7588 posts
cc: Trog; Infi; fpot; Vash; Facey; PornoPete; HurricaneJim; Spook; Sir Redhat; Viper119; Raven; Tollaz0r!; Fade2Black

Richard Fidler talks to interesting yank, Thomas Frank about how America's Democrats got it so wrong

http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/conversations/conversations-thomas-frank/8324254
09:29pm 11/03/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2018 posts
Interesting about the personal debt in america. I wonder what's going on in Australia?

http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/08aff6164d6d51d057c63cf95cc195bf
09:42pm 11/03/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12647 posts
Both the ABC and Sky News have called the election for Labor. Sky’s David Speers said it was a “bloodbath result” for the Liberals. As of 9pm Perth time (12 midnight AEST) Labor had taken 33 seats, the Liberals 10 and the Nationals 6. Labor’s share of the vote is 43 per cent, the Liberals are on 32 per cent, Greens 9 per cent and the Nationals and One Nation both on 6 per cent.


http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/western-australian-state-election-2017-results-labor-looks-to-topple-the-coalition-following-controversial-one-nation-deal/news-story/1cff6a9875f480af597c783cdb753fa1

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/02/04/23/3CC9EECF00000578-4192184-image-a-4_1486249663959.jpg

I been watching Pauline lately and shes become a bit arrogant.
It easy to catch the Redneck/Angry Liberal vote but to get anywhere you need to look competent and not speak before you think.

She lost touch with her base this week but I guess WA just wanted anyone but Liberal. Trunbulls "dont offend anyone" Federal leadership wouldnt have helped.



12:37am 12/03/17 Permalink
Zenmaster
Queensland
24 posts
I'm still unsure how it is that you think we care about the existing 2 party system Faceman.



Aussies won't go full Trump.



;)
01:14am 12/03/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2019 posts
Daily reminder of the LNP affordable housing policy.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6oUIutU8AA5w16.jpg

Is it inhumane to make these guys run a gauntlet while they're pelted with cabbages after the uprising?
04:16pm 12/03/17 Permalink
HurricaneJim
Brisbane, Queensland
2349 posts

cc: Trog; Infi; fpot; Vash; Facey; PornoPete; HurricaneJim; Spook; Sir Redhat; Viper119; Raven; Tollaz0r!; Fade2Black

Richard Fidler talks to interesting yank, Thomas Frank about how America's Democrats got it so wrong

http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/conversations/conversations-thomas-frank/8324254


Well that has been happening since Bob Hawke became PM, to be "progressive" Labor needs professionals. This tends to align them less with the workers than the "middle class". On the other side is the conservatives, fully in bed with Big Business. Turnbull being the prime example even though he knows we must act on climate change but his masters namely Coal and those who profit from the power network won't allow the change. He knows that NBN (FTTH) is better than his Fraudband but his masters in that field (Murdoch etc) don't want change. All of the "big businesses" are in favour of less tax and no regulations. Private enterprise will never allow change unless they can make a massive profit from it.

I personally don't like either of them but in our system it's a choice between the lesser of two evils.
07:00pm 12/03/17 Permalink
dais
Brisbane, Queensland
12127 posts






07:22pm 12/03/17 Permalink
dais
Brisbane, Queensland
12128 posts
On SBS World News they said Musk and Turnbull had an hour long conversation about the future of electricity supply today.
07:53pm 12/03/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12648 posts
Western Australia Liberal Party wiped out and Turnbull is spending an hour on the phone talking to a Socialist Billionaire about batteries when Australia has almost unlimited supplies of Gas and Coal.

08:49pm 12/03/17 Permalink
dais
Brisbane, Queensland
12129 posts
Western Australia Liberal Party wiped out and Turnbull is spending an hour on the phone talking to a Socialist Billionaire about batteries when Australia has almost unlimited supplies of Gas and Coal.


Could that possibly be because renewables with batteries are cheaper?

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/politics/federal/2017/03/09/renewables-now-aust-cheapest-power-option.html
Renewables are now Australia's cheapest energy option, even when the cost of storage to make the intermittent power sources reliable is added.

And 'clean coal' using carbon capture and storage technology won't be commercially viable until 2030 at the earliest, meaning it won't help Australia meet its Paris Agreement emissions reduction obligations, energy market analyst RepuTex says.

It finds in a major study released on Thursday that while there are many opportunities to cut emissions, carbon capture and storage is not among the cheapest.

Traditionally, gas power has been Australia's cheapest source of reliable power.

But with gas prices rising and the cost of storage technologies falling, RepuTex says the 'true cost' of renewables - generation plus storage - is now cheaper.


last edited by dais at 21:02:14 12/Mar/17
09:01pm 12/03/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12649 posts
How can you possibly have a sensible conversation about Wind Solar and now Batteries replacing Fossil Fuels ?

10:12pm 12/03/17 Permalink