We don’t seem to have an October politics thread.
I’m not sure I entirely agree with Michelle Grattan about people not forgiving a “broken election promise”. Probably my own bias though.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-07/treasurer-throws-more-doubt-on-stage-3-tax-cuts/101510216
buffy said:
We don’t seem to have an October politics thread.I’m not sure I entirely agree with Michelle Grattan about people not forgiving a “broken election promise”. Probably my own bias though.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-07/treasurer-throws-more-doubt-on-stage-3-tax-cuts/101510216
So how many election promises does she want to go back and not forgive?
The same happens after every election.
roughbarked said:
buffy said:
We don’t seem to have an October politics thread.I’m not sure I entirely agree with Michelle Grattan about people not forgiving a “broken election promise”. Probably my own bias though.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-07/treasurer-throws-more-doubt-on-stage-3-tax-cuts/101510216
So how many election promises does she want to go back and not forgive?
The same happens after every election.
The Albansese govt has already kept enough of its promises to make it look like a model of propriety compared to the Morrison govt. I reckon we could forgive it a severe bend on this one, which seems only to affect those getting $180,000 – $200,000 p.a.
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:
buffy said:
We don’t seem to have an October politics thread.I’m not sure I entirely agree with Michelle Grattan about people not forgiving a “broken election promise”. Probably my own bias though.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-07/treasurer-throws-more-doubt-on-stage-3-tax-cuts/101510216
So how many election promises does she want to go back and not forgive?
The same happens after every election.
The Albansese govt has already kept enough of its promises to make it look like a model of propriety compared to the Morrison govt. I reckon we could forgive it a severe bend on this one, which seems only to affect those getting $180,000 – $200,000 p.a.
on the other hand why are élections made on promises anyway, why not just make provisional conditional plans and then inform the public of progress and how plans evolve
SCIENCE said:
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:So how many election promises does she want to go back and not forgive?
The same happens after every election.
The Albansese govt has already kept enough of its promises to make it look like a model of propriety compared to the Morrison govt. I reckon we could forgive it a severe bend on this one, which seems only to affect those getting $180,000 – $200,000 p.a.
on the other hand why are élections made on promises anyway, why not just make provisional conditional plans and then inform the public of progress and how plans evolve
Or, briefly state what the aims of your government will be (policies), and outline some methods/alternatives by which they might be achieved, without binding yourself to any one approach.
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:
buffy said:
We don’t seem to have an October politics thread.I’m not sure I entirely agree with Michelle Grattan about people not forgiving a “broken election promise”. Probably my own bias though.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-07/treasurer-throws-more-doubt-on-stage-3-tax-cuts/101510216
So how many election promises does she want to go back and not forgive?
The same happens after every election.
The Albansese govt has already kept enough of its promises to make it look like a model of propriety compared to the Morrison govt. I reckon we could forgive it a severe bend on this one, which seems only to affect those getting $180,000 – $200,000 p.a.
They could continue the tax offsets and give most taxpayers $1000 a year to help with cost of living and direct most of the spoils to those on lower and medium incomes. They can leave tax reform at the top until bracket creep pushes too many into the top bracket.
I have an idea for the Government. Divide any promises made into core & non core.
Or has that one been used previously.https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/06/labor-attacked-by-former-rba-governor-bernie-fraser-for-sticking-to-dodgy-stage-three-tax-cuts
The former governor of the Reserve Bank, Bernie Fraser, has criticised the Labor government for sticking to the “very dodgy” stage-three tax cuts, arguing they should be repealed to allow for spending on social programs.
Condemning the tax cut package as “unfair and unwarranted”, Fraser said Labor in opposition had only supported the measure as part of its “small target strategy to gain political power for the party” and it now ought to be reconsidered.
“There is no honour in the government standing by what in truth is really a very dodgy commitment and hardly an unbreakable one in current circumstances,” Fraser told the Australia Institute’s revenue summit in Canberra on Thursday.
>>Fraser said Labor in opposition had only supported the measure as part of its “small target strategy to gain political power for the party”
Yep, you can’t trust them.
dv said:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/06/labor-attacked-by-former-rba-governor-bernie-fraser-for-sticking-to-dodgy-stage-three-tax-cutsThe former governor of the Reserve Bank, Bernie Fraser, has criticised the Labor government for sticking to the “very dodgy” stage-three tax cuts, arguing they should be repealed to allow for spending on social programs.
Condemning the tax cut package as “unfair and unwarranted”, Fraser said Labor in opposition had only supported the measure as part of its “small target strategy to gain political power for the party” and it now ought to be reconsidered.
“There is no honour in the government standing by what in truth is really a very dodgy commitment and hardly an unbreakable one in current circumstances,” Fraser told the Australia Institute’s revenue summit in Canberra on Thursday.
Hope he is listened to.
dv said:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/06/labor-attacked-by-former-rba-governor-bernie-fraser-for-sticking-to-dodgy-stage-three-tax-cutsThe former governor of the Reserve Bank, Bernie Fraser, has criticised the Labor government for sticking to the “very dodgy” stage-three tax cuts, arguing they should be repealed to allow for spending on social programs.
Condemning the tax cut package as “unfair and unwarranted”, Fraser said Labor in opposition had only supported the measure as part of its “small target strategy to gain political power for the party” and it now ought to be reconsidered.
“There is no honour in the government standing by what in truth is really a very dodgy commitment and hardly an unbreakable one in current circumstances,” Fraser told the Australia Institute’s revenue summit in Canberra on Thursday.
This ALP is quite disappointing in too many ways. They are certainly a lesser evil than the LNP though.
Peak Warming Man said:
>>Fraser said Labor in opposition had only supported the measure as part of its “small target strategy to gain political power for the party”Yep, you can’t trust them.
They’ll eat you and everyone you know
Spiny Norman said:
dv said:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/06/labor-attacked-by-former-rba-governor-bernie-fraser-for-sticking-to-dodgy-stage-three-tax-cutsThe former governor of the Reserve Bank, Bernie Fraser, has criticised the Labor government for sticking to the “very dodgy” stage-three tax cuts, arguing they should be repealed to allow for spending on social programs.
Condemning the tax cut package as “unfair and unwarranted”, Fraser said Labor in opposition had only supported the measure as part of its “small target strategy to gain political power for the party” and it now ought to be reconsidered.
“There is no honour in the government standing by what in truth is really a very dodgy commitment and hardly an unbreakable one in current circumstances,” Fraser told the Australia Institute’s revenue summit in Canberra on Thursday.
This ALP is quite disappointing in too many ways. They are certainly a lesser evil than the LNP though.
Give them a bit of time to sort it out. Is about all I can add to that. Anything is preferrable to going back to the current LNP.
Jim Chalmers has a unique chance to remake Australia – or to squander $243bn on the rich
Australia is one of the richest countries in the world but decades of tax cuts have trained us to feel poor
Jim Chalmers has a once-in-a-century opportunity to spend a quarter of a trillion dollars on nation building without going into a cent of debt. In fact, if he chooses his public investments well, he could drive growth up, cost of living down, and pay down the government’s debt faster than currently expected. Or he can keep the stage-three tax cuts.
But despite the clear evidence that the overwhelming share of the stage-three tax cuts will go to the highest income earners, the attempts to muddy those waters never stops.
According to the Australian, scrapping the cuts would mean “2.5 million middle income Australians will pay thousands of dollars in additional tax”. It then goes on to describe those middle income Australians as individuals earning between $120,000 and $160,000 a year.
The most inconvenient truth of Australian economic debate is that those earning $120,000 per year are nothing like “middle income” Australians. The average earning of a fulltime worker in Australia is $92,000 and of course that average is skewed upwards by CEOs like Macquarie Bank’s Shemara Wikramanayake, who takes home $14.6m a year. The median income was just $62,868 last year.
While it may help win votes and sell papers to pretend that those earning $120,000-$160,000 are “middle income earners”, such deception does nothing to help Australians understand the country they live in or the likely impact of policy change.
The other dubious argument used by those trying to rescue the stage-three tax cuts is to argue that they are simply a solution to the “bracket creep” caused by rising nominal wages pushing people into higher tax brackets. The first problem with that argument is that while all taxpayers, including low income earners, experience bracket creep, the lowest income earners get absolutely nothing from these tax cuts, while the highest income earners get overcompensated. And the second problem is that while CEO pay is rising at 17%, low income earners are seeing their real wages fall. The idea that the tax system need to focus on the pain experienced by those at the top is simply bizarre.
But back to Chalmers’ opportunity. The tax cuts, released in the Morrison government’s 2018 budget, are one of the most expensive budget announcements ever made in Australia. They were announced with no modelling, no costing and no offsetting spending cuts. If they go ahead, their $243bn cost over the next 10 years alone is on par with the lifetime cost of our (just as poorly thought through) plan to buy nuclear submarines.
If Chalmers can get cabinet to grasp the stinging nettle of Morrison’s tax plan he can pull our entire political and democratic debate from the funk it’s been in for decades. Australia is one of the richest countries in the world; we are in the middle of an energy price boom; we have enormous opportunities in renewable energy; but decades of tax cuts have trained us to feel poor, that we can’t have nice things, and that the future is something to fear rather than embrace.
People in rich countries such as Norway, Denmark, Finland and Sweden take for granted that they can have nice things like free childcare and university degrees. Their quality public schools and health systems are such that private schools and private health insurance are almost non-existent. And while it may seem strange for Australians to hear, having all those nice things hasn’t hurt their economies – in fact, it has helped them. Back in 1990, GDP per hour worked in Australia was about the same as that of the Nordic counties, but since we embraced the neoliberal obsessions of tax cuts, spending cuts, wage cuts and privatisation, productivity in the Nordic countries has steadily outpaced our anaemic performance.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/commentisfree/2022/oct/06/australians-on-120k-are-not-middle-income-earners-we-must-remake-australia-not-spend-243bn-on-the-rich
dv said:
Jim Chalmers has a unique chance to remake Australia – or to squander $243bn on the richAustralia is one of the richest countries in the world but decades of tax cuts have trained us to feel poor
Jim Chalmers has a once-in-a-century opportunity to spend a quarter of a trillion dollars on nation building without going into a cent of debt. In fact, if he chooses his public investments well, he could drive growth up, cost of living down, and pay down the government’s debt faster than currently expected. Or he can keep the stage-three tax cuts.
But despite the clear evidence that the overwhelming share of the stage-three tax cuts will go to the highest income earners, the attempts to muddy those waters never stops.
According to the Australian, scrapping the cuts would mean “2.5 million middle income Australians will pay thousands of dollars in additional tax”. It then goes on to describe those middle income Australians as individuals earning between $120,000 and $160,000 a year.
The most inconvenient truth of Australian economic debate is that those earning $120,000 per year are nothing like “middle income” Australians. The average earning of a fulltime worker in Australia is $92,000 and of course that average is skewed upwards by CEOs like Macquarie Bank’s Shemara Wikramanayake, who takes home $14.6m a year. The median income was just $62,868 last year.
While it may help win votes and sell papers to pretend that those earning $120,000-$160,000 are “middle income earners”, such deception does nothing to help Australians understand the country they live in or the likely impact of policy change.
The other dubious argument used by those trying to rescue the stage-three tax cuts is to argue that they are simply a solution to the “bracket creep” caused by rising nominal wages pushing people into higher tax brackets. The first problem with that argument is that while all taxpayers, including low income earners, experience bracket creep, the lowest income earners get absolutely nothing from these tax cuts, while the highest income earners get overcompensated. And the second problem is that while CEO pay is rising at 17%, low income earners are seeing their real wages fall. The idea that the tax system need to focus on the pain experienced by those at the top is simply bizarre.
But back to Chalmers’ opportunity. The tax cuts, released in the Morrison government’s 2018 budget, are one of the most expensive budget announcements ever made in Australia. They were announced with no modelling, no costing and no offsetting spending cuts. If they go ahead, their $243bn cost over the next 10 years alone is on par with the lifetime cost of our (just as poorly thought through) plan to buy nuclear submarines.
If Chalmers can get cabinet to grasp the stinging nettle of Morrison’s tax plan he can pull our entire political and democratic debate from the funk it’s been in for decades. Australia is one of the richest countries in the world; we are in the middle of an energy price boom; we have enormous opportunities in renewable energy; but decades of tax cuts have trained us to feel poor, that we can’t have nice things, and that the future is something to fear rather than embrace.
People in rich countries such as Norway, Denmark, Finland and Sweden take for granted that they can have nice things like free childcare and university degrees. Their quality public schools and health systems are such that private schools and private health insurance are almost non-existent. And while it may seem strange for Australians to hear, having all those nice things hasn’t hurt their economies – in fact, it has helped them. Back in 1990, GDP per hour worked in Australia was about the same as that of the Nordic counties, but since we embraced the neoliberal obsessions of tax cuts, spending cuts, wage cuts and privatisation, productivity in the Nordic countries has steadily outpaced our anaemic performance.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/commentisfree/2022/oct/06/australians-on-120k-are-not-middle-income-earners-we-must-remake-australia-not-spend-243bn-on-the-rich
dv said:
Jim Chalmers has a unique chance to remake Australia – or to squander $243bn on the richAustralia is one of the richest countries in the world but decades of tax cuts have trained us to feel poor
Jim Chalmers has a once-in-a-century opportunity to spend a quarter of a trillion dollars on nation building without going into a cent of debt. In fact, if he chooses his public investments well, he could drive growth up, cost of living down, and pay down the government’s debt faster than currently expected. Or he can keep the stage-three tax cuts.
But despite the clear evidence that the overwhelming share of the stage-three tax cuts will go to the highest income earners, the attempts to muddy those waters never stops.
According to the Australian, scrapping the cuts would mean “2.5 million middle income Australians will pay thousands of dollars in additional tax”. It then goes on to describe those middle income Australians as individuals earning between $120,000 and $160,000 a year.
The most inconvenient truth of Australian economic debate is that those earning $120,000 per year are nothing like “middle income” Australians. The average earning of a fulltime worker in Australia is $92,000 and of course that average is skewed upwards by CEOs like Macquarie Bank’s Shemara Wikramanayake, who takes home $14.6m a year. The median income was just $62,868 last year.
While it may help win votes and sell papers to pretend that those earning $120,000-$160,000 are “middle income earners”, such deception does nothing to help Australians understand the country they live in or the likely impact of policy change.
The other dubious argument used by those trying to rescue the stage-three tax cuts is to argue that they are simply a solution to the “bracket creep” caused by rising nominal wages pushing people into higher tax brackets. The first problem with that argument is that while all taxpayers, including low income earners, experience bracket creep, the lowest income earners get absolutely nothing from these tax cuts, while the highest income earners get overcompensated. And the second problem is that while CEO pay is rising at 17%, low income earners are seeing their real wages fall. The idea that the tax system need to focus on the pain experienced by those at the top is simply bizarre.
But back to Chalmers’ opportunity. The tax cuts, released in the Morrison government’s 2018 budget, are one of the most expensive budget announcements ever made in Australia. They were announced with no modelling, no costing and no offsetting spending cuts. If they go ahead, their $243bn cost over the next 10 years alone is on par with the lifetime cost of our (just as poorly thought through) plan to buy nuclear submarines.
If Chalmers can get cabinet to grasp the stinging nettle of Morrison’s tax plan he can pull our entire political and democratic debate from the funk it’s been in for decades. Australia is one of the richest countries in the world; we are in the middle of an energy price boom; we have enormous opportunities in renewable energy; but decades of tax cuts have trained us to feel poor, that we can’t have nice things, and that the future is something to fear rather than embrace.
People in rich countries such as Norway, Denmark, Finland and Sweden take for granted that they can have nice things like free childcare and university degrees. Their quality public schools and health systems are such that private schools and private health insurance are almost non-existent. And while it may seem strange for Australians to hear, having all those nice things hasn’t hurt their economies – in fact, it has helped them. Back in 1990, GDP per hour worked in Australia was about the same as that of the Nordic counties, but since we embraced the neoliberal obsessions of tax cuts, spending cuts, wage cuts and privatisation, productivity in the Nordic countries has steadily outpaced our anaemic performance.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/commentisfree/2022/oct/06/australians-on-120k-are-not-middle-income-earners-we-must-remake-australia-not-spend-243bn-on-the-rich
Will he cave into his media masters?
dv said:
Jim Chalmers has a unique chance to remake Australia – or to squander $243bn on the richAustralia is one of the richest countries in the world but decades of tax cuts have trained us to feel poor
Jim Chalmers has a once-in-a-century opportunity to spend a quarter of a trillion dollars on nation building without going into a cent of debt. In fact, if he chooses his public investments well, he could drive growth up, cost of living down, and pay down the government’s debt faster than currently expected. Or he can keep the stage-three tax cuts.
But despite the clear evidence that the overwhelming share of the stage-three tax cuts will go to the highest income earners, the attempts to muddy those waters never stops.
According to the Australian, scrapping the cuts would mean “2.5 million middle income Australians will pay thousands of dollars in additional tax”. It then goes on to describe those middle income Australians as individuals earning between $120,000 and $160,000 a year.
The most inconvenient truth of Australian economic debate is that those earning $120,000 per year are nothing like “middle income” Australians. The average earning of a fulltime worker in Australia is $92,000 and of course that average is skewed upwards by CEOs like Macquarie Bank’s Shemara Wikramanayake, who takes home $14.6m a year. The median income was just $62,868 last year.
While it may help win votes and sell papers to pretend that those earning $120,000-$160,000 are “middle income earners”, such deception does nothing to help Australians understand the country they live in or the likely impact of policy change.
The other dubious argument used by those trying to rescue the stage-three tax cuts is to argue that they are simply a solution to the “bracket creep” caused by rising nominal wages pushing people into higher tax brackets. The first problem with that argument is that while all taxpayers, including low income earners, experience bracket creep, the lowest income earners get absolutely nothing from these tax cuts, while the highest income earners get overcompensated. And the second problem is that while CEO pay is rising at 17%, low income earners are seeing their real wages fall. The idea that the tax system need to focus on the pain experienced by those at the top is simply bizarre.
But back to Chalmers’ opportunity. The tax cuts, released in the Morrison government’s 2018 budget, are one of the most expensive budget announcements ever made in Australia. They were announced with no modelling, no costing and no offsetting spending cuts. If they go ahead, their $243bn cost over the next 10 years alone is on par with the lifetime cost of our (just as poorly thought through) plan to buy nuclear submarines.
If Chalmers can get cabinet to grasp the stinging nettle of Morrison’s tax plan he can pull our entire political and democratic debate from the funk it’s been in for decades. Australia is one of the richest countries in the world; we are in the middle of an energy price boom; we have enormous opportunities in renewable energy; but decades of tax cuts have trained us to feel poor, that we can’t have nice things, and that the future is something to fear rather than embrace.
People in rich countries such as Norway, Denmark, Finland and Sweden take for granted that they can have nice things like free childcare and university degrees. Their quality public schools and health systems are such that private schools and private health insurance are almost non-existent. And while it may seem strange for Australians to hear, having all those nice things hasn’t hurt their economies – in fact, it has helped them. Back in 1990, GDP per hour worked in Australia was about the same as that of the Nordic counties, but since we embraced the neoliberal obsessions of tax cuts, spending cuts, wage cuts and privatisation, productivity in the Nordic countries has steadily outpaced our anaemic performance.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/commentisfree/2022/oct/06/australians-on-120k-are-not-middle-income-earners-we-must-remake-australia-not-spend-243bn-on-the-rich
But one thing my son complained about. In Norway, they close down their swimming pools in winter. Apparently, heating them must take too much money?
roughbarked said:
dv said:
Jim Chalmers has a unique chance to remake Australia – or to squander $243bn on the richAustralia is one of the richest countries in the world but decades of tax cuts have trained us to feel poor
Jim Chalmers has a once-in-a-century opportunity to spend a quarter of a trillion dollars on nation building without going into a cent of debt. In fact, if he chooses his public investments well, he could drive growth up, cost of living down, and pay down the government’s debt faster than currently expected. Or he can keep the stage-three tax cuts.
But despite the clear evidence that the overwhelming share of the stage-three tax cuts will go to the highest income earners, the attempts to muddy those waters never stops.
According to the Australian, scrapping the cuts would mean “2.5 million middle income Australians will pay thousands of dollars in additional tax”. It then goes on to describe those middle income Australians as individuals earning between $120,000 and $160,000 a year.
The most inconvenient truth of Australian economic debate is that those earning $120,000 per year are nothing like “middle income” Australians. The average earning of a fulltime worker in Australia is $92,000 and of course that average is skewed upwards by CEOs like Macquarie Bank’s Shemara Wikramanayake, who takes home $14.6m a year. The median income was just $62,868 last year.
While it may help win votes and sell papers to pretend that those earning $120,000-$160,000 are “middle income earners”, such deception does nothing to help Australians understand the country they live in or the likely impact of policy change.
The other dubious argument used by those trying to rescue the stage-three tax cuts is to argue that they are simply a solution to the “bracket creep” caused by rising nominal wages pushing people into higher tax brackets. The first problem with that argument is that while all taxpayers, including low income earners, experience bracket creep, the lowest income earners get absolutely nothing from these tax cuts, while the highest income earners get overcompensated. And the second problem is that while CEO pay is rising at 17%, low income earners are seeing their real wages fall. The idea that the tax system need to focus on the pain experienced by those at the top is simply bizarre.
But back to Chalmers’ opportunity. The tax cuts, released in the Morrison government’s 2018 budget, are one of the most expensive budget announcements ever made in Australia. They were announced with no modelling, no costing and no offsetting spending cuts. If they go ahead, their $243bn cost over the next 10 years alone is on par with the lifetime cost of our (just as poorly thought through) plan to buy nuclear submarines.
If Chalmers can get cabinet to grasp the stinging nettle of Morrison’s tax plan he can pull our entire political and democratic debate from the funk it’s been in for decades. Australia is one of the richest countries in the world; we are in the middle of an energy price boom; we have enormous opportunities in renewable energy; but decades of tax cuts have trained us to feel poor, that we can’t have nice things, and that the future is something to fear rather than embrace.
People in rich countries such as Norway, Denmark, Finland and Sweden take for granted that they can have nice things like free childcare and university degrees. Their quality public schools and health systems are such that private schools and private health insurance are almost non-existent. And while it may seem strange for Australians to hear, having all those nice things hasn’t hurt their economies – in fact, it has helped them. Back in 1990, GDP per hour worked in Australia was about the same as that of the Nordic counties, but since we embraced the neoliberal obsessions of tax cuts, spending cuts, wage cuts and privatisation, productivity in the Nordic countries has steadily outpaced our anaemic performance.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/commentisfree/2022/oct/06/australians-on-120k-are-not-middle-income-earners-we-must-remake-australia-not-spend-243bn-on-the-rich
Good article.
It is. Speaks with straight tongue and all that.
roughbarked said:
But one thing my son complained about. In Norway, they close down their swimming pools in winter. Apparently, heating them must take too much money?
Possibly just one of those things that Norwegians have always done, and see no reason to change now. Like eating whales.
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:But one thing my son complained about. In Norway, they close down their swimming pools in winter. Apparently, heating them must take too much money?
Possibly just one of those things that Norwegians have always done, and see no reason to change now. Like eating whales.
Water parks close in winter here, in WA at least
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:But one thing my son complained about. In Norway, they close down their swimming pools in winter. Apparently, heating them must take too much money?
Possibly just one of those things that Norwegians have always done, and see no reason to change now. Like eating whales.
I don’t remember any swimming pools in Australia staying open in winter.
Cymek said:
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:But one thing my son complained about. In Norway, they close down their swimming pools in winter. Apparently, heating them must take too much money?
Possibly just one of those things that Norwegians have always done, and see no reason to change now. Like eating whales.
Water parks close in winter here, in WA at least
The big wave pool at Bayswater Waves is open all year
dv said:
Cymek said:
captain_spalding said:Possibly just one of those things that Norwegians have always done, and see no reason to change now. Like eating whales.
Water parks close in winter here, in WA at least
The big wave pool at Bayswater Waves is open all year
Pool complex in Toowoomba open in winter.
captain_spalding said:
dv said:
Cymek said:Water parks close in winter here, in WA at least
The big wave pool at Bayswater Waves is open all year
Pool complex in Toowoomba open in winter.
midwinter naked plunge in Derwent river.
sarahs mum said:
captain_spalding said:
dv said:The big wave pool at Bayswater Waves is open all year
Pool complex in Toowoomba open in winter.
midwinter naked plunge in Derwent river.
You left of the end part of that headline:
‘…ends in death’.
Michael V said:
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:But one thing my son complained about. In Norway, they close down their swimming pools in winter. Apparently, heating them must take too much money?
Possibly just one of those things that Norwegians have always done, and see no reason to change now. Like eating whales.
I don’t remember any swimming pools in Australia staying open in winter.
Indoor ones do, but not outdoor ones, I think.
captain_spalding said:
sarahs mum said:
captain_spalding said:Pool complex in Toowoomba open in winter.
midwinter naked plunge in Derwent river.
You left of the end part of that headline:
‘…ends in death’.
no it doesn’t.
When we lived near Bundaberg, we said we could discern where people came from by their midwinter attire/behaviour.
Locals: long sleeves, maybe a flanno shirt, light jumper/cardigan.
Northern Australians: parkas, heavy jumpers, complaints about the cold.
Southern mainland Australians: shorts, T-shirts.
Tasmanians: swimming in the sea. ‘Look, mum, i’ve been in for ten minutes and i’m still not dead!’.
dv said:
Cymek said:
captain_spalding said:Possibly just one of those things that Norwegians have always done, and see no reason to change now. Like eating whales.
Water parks close in winter here, in WA at least
The big wave pool at Bayswater Waves is open all year
That is also indoors
Arts said:
dv said:
Cymek said:Water parks close in winter here, in WA at least
The big wave pool at Bayswater Waves is open all year
That is also indoors
Well, if we’re going to split the ‘indoor/outdoor’ hair when the original query was ‘any’…
captain_spalding said:
Arts said:
dv said:The big wave pool at Bayswater Waves is open all year
That is also indoors
Well, if we’re going to split the ‘indoor/outdoor’ hair when the original query was ‘any’…
Of course, we don’t actually know if the Norwegian pools mentioned at the start are indoor or outdoor.
buffy said:
captain_spalding said:
Arts said:That is also indoors
Well, if we’re going to split the ‘indoor/outdoor’ hair when the original query was ‘any’…
Of course, we don’t actually know if the Norwegian pools mentioned at the start are indoor or outdoor.
Good point.
captain_spalding said:
Arts said:
dv said:The big wave pool at Bayswater Waves is open all year
That is also indoors
Well, if we’re going to split the ‘indoor/outdoor’ hair when the original query was ‘any’…
I have no experience of indoor pools, except at Uni, where I went just once; the air stinging my eyes drove me out of the room.
Michael V said:
captain_spalding said:
Arts said:That is also indoors
Well, if we’re going to split the ‘indoor/outdoor’ hair when the original query was ‘any’…
I have no experience of indoor pools, except at Uni, where I went just once; the air stinging my eyes drove me out of the room.
Chlorine? or eyecicles?
Kingy said:
Michael V said:
captain_spalding said:Well, if we’re going to split the ‘indoor/outdoor’ hair when the original query was ‘any’…
I have no experience of indoor pools, except at Uni, where I went just once; the air stinging my eyes drove me out of the room.
Chlorine? or eyecicles?
Chlorine.
Arts said:
dv said:
Cymek said:Water parks close in winter here, in WA at least
The big wave pool at Bayswater Waves is open all year
That is also indoors
Yeah I know
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:But one thing my son complained about. In Norway, they close down their swimming pools in winter. Apparently, heating them must take too much money?
Possibly just one of those things that Norwegians have always done, and see no reason to change now. Like eating whales.
yeah
Michael V said:
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:But one thing my son complained about. In Norway, they close down their swimming pools in winter. Apparently, heating them must take too much money?
Possibly just one of those things that Norwegians have always done, and see no reason to change now. Like eating whales.
I don’t remember any swimming pools in Australia staying open in winter.
We have had heated swmming pools here since the seventies.
roughbarked said:
Michael V said:
captain_spalding said:Possibly just one of those things that Norwegians have always done, and see no reason to change now. Like eating whales.
I don’t remember any swimming pools in Australia staying open in winter.
We have had heated swmming pools here since the seventies.
plus the buildings are outside.
buffy said:
Michael V said:
captain_spalding said:Possibly just one of those things that Norwegians have always done, and see no reason to change now. Like eating whales.
I don’t remember any swimming pools in Australia staying open in winter.
Indoor ones do, but not outdoor ones, I think.
This.
captain_spalding said:
buffy said:
captain_spalding said:Well, if we’re going to split the ‘indoor/outdoor’ hair when the original query was ‘any’…
Of course, we don’t actually know if the Norwegian pools mentioned at the start are indoor or outdoor.
Good point.
I can assure you that they were not outdoor.
ChrispenEvan said:
roughbarked said:
Michael V said:I don’t remember any swimming pools in Australia staying open in winter.
We have had heated swmming pools here since the seventies.
plus the buildings are outside.
Inescapable.
roughbarked said:
captain_spalding said:
buffy said:Of course, we don’t actually know if the Norwegian pools mentioned at the start are indoor or outdoor.
Good point.
I can assure you that they were not outdoor.
You can have outdoor heated pools and Scandinavians do weird things with hot tubs and stuff outside. I see no reason for them not to have outdoor heated swimming pools as well as indoor ones (which could be year round use).
buffy said:
roughbarked said:
captain_spalding said:Good point.
I can assure you that they were not outdoor.
You can have outdoor heated pools and Scandinavians do weird things with hot tubs and stuff outside. I see no reason for them not to have outdoor heated swimming pools as well as indoor ones (which could be year round use).
Just the bigger the pool the bigger the power bill.
“Greens push for National Transition Authority”
I hope that’s about climate change.
roughbarked said:
buffy said:
roughbarked said:I can assure you that they were not outdoor.
You can have outdoor heated pools and Scandinavians do weird things with hot tubs and stuff outside. I see no reason for them not to have outdoor heated swimming pools as well as indoor ones (which could be year round use).
Just the bigger the pool the bigger the power bill.
Norway has hydro out the wazoo and up until just recently had very low power costs.
Peak Warming Man said:
“Greens push for National Transition Authority”I hope that’s about climate change.
snigger
Peak Warming Man said:
“Greens push for National Transition Authority”I hope that’s about climate change.
LOL :)
https://www.newcastleherald.com.au/story/7922104/greens-push-for-national-transition-authority/
sibeen said:
roughbarked said:
buffy said:You can have outdoor heated pools and Scandinavians do weird things with hot tubs and stuff outside. I see no reason for them not to have outdoor heated swimming pools as well as indoor ones (which could be year round use).
Just the bigger the pool the bigger the power bill.
Norway has hydro out the wazoo and up until just recently had very low power costs.
They must have another reason then.
https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/opinion/topic/2022/10/08/mathias-cormanns-failures-the-oecd
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-09/federal-government-appears-set-to-maintain-stage-3-tax-cuts/101516346
I broadly think the tax cuts are a good idea if for no other reason that it will force the Labs to be a bit more innovative when it comes to actual tax reform. I think there is some pretty low hanging fruit in lowering overall individual tax rates but putting a cap on tax deductions (say $10k for example) as well as looking at eliminating many of crazy super and capital gains tax offsets.
The Liberal Party’s campaign boss has angrily threatened to quit as the election campaign is about to begin over a feud with Opposition Leader Matthew Guy’s chief of staff, who MPs and officials claim has “gone rogue” in his attempt to revive the opposition’s fortunes.
Party insiders say that a lack of an economic narrative and too few volunteers, coupled with a multimillion-dollar shortfall in funds from the Liberal-aligned Cormack Foundation, are hampering attempts to stop Labor winning a third term in office. Ongoing leadership speculation is also causing angst among MPs.
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/liberal-campaign-beset-by-threats-to-quit-surprise-announcements-and-lack-of-cash-20221007-p5bnwm.html
Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Has Been Declared a Hate Group
Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party has been listed as one of 20 established and emerging hate groups in Australia by a global extremism think tank, for its track record on anti-multiculturalism, white nationalism, and COVID-19 conspiracy theories.
In a report released on Wednesday, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) added One Nation and the Australian Christian Lobby to its registry of Australian hate groups, as part of an educational global series aimed at illustrating how local hate groups interact with others around the world.
more…
https://globalextremism.org/australia/
Australia’s hate and right-wing extremism groups, according to the GPAHE
https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/2022/10/10/kohler-world-nations-destruction/
ChrispenEvan said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/2022/10/10/kohler-world-nations-destruction/
If the world could slow down the destruction enough to allow me to get home that would be good. I received Gracie and Sally Cat’s import verification this week.
Tau.Neutrino said:
Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Has Been Declared a Hate GroupPauline Hanson’s One Nation Party has been listed as one of 20 established and emerging hate groups in Australia by a global extremism think tank, for its track record on anti-multiculturalism, white nationalism, and COVID-19 conspiracy theories.
In a report released on Wednesday, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) added One Nation and the Australian Christian Lobby to its registry of Australian hate groups, as part of an educational global series aimed at illustrating how local hate groups interact with others around the world.
more…
https://globalextremism.org/australia/
Australia’s hate and right-wing extremism groups, according to the GPAHE
- Australia First Party (white nationalist, anti-immigrant)
- Australian Christian Lobby (anti-LGBTIQA+)
- Australian League of Rights (conspiracy, antisemitism, white nationalist)
- Australian Natives Association, Inc. (anti-immigrant, white nationalist, anti-woman)
- Australian Protectionist Party (anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, white nationalist)
- The Australian Vanguard (white supremacist, anti-immigrant, anti-Semitic)
- Binary Australia (anti-LGBTIQA+)
- European Australia Movement (white nationalist, neo-Nazi)
- Love Australia or Leave Party (anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim)
- Golden Dawn Australia (anti-immigrant, white nationalist)
- LGB Alliance Australia (anti-transgender)
- Nationalist Alternative (white nationalist, anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant)
- National Socialist Network (neo-Nazi, anti-Semitic, white nationalist)
- One Nation Party (anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, white nationalist, conspiracy)
- Proud Boys Australia (white nationalist, anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, anti-woman)
- Rise Up Australia (anti-Muslim, anti-LGBTIQA+)
- SA Mens Health Club (neo-Nazi)
- Society of Western Australian Nationalists (neo-Nazi)
- True Blue Crew (anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, white nationalist)
- White WellBeing Australia (white nationalist)
Pauline the hater.
kii said:
ChrispenEvan said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/2022/10/10/kohler-world-nations-destruction/If the world could slow down the destruction enough to allow me to get home that would be good. I received Gracie and Sally Cat’s import verification this week.
This is good.
Roy Morgan poll on federal voting intention 55-45.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-05/rod-culleton-charged-false-information-electoral-commission/101501698
Former One Nation senator Rod Culleton has been charged with giving false information to the Australian Electoral Commission.dv said:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-05/rod-culleton-charged-false-information-electoral-commission/101501698 Former One Nation senator Rod Culleton has been charged with giving false information to the Australian Electoral Commission.
Did he tell them he wasn’t a dickhead?
ChrispenEvan said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/2022/10/10/kohler-world-nations-destruction/
if worldism had a few problems you’d get less than a hint from reading that
https://antonygreen.com.au/voter-preferences-set-be-ignored-at-the-2022-victorian-legislative-council-election/
Voter Preferences set be Ignored at the 2022 Victorian Legislative Council Election
dv said:
https://antonygreen.com.au/voter-preferences-set-be-ignored-at-the-2022-victorian-legislative-council-election/Voter Preferences set be Ignored at the 2022 Victorian Legislative Council Election
The plan is coming along nicely.
Soon, they’ll be able to ignore votes altogether.
captain_spalding said:
dv said:
https://antonygreen.com.au/voter-preferences-set-be-ignored-at-the-2022-victorian-legislative-council-election/Voter Preferences set be Ignored at the 2022 Victorian Legislative Council Election
The plan is coming along nicely.
Soon, they’ll be able to ignore votes altogether.
seeing as nothing is actual changing in the voting system and has been like this for eons (1988) it sure is slow process.
The treasurer confirmed the looming budget would include the measures on multinational tax avoidance that had been flagged with voters and corporates prior to the May election. He said Treasury would provide an updated value of the revenue measure.
Labor flagged pre-election it would support the global push for multinationals, like Google and Facebook, to face a minimum 15% tax rate and also limit debt-related deductions – measures which it estimated would raise $1.89bn over the forward estimates.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/oct/11/treasurer-says-australia-likely-to-avoid-recession-but-admits-global-economy-is-dangerous
Once again … well done, Qld.
dv said:
Once again … well done, Qld.
I take no responsibility for that idiot.
Michael V said:
dv said:
Once again … well done, Qld.
I take no responsibility for that idiot.
Get in line!
Spiny Norman said:
Michael V said:
dv said:
Once again … well done, Qld.
I take no responsibility for that idiot.
Get in line!
You’re Queenslanders. It’s like the stain of original sin; it cannot be simply wished away.
Today’s Resolve federal polling
Two party preferred
58.9 ALP – 41.1 Coalition
Primary vote
ALP 39%
Coalition 30%
Green 12%
Independents 9%
ONP 5%
UAP 3% which is no longer a registered party?
36% say ALP is best to handle the economy, 30% say Coalition. This still leaves a lot of “don’t know” but it is a positive sign for Labor that they are ahead on this metric.
Albanese has 60% approval, 24% disapproval
Dutton has 31% approval, 41% disapproval
On preferred PM, 55% say Albanese, 18% say Dutton. This represents an improvement for Dutton who got 17% last time. I think we’re headed for a Duttslide.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/11/almost-200000-robodebt-cases-to-be-wiped-as-albanese-government-condemns-shameful-scheme
The Victorian Liberal Party’s in-house lawyer has resigned, sending a damning email saying she could no longer work with the party’s campaign leadership team, who she accused of ignoring her legal advice that some of their decisions may have broken the law.
Legal and compliance director Chandra Lloyd quit her job on Monday night after telling the party’s Victorian president on Friday that she could no longer work under state director Sam McQuestin.
The resignation will add to the instability of Opposition Leader Matthew Guy’s election team just weeks before the state election.
“On prior occasions I have raised with you concerns regarding the operations of the Secretariat , some of which have resulted in regulatory investigations that may be considered criminal in nature,” Lloyd wrote to Victorian Liberal Party president Greg Mirabella on Monday evening in an email obtained by The Age.
Five party sources from the parliamentary and organisational wings of the party, speaking anonymously to detail legally sensitive matters, said Lloyd was furious that the party’s top brass had proceeded with legally risky decisions she had either advised could be illegal or not been consulted about.
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/liberals-top-lawyer-quits-over-party-s-legally-risky-decisions-20221011-p5bowh.html
?
dv said:
The Victorian Liberal Party’s in-house lawyer has resigned, sending a damning email saying she could no longer work with the party’s campaign leadership team, who she accused of ignoring her legal advice that some of their decisions may have broken the law.Legal and compliance director Chandra Lloyd quit her job on Monday night after telling the party’s Victorian president on Friday that she could no longer work under state director Sam McQuestin.
The resignation will add to the instability of Opposition Leader Matthew Guy’s election team just weeks before the state election.
“On prior occasions I have raised with you concerns regarding the operations of the Secretariat , some of which have resulted in regulatory investigations that may be considered criminal in nature,” Lloyd wrote to Victorian Liberal Party president Greg Mirabella on Monday evening in an email obtained by The Age.
Five party sources from the parliamentary and organisational wings of the party, speaking anonymously to detail legally sensitive matters, said Lloyd was furious that the party’s top brass had proceeded with legally risky decisions she had either advised could be illegal or not been consulted about.
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/liberals-top-lawyer-quits-over-party-s-legally-risky-decisions-20221011-p5bowh.html
?
Sam Mcquestin again. at least he isn’t in Tassie anymore.
sarahs mum said:
dv said:
The Victorian Liberal Party’s in-house lawyer has resigned, sending a damning email saying she could no longer work with the party’s campaign leadership team, who she accused of ignoring her legal advice that some of their decisions may have broken the law.Legal and compliance director Chandra Lloyd quit her job on Monday night after telling the party’s Victorian president on Friday that she could no longer work under state director Sam McQuestin.
The resignation will add to the instability of Opposition Leader Matthew Guy’s election team just weeks before the state election.
“On prior occasions I have raised with you concerns regarding the operations of the Secretariat , some of which have resulted in regulatory investigations that may be considered criminal in nature,” Lloyd wrote to Victorian Liberal Party president Greg Mirabella on Monday evening in an email obtained by The Age.
Five party sources from the parliamentary and organisational wings of the party, speaking anonymously to detail legally sensitive matters, said Lloyd was furious that the party’s top brass had proceeded with legally risky decisions she had either advised could be illegal or not been consulted about.
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/liberals-top-lawyer-quits-over-party-s-legally-risky-decisions-20221011-p5bowh.html
?
Sam Mcquestin again. at least he isn’t in Tassie anymore.
some of their decisions may have broken the law.
I wonder what those decisions are ?
Tau.Neutrino said:
sarahs mum said:
dv said:
The Victorian Liberal Party’s in-house lawyer has resigned, sending a damning email saying she could no longer work with the party’s campaign leadership team, who she accused of ignoring her legal advice that some of their decisions may have broken the law.Legal and compliance director Chandra Lloyd quit her job on Monday night after telling the party’s Victorian president on Friday that she could no longer work under state director Sam McQuestin.
The resignation will add to the instability of Opposition Leader Matthew Guy’s election team just weeks before the state election.
“On prior occasions I have raised with you concerns regarding the operations of the Secretariat , some of which have resulted in regulatory investigations that may be considered criminal in nature,” Lloyd wrote to Victorian Liberal Party president Greg Mirabella on Monday evening in an email obtained by The Age.
Five party sources from the parliamentary and organisational wings of the party, speaking anonymously to detail legally sensitive matters, said Lloyd was furious that the party’s top brass had proceeded with legally risky decisions she had either advised could be illegal or not been consulted about.
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/liberals-top-lawyer-quits-over-party-s-legally-risky-decisions-20221011-p5bowh.html
?
Sam Mcquestin again. at least he isn’t in Tassie anymore.
some of their decisions may have broken the law.
I wonder what those decisions are ?
Probably the bit it says in this piece about sending out postal vote applications to people.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-12/victoria-liberal-party-resignation-postal-voting-applications/101526676
Freindlyjordies seems to be suggesting that Optus lost that info because the Lib govt told them they had to keep and changed laws allowing such to happen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66RyNWdTPwM
dv said:
Now, there’s man driven by nothing but pure spite and vitriol.
dv said:
Haters must be unhappy people.
dv said:
How does that work.
Michael V said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
captain_spalding said:
dv said:
Now, there’s man driven by nothing but pure spite and vitriol.
Haters must be unhappy people.
How does that work.
and why does he look like Putin poisoned him with dioxin
SCIENCE said:
Michael V said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
Haters must be unhappy people.
How does that work.
and why does he look like Putin poisoned him with dioxin
Yeah he looks quite aged
Cymek said:
SCIENCE said:Michael V said:
How does that work.
and why does he look like Putin poisoned him with dioxin
Yeah he looks quite aged
Sith supposedly hide their true appearance so perhaps his psychic mask is slipping
Cymek said:
SCIENCE said:Michael V said:
How does that work.
and why does he look like Putin poisoned him with dioxin
Yeah he looks quite aged
Looked him up and was expecting him to be about 70, but he’s younger than me.
Michael V said:
dv said:
How does that work.
Basically Latham believes that they have a better chance if he is the head of the ticket due to his personal following and celebrity status.
He is currently nearly halfway through his 8 year term in the Legislative Assembly. He plans to quit, which will result in One Nation replacing the casual vacancy with another person, and then run for a fresh 8 year term.
Michael V said:
dv said:
How does that work.
I’m sure he thinks he knows.
dv said:
Michael V said:
dv said:
How does that work.
Basically Latham believes that they have a better chance if he is the head of the ticket due to his personal following and celebrity status.
He is currently nearly halfway through his 8 year term in the Legislative Assembly. He plans to quit, which will result in One Nation replacing the casual vacancy with another person, and then run for a fresh 8 year term.
Ah, I see. Thanks for explaining.
:)
Michael V said:
dv said:
Michael V said:How does that work.
Basically Latham believes that they have a better chance if he is the head of the ticket due to his personal following and celebrity status.
He is currently nearly halfway through his 8 year term in the Legislative Assembly. He plans to quit, which will result in One Nation replacing the casual vacancy with another person, and then run for a fresh 8 year term.
Ah, I see. Thanks for explaining.
:)
I will laugh like a drain if the cunt loses.
sibeen said:
Michael V said:
dv said:Basically Latham believes that they have a better chance if he is the head of the ticket due to his personal following and celebrity status.
He is currently nearly halfway through his 8 year term in the Legislative Assembly. He plans to quit, which will result in One Nation replacing the casual vacancy with another person, and then run for a fresh 8 year term.
Ah, I see. Thanks for explaining.
:)
I will laugh like a drain if the cunt loses.
What a relief that would be.
Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk says she will talk to Agriculture Minister Mark Furner after he made a “misogynistic” remark about Opposition MP Ros Bates during Parliament yesterday.
Mr Furner is accused of saying “what a dopey, stupid woman you are” to Ms Bates during a debate in parliament yesterday over proposed amendments to the Health Practitioner Regulation Bill.
————————————
I’ve heard some appalling things said under privilege but that’s probably as bad as it gets.
There probably should be special legislation to protect women from this type of abuse.
Peak Warming Man said:
Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk says she will talk to Agriculture Minister Mark Furner after he made a “misogynistic” remark about Opposition MP Ros Bates during Parliament yesterday.
Mr Furner is accused of saying “what a dopey, stupid woman you are” to Ms Bates during a debate in parliament yesterday over proposed amendments to the Health Practitioner Regulation Bill.
————————————I’ve heard some appalling things said under privilege but that’s probably as bad as it gets.
There probably should be special legislation to protect women from this type of abuse.
Doesn’t he know “women” don’t exist any more just chest feeders and birthing parents?
Peak Warming Man said:
Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk says she will talk to Agriculture Minister Mark Furner after he made a “misogynistic” remark about Opposition MP Ros Bates during Parliament yesterday.
Mr Furner is accused of saying “what a dopey, stupid woman you are” to Ms Bates during a debate in parliament yesterday over proposed amendments to the Health Practitioner Regulation Bill.
————————————I’ve heard some appalling things said under privilege but that’s probably as bad as it gets.
There probably should be special legislation to protect women from this type of abuse.
It was so bad, the context it was said in has been lost. What was it she said that was supposed to be so stupid?
and it should not only be women who should be protected from such backstreet bullyboys.
Peak Warming Man said:
Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk says she will talk to Agriculture Minister Mark Furner after he made a “misogynistic” remark about Opposition MP Ros Bates during Parliament yesterday.
Mr Furner is accused of saying “what a dopey, stupid woman you are” to Ms Bates during a debate in parliament yesterday over proposed amendments to the Health Practitioner Regulation Bill.
————————————I’ve heard some appalling things said under privilege but that’s probably as bad as it gets.
There probably should be special legislation to protect women from this type of abuse.
I agree that she’s no a dopey stupid woman. She’s very sneaky & conniving.
wookiemeister said:
Peak Warming Man said:
Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk says she will talk to Agriculture Minister Mark Furner after he made a “misogynistic” remark about Opposition MP Ros Bates during Parliament yesterday.
Mr Furner is accused of saying “what a dopey, stupid woman you are” to Ms Bates during a debate in parliament yesterday over proposed amendments to the Health Practitioner Regulation Bill.
————————————I’ve heard some appalling things said under privilege but that’s probably as bad as it gets.
There probably should be special legislation to protect women from this type of abuse.
What an idiotDoesn’t he know “women” don’t exist any more just chest feeders and birthing parents?
I think you’ll find that words like breastfeeding and mother will be phased out of the lexicon just like gollywog etc.
lol
Mr Keating speculated that the royals would have preferred a different result. “I think the royal family would have been so glad for the referendum to have passed, to be honest,” he said.
Mr Keating went on to predict that King Charles III will denounce the UK’s claim in Australia.
SCIENCE said:
lolMr Keating speculated that the royals would have preferred a different result. “I think the royal family would have been so glad for the referendum to have passed, to be honest,” he said.
Mr Keating went on to predict that King Charles III will denounce the UK’s claim in Australia.
He’s an Irish catholic, right.
SCIENCE said:
lolMr Keating speculated that the royals would have preferred a different result. “I think the royal family would have been so glad for the referendum to have passed, to be honest,” he said.
Mr Keating went on to predict that King Charles III will denounce the UK’s claim in Australia.
Love him or hate him you have to admit he is a prizewinning shit stirrer.
I think PWM would have been an exciting PM
Peak Warming Man said:
SCIENCE said:
lolMr Keating speculated that the royals would have preferred a different result. “I think the royal family would have been so glad for the referendum to have passed, to be honest,” he said.
Mr Keating went on to predict that King Charles III will denounce the UK’s claim in Australia.
He’s an Irish catholic, right.
Unlike that Andrews chap who is a Roman Catholic.
oh how we laughed at CHINA but suddenly in Chairman Dan’s People’s Republic the need to populate overrode all levity and boom
https://www.afr.com/politics/morrison-s-extra-roles-invalid-former-high-court-judge-20221012-p5bp35
ChrispenEvan said:
https://www.afr.com/politics/morrison-s-extra-roles-invalid-former-high-court-judge-20221012-p5bp35
Wonder why he wasn’t told that at the time?
ChrispenEvan said:
https://www.afr.com/politics/morrison-s-extra-roles-invalid-former-high-court-judge-20221012-p5bp35
so he’s innocent because he never did any dodgies in these invalid roles because they were invalid, makes sense
roughbarked said:
ChrispenEvan said:
https://www.afr.com/politics/morrison-s-extra-roles-invalid-former-high-court-judge-20221012-p5bp35Wonder why he wasn’t told that at the time?
He didn’t ask.
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:
ChrispenEvan said:
https://www.afr.com/politics/morrison-s-extra-roles-invalid-former-high-court-judge-20221012-p5bp35Wonder why he wasn’t told that at the time?
He didn’t ask.
Yes Minister.
hey look we know the other AngloWhiteAlliance* countries’ politics are far more exciting but
A political stoush has erupted after the NSW government and opposition both announced the same policy on the same day.
fucking laugh out loud
*: Keevak says Asians — including the Chinese and Japanese — began to “darken”. They lost their whiteness, he says, “when it became clear they would remain unwilling to participate in European systems of trade, religion and international relations”.
SCIENCE said:
He’s wrong, though, and it is for pretty simple chemical reasons.
The carbon in carbon dioxide has an oxidation number of +4.
Coal is pretty close to being amorphous carbon, 0 oxidation number. Hydrocarbons are doubly reduced, oxidation number of -4.
dv said:
SCIENCE said:
He’s wrong, though, and it is for pretty simple chemical reasons.
The carbon in carbon dioxide has an oxidation number of +4.
Coal is pretty close to being amorphous carbon, 0 oxidation number. Hydrocarbons are doubly reduced, oxidation number of -4.
well at least the hydrogen oxides are natural and clean
fuck revisionists
SCIENCE said:
fuck revisionists
Do we have to?
The Rev Dodgson said:
SCIENCE said:
fuck revisionists
Do we have to?
didn’t you read the fine print when you joined?
ChrispenEvan said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
SCIENCE said:
fuck revisionists
Do we have to?
didn’t you read the fine print when you joined?
join with revisionists
ChrispenEvan said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/17/scott-morrison-worldwide-speakers-group/LOL.
sickening.
sarahs mum said:
ChrispenEvan said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/17/scott-morrison-worldwide-speakers-group/LOL.
sickening.
“He is hailed for “aggressively working toward a net zero global emissions economy”.”
No need to be sickened.
Obviously this report is from a parallel universe.
The Rev Dodgson said:
sarahs mum said:
ChrispenEvan said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/17/scott-morrison-worldwide-speakers-group/LOL.
sickening.
“He is hailed for “aggressively working toward a net zero global emissions economy”.”
No need to be sickened.
Obviously this report is from a parallel universe.
I wished he’d slip into a parallel universe.
roughbarked said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
sarahs mum said:sickening.
“He is hailed for “aggressively working toward a net zero global emissions economy”.”
No need to be sickened.
Obviously this report is from a parallel universe.
I wished he’d slip into a parallel universe.
Well, it’s hardly surprising, now is it?
The man has been an unmitigated fraud in everything he’s ever done. He’s hardly likely to now repent and reform his bullshit ways.
ChrispenEvan said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/17/scott-morrison-worldwide-speakers-group/LOL.
Doesn’t that breach our truth in advertising laws?
buffy said:
ChrispenEvan said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/17/scott-morrison-worldwide-speakers-group/LOL.
Doesn’t that breach our truth in advertising laws?
Pollies seem to be exempt?
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:
The Rev Dodgson said:“He is hailed for “aggressively working toward a net zero global emissions economy”.”
No need to be sickened.
Obviously this report is from a parallel universe.
I wished he’d slip into a parallel universe.
Well, it’s hardly surprising, now is it?
The man has been an unmitigated fraud in everything he’s ever done. He’s hardly likely to now repent and reform his bullshit ways.
And what is he doing looking for another job anyway. He is letting down his constituents who voted him back into his seat. I disapprove.
roughbarked said:
buffy said:
ChrispenEvan said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/17/scott-morrison-worldwide-speakers-group/LOL.
Doesn’t that breach our truth in advertising laws?
Pollies seem to be exempt?
The silence would be deafening otherwise
roughbarked said:
buffy said:
ChrispenEvan said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/17/scott-morrison-worldwide-speakers-group/LOL.
Doesn’t that breach our truth in advertising laws?
Pollies seem to be exempt?
Well, Morrison is a special case. Sort of a ‘special needs’ case.
He seems to have some congenital defect which has been in evidence for quite some years, and which prevents him from comprehending the concept of ‘truth’ in any way, shape, form or meaning.
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:
buffy said:Doesn’t that breach our truth in advertising laws?
Pollies seem to be exempt?
Well, Morrison is a special case. Sort of a ‘special needs’ case.
He seems to have some congenital defect which has been in evidence for quite some years, and which prevents him from comprehending the concept of ‘truth’ in any way, shape, form or meaning.
In that context it fits with the hillsinging.
roughbarked said:
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:Pollies seem to be exempt?
Well, Morrison is a special case. Sort of a ‘special needs’ case.
He seems to have some congenital defect which has been in evidence for quite some years, and which prevents him from comprehending the concept of ‘truth’ in any way, shape, form or meaning.
In that context it fits with the hillsinging.
Fits in like Cinderella’s foot in a glass slipper.
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:
captain_spalding said:Well, Morrison is a special case. Sort of a ‘special needs’ case.
He seems to have some congenital defect which has been in evidence for quite some years, and which prevents him from comprehending the concept of ‘truth’ in any way, shape, form or meaning.
In that context it fits with the hillsinging.
Fits in like Cinderella’s foot in a glass slipper.
He should meet with Lord True
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:
buffy said:Doesn’t that breach our truth in advertising laws?
Pollies seem to be exempt?
Well, Morrison is a special case. Sort of a ‘special needs’ case.
He seems to have some congenital defect which has been in evidence for quite some years, and which prevents him from comprehending the concept of ‘truth’ in any way, shape, form or meaning.
I find it astonishing he is a couple of years older than, he looks much older and his attitude harkens back to the 1950’s
He grew up with the same music, movies, etc and society changes I did
Cymek said:
captain_spalding said:
roughbarked said:
Pollies seem to be exempt?
Well, Morrison is a special case. Sort of a ‘special needs’ case.
He seems to have some congenital defect which has been in evidence for quite some years, and which prevents him from comprehending the concept of ‘truth’ in any way, shape, form or meaning.
I find it astonishing he is a couple of years older than, he looks much older and his attitude harkens back to the 1950’s
He grew up with the same music, movies, etc and society changes I did
did he though, was yours a life of religious fanaticism and rich white male privilege
SCIENCE said:
Cymek said:
captain_spalding said:
Well, Morrison is a special case. Sort of a ‘special needs’ case.
He seems to have some congenital defect which has been in evidence for quite some years, and which prevents him from comprehending the concept of ‘truth’ in any way, shape, form or meaning.
I find it astonishing he is a couple of years older than, he looks much older and his attitude harkens back to the 1950’s
He grew up with the same music, movies, etc and society changes I did
did he though, was yours a life of religious fanaticism and rich white male privilege
Their is that, white yes, so privileged but not rich
I have met people who because of religion have very little in common with wider society, they must be so protected from reality
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/17/senator-linda-reynolds-accused-of-attempting-to-coach-defence-lawyers-in-cross-examination-of-brittany-higgins
Australia quietly drops recognition of West Jerusalem as capital of Israel
Exclusive: Former PM Scott Morrison’s decision to formally recognise West Jerusalem has now been reversed by Labor government
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/17/australia-quietly-drops-recognition-of-west-jerusalem-as-capital-of-israel
https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/finance-news/2022/10/17/food-prices-floods-inflation/
ABC News:
‘Lawyers warn anti-corruption commission’s ‘exceptional circumstances’ test for public hearings could be misused
By political reporter Henry Belot
Designs for a National Anti-Corruption Commission could be misused to prevent public hearings, lawyers and senior former politicians warn, as the federal government defends an “exceptional circumstances” test for open hearings.’
Well, derrrr….
captain_spalding said:
ABC News:‘Lawyers warn anti-corruption commission’s ‘exceptional circumstances’ test for public hearings could be misused
By political reporter Henry Belot
Designs for a National Anti-Corruption Commission could be misused to prevent public hearings, lawyers and senior former politicians warn, as the federal government defends an “exceptional circumstances” test for open hearings.’Well, derrrr….
I’ll bet Henry prounounces his name Bellow, just like Mrs Bucket.
Left-wing anarchist Bob Katter refuses to pledge allegiance to Crown
https://www.6newsau.com/post/bob-katter-confesses-he-refuses-to-pledge-allegiance-to-the-queen-in-interview-with-the-chaser
It is just one poll, but we aren’t getting many, so here it is:
Freshwater Polling result for NSW: 54 ALP, 46 Libs.
Vita leads Dominic 41-38 as preferred Premier.
Spiny Norman said:
Spiny Norman said:
The axes?
wookiemeister said:
Spiny Norman said:
This sounds like a maths question
After my maths faux pas day or two ago, I’m never going to try to solve anything more complex than something that isn’t very complex.
X and Y were very actually important in the community, we needed action and strong shoulders to carry the heavy burden to rejoice and ascend to the sunlight uplands of tomorrow.
dv said:
Spiny Norman said:
The axes?
the chromosomes
Spiny Norman said:
wookiemeister said:
Spiny Norman said:
This sounds like a maths question
After my maths faux pas day or two ago, I’m never going to try to solve anything more complex than something that isn’t very complex.
i see what you did there.
ChrispenEvan said:
Spiny Norman said:
wookiemeister said:This sounds like a maths question
After my maths faux pas day or two ago, I’m never going to try to solve anything more complex than something that isn’t very complex.
i see what you did there.
jk
dv said:
It is just one poll, but we aren’t getting many, so here it is:Freshwater Polling result for NSW: 54 ALP, 46 Libs.
Vita leads Dominic 41-38 as preferred Premier.
vita will be a lively candidate.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-18/fred-nile-to-retire-from-nsw-politics/101548754
dv said:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-18/fred-nile-to-retire-from-nsw-politics/101548754
It’ll be more the poorer.
Who’s going to spend hours poring over online pornography to be able to speak to the subject with any credibility?
Peak Warming Man said:
dv said:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-18/fred-nile-to-retire-from-nsw-politics/101548754
It’ll be more the poorer.
Who’s going to spend hours poring over online pornography to be able to speak to the subject with any credibility?
His wife will be replacing him.
dv said:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-18/fred-nile-to-retire-from-nsw-politics/101548754
Mr buffy and I thought he was dead.
dv said:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-18/fred-nile-to-retire-from-nsw-politics/101548754
I remember when he was last on my ballot. It was such a long time ago.
dv said:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-18/fred-nile-to-retire-from-nsw-politics/101548754
so what are his accomplishments over his long political career?
Spiny Norman said:
Is she describing her previous partner and the reason that they are not the current partner?
Kingy said:
Spiny Norman said:
Is she describing her previous partner and the reason that they are not the current partner?
More prosaically, it looks like an embarrassing example of “I’ll make up some bullshit or other later” and then forgetting to do so.
Kingy said:
Spiny Norman said:
Is she describing her previous partner and the reason that they are not the current partner?
copy .. paste.
Someone else’s job to write the damn thing.
A month out from the Vic election, Morgan poll indicates 60-40 towards the ALP
Drain The Swamp
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-20/bandt-asks-thorpe-to-resign-as-senate-deputy/101557298
dv said:
so the biggest shortfall from potential gains is when Labor are in power
We need to tax energy exports. Use the money to subsidise cheaper domestic energy. Boost the competitiveness of Australian businesses by having a low-cost energy system. We can’t compete on wages, so we might as well compete on something else. Attract investment into capital intensive and energy intensive industries. A small and well educated population to operate and run them.
party_pants said:
We need to tax energy exports. Use the money to subsidise cheaper domestic energy. Boost the competitiveness of Australian businesses by having a low-cost energy system. We can’t compete on wages, so we might as well compete on something else. Attract investment into capital intensive and energy intensive industries. A small and well educated population to operate and run them.
But…but…that’s crazy talk.
Tax energy exports? What will political parties do for donations? And think of all the lobbyists; they’ve worked so hard to ensure that no Australian government can function without their clients (and the approval of their clients). And what about the media? Do you really want Rupert to go full bananas, and put One Nation in power?
And all for what? The benefit of the nation?
You’re talking crazy now…
party_pants said:
We need to tax energy exports. Use the money to subsidise cheaper domestic energy. Boost the competitiveness of Australian businesses by having a low-cost energy system. We can’t compete on wages, so we might as well compete on something else. Attract investment into capital intensive and energy intensive industries. A small and well educated population to operate and run them.
Subsidising energy use so Australia can compete in areas where it isn’t competitive would be a bad idea even without climate change. Considering climate change it is a truly terrible idea.
Australia should compete in areas where it is competitive and have economic policies that as far as possible make all costs visible, including future costs.
The Rev Dodgson said:
and have economic policies that as far as possible make all costs visible, including future costs.
Laugh Out Loud Good Luck When This Is What Australian Politicians Think Transparency Means
The Rev Dodgson said:
party_pants said:
We need to tax energy exports. Use the money to subsidise cheaper domestic energy. Boost the competitiveness of Australian businesses by having a low-cost energy system. We can’t compete on wages, so we might as well compete on something else. Attract investment into capital intensive and energy intensive industries. A small and well educated population to operate and run them.
Subsidising energy use so Australia can compete in areas where it isn’t competitive would be a bad idea even without climate change. Considering climate change it is a truly terrible idea.
Australia should compete in areas where it is competitive and have economic policies that as far as possible make all costs visible, including future costs.
I am no longer of this view. I don’t think we can continue indefinitely just being an exporter of cheap raw commodities to unfriendly nations. I think we need to diversify our economy into more value-added industries. If we have learned anything over the last 2-3 years with COVID and aggressive behaviour from authoritarian regimes is that we need to be more self-reliant and resilient. Getting new industries off the ground and running needs strategic direction by governments, not the sort of thing you would just leave to the markets and hope it happens some day. Lots of economic success stories have their origins in government backing the development of key industry sectors and encouraging (directing) investment towards it.
dv said:
Wonder what the Norwegians are doing to prepare themselves for less reliance on those sources of income.
party_pants said:
I am no longer of this view. I don’t think we can continue indefinitely just being an exporter of cheap raw commodities to unfriendly nations. I think we need to diversify our economy into more value-added industries. If we have learned anything over the last 2-3 years with COVID and aggressive behaviour from authoritarian regimes is that we need to be more self-reliant and resilient. Getting new industries off the ground and running needs strategic direction by governments, not the sort of thing you would just leave to the markets and hope it happens some day. Lots of economic success stories have their origins in government backing the development of key industry sectors and encouraging (directing) investment towards it.
I do agree with all that.
It’s something we should have started doing 40 -50 years ago.
Bubblecar said:
dv said:
Wonder what the Norwegians are doing to prepare themselves for less reliance on those sources of income.
Sharpening up the harpoons, i expect.
Bubblecar said:
dv said:
Wonder what the Norwegians are doing to prepare themselves for less reliance on those sources of income.
Accumulating a trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund.
Bubblecar said:
dv said:
Wonder what the Norwegians are doing to prepare themselves for less reliance on those sources of income.
They are investing it in stocks and bonds and shares all over the world. They have an enourmous soveign wealth fund.
dv said:
Bubblecar said:
dv said:
Wonder what the Norwegians are doing to prepare themselves for less reliance on those sources of income.
Accumulating a trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund.
Smart.
captain_spalding said:
party_pants said:I am no longer of this view. I don’t think we can continue indefinitely just being an exporter of cheap raw commodities to unfriendly nations. I think we need to diversify our economy into more value-added industries. If we have learned anything over the last 2-3 years with COVID and aggressive behaviour from authoritarian regimes is that we need to be more self-reliant and resilient. Getting new industries off the ground and running needs strategic direction by governments, not the sort of thing you would just leave to the markets and hope it happens some day. Lots of economic success stories have their origins in government backing the development of key industry sectors and encouraging (directing) investment towards it.
Nah, houses’n’holes is where it’s at mate…
I do agree with all that.
It’s something we should have started doing 40 -50 years ago.
party_pants said:
I am no longer of this view. I don’t think we can continue indefinitely just being an exporter of cheap raw commodities to unfriendly nations. I think we need to diversify our economy into more value-added industries.
That’s exactly why we should focus on those areas of work where Australia has a competitive advantage.
It’s a complete myth that mining is the only industry where Australia can compete internationally.
dv said:
Bubblecar said:
dv said:
Wonder what the Norwegians are doing to prepare themselves for less reliance on those sources of income.
Accumulating a trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund.
The Rev Dodgson said:
party_pants said:I am no longer of this view. I don’t think we can continue indefinitely just being an exporter of cheap raw commodities to unfriendly nations. I think we need to diversify our economy into more value-added industries.
That’s exactly why we should focus on those areas of work where Australia has a competitive advantage.
It’s a complete myth that mining is the only industry where Australia can compete internationally.
True.
Tamb said:
dv said:
Bubblecar said:Wonder what the Norwegians are doing to prepare themselves for less reliance on those sources of income.
Accumulating a trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund.
Drinking heavily.
The taxes are so high on alcohol in Norway that those who want to drink have to leave the country for a session.
chickens getting counted but have they hatched yet
roughbarked said:
Tamb said:
dv said:Accumulating a trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund.
Drinking heavily.The taxes are so high on alcohol in Norway that those who want to drink have to leave the country for a session.
Tamb said:
roughbarked said:
Tamb said:Drinking heavily.
The taxes are so high on alcohol in Norway that those who want to drink have to leave the country for a session.
When I was travelling in Scandinavia the big thing was to use the ferries where you could buy duty free alcohol. If you bought enough you got a free wheeled trolley to carry the stuff.
That’s how they do it.
good to know that they’re protecting the native animals out there oh
wait
News
Bureau of Meteorology staff have been hospitalised because of work conditions, as a loss of senior meteorologists means junior forecasters are trying to deal with natural disasters beyond their expertise. By Rick Morton.
Exclusive: Toxic culture has plunged the Bureau of Meteorology into chaos
saturday paper.
He said: “Would you agree that in the run up to election that having an allegation that one staff member sexually assaulted another staff member would be potentially politically embarrassing?”
Reynolds said: “No, I do not accept that.”
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/who-knew-what-and-when-trial-hears-new-details-of-timeline-after-brittany-higgins-alleged
sarahs mum said:
He said: “Would you agree that in the run up to election that having an allegation that one staff member sexually assaulted another staff member would be potentially politically embarrassing?”Reynolds said: “No, I do not accept that.”
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/who-knew-what-and-when-trial-hears-new-details-of-timeline-after-brittany-higgins-alleged
Handled appropriately, it need not have been embarrassing
dv said:
sarahs mum said:
He said: “Would you agree that in the run up to election that having an allegation that one staff member sexually assaulted another staff member would be potentially politically embarrassing?”Reynolds said: “No, I do not accept that.”
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/who-knew-what-and-when-trial-hears-new-details-of-timeline-after-brittany-higgins-alleged
Handled appropriately, it need not have been embarrassing
Yes but according to her, she didn’t know about it.
roughbarked said:
dv said:
sarahs mum said:
He said: “Would you agree that in the run up to election that having an allegation that one staff member sexually assaulted another staff member would be potentially politically embarrassing?”Reynolds said: “No, I do not accept that.”
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/who-knew-what-and-when-trial-hears-new-details-of-timeline-after-brittany-higgins-alleged
Handled appropriately, it need not have been embarrassing
Yes but according to her, she didn’t know about it.
damn they must have had a terrible intraoffice communications set-up
dv said:
roughbarked said:
dv said:Handled appropriately, it need not have been embarrassing
Yes but according to her, she didn’t know about it.
damn they must have had a terrible intraoffice communications set-up
I’m sure she’s telling fibs.
Has there been any debate lately for a national ID card or a proposal to form central repository for our ID particulars?
JudgeMental said:
Has there been any debate lately for a national ID card or a proposal to form central repository for our ID particulars?
The dark web?
roughbarked said:
dv said:
roughbarked said:Yes but according to her, she didn’t know about it.
damn they must have had a terrible intraoffice communications set-up
I’m sure she’s telling fibs.
Associated with the Morrison government?
Congenital liar.
JudgeMental said:
Has there been any debate lately for a national ID card or a proposal to form central repository for our ID particulars?
Apparently there has.
Unfortunately, it’s been conceived by, implemented by, and run by hackers.
Finance Minister Katy Gallagher argues that the projects promised before April’s federal election were an attempt to win votes and were not value for money.
L¿OL¿¡
NSW Corrections Minister Geoff Lee says he will not allow the state’s prison system to be “dictated to” by a United Nations delegation carrying out inspections of facilities in Australia.
don’t worry there ain’t no women without headscarves, or ethnic minorities, there, nothing to hide
SCIENCE said:
L¿OL¿¡
NSW Corrections Minister Geoff Lee says he will not allow the state’s prison system to be “dictated to” by a United Nations delegation carrying out inspections of facilities in Australia.
don’t worry there ain’t no women without headscarves, or ethnic minorities, there, nothing to hide
It would be interesting to see if entry refusal was at the local level rather than a mandate from government.
Cymek said:
SCIENCE said:
L¿OL¿¡
NSW Corrections Minister Geoff Lee says he will not allow the state’s prison system to be “dictated to” by a United Nations delegation carrying out inspections of facilities in Australia.
don’t worry there ain’t no women without headscarves, or ethnic minorities, there, nothing to hide
It would be interesting to see if entry refusal was at the local level rather than a mandate from government.
That’s the beauty of multilayered bureaucratic ostensible democracy isn’t it, everything is plausibly deniable, it’s the will of the silent majority¡
SCIENCE said:
L¿OL¿¡
NSW Corrections Minister Geoff Lee says he will not allow the state’s prison system to be “dictated to” by a United Nations delegation carrying out inspections of facilities in Australia.
don’t worry there ain’t no women without headscarves, or ethnic minorities, there, nothing to hide
one of the issues they are looking at is the treatment of our very own ethnic minority
diddly-squat said:
SCIENCE said:L¿OL¿¡
NSW Corrections Minister Geoff Lee says he will not allow the state’s prison system to be “dictated to” by a United Nations delegation carrying out inspections of facilities in Australia.
don’t worry there ain’t no women without headscarves, or ethnic minorities, there, nothing to hide
one of the issues they are looking at is the treatment of our very own ethnic minority
In tassie it seems to be about the sexual abuse of incarcerated minors and putting minors in solitary for extended periods of time.
This was what I was wondering, prisons can refuse entry to anyone they choose especially if you’ve not been approved or undertaken certain training.
A Corrective Services NSW spokesperson said the UN representatives were “refused entry without incident” to the Mary Wade Correctional Centre and the Metropolitan Remand and Reception Centre Sydney on Sunday and the Queanbeyan Court Cells last Tuesday “as they did not have prior approval”.
Rights groups say issues in places like Don Dale warrant scrutiny.(ABC News: Tristan Hooft)
“Any person who seeks to visit a correctional site operated by or on behalf of CSNSW must have prior written authorisation or will be refused entry,” the spokesperson said.
“This includes visits by foreign officials including the United Nations Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture.”
dv said:
I think the Liberal Party in Victoria need a List of things that they cannot do.
sarahs mum said:
dv said:
sarahs mum said:
I don’t understand why someone with that much money wants another job.
On one hand, there are historical examples of wealthy people getting involved in politics for at least partly altruistic reasons. Kevin Rudd is quite well to do, Nelson Rockefeller was a billionaire, Ross Perot may have been a bit nutty but he didn’t have policies that would favour his class.
On the other hand, it’s hard to overstate the extent to which, for some people, all the money isn’t nearly enough. Having grifted and connived their way to a billion, some people aren’t happy until it is 2 billion, 3 billion etc, and there are certainly plenty of cases of extremely wealthy people getting into politics in order to make even more money either by changing the regulations so that the billionaire class is benefited generally, or through outright corruption.
There’s nothing in Rishi’s policy set that makes me think that he’s in the first category.
Philanthropy used to be a thing.
and the ABC used to be uh wait what was that again
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-26/the-dirty-secret-at-the-heart-of-the-budget/101574394
ah yes Your ABC right there, going right back to their communist roots
reality of the budget: the poor will pay. And the dirty little secret is that the government needs them to
at least he’s being ironic
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/25/budget-2022-october-labor-australia-federal-government-anthony-albanese-australian-treasurer-jim-chalmers
dv said:
OMG Capitalists!
dv said:
Ah well, I won’t be watching future Dr Who in that case.
dv said:
The Blind peoples wireless reads the Dr Who magazine every week.
Peak Warming Man said:
dv said:
OMG Capitalists!
Kind of an end of an era but probably inevitable.
Key Event
Jacqui Lambie: ‘Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year’ who says they need a tax cut is ‘being greedy’
Speaking on ABC News Breakfast, Jacqui Lambie says there’s no easy answer to Australia’s budget woes, adding: “You cannot blame for this.”
“They’ve been in for five months … You had nine years of the Coalition. This is their mess that they are cleaning up.”She says the government should look at the stage 3 tax cuts to provide relief for those struggling.
“You can give some tax cuts, give them to those people on or below the poverty line. “I do not need a tax cut. Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year that says they do, I say you’re being greedy.”https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-26/live-updates-federal-budget-2022-reaction-jim-chalmers/101577442
dv said:
Key Event
Jacqui Lambie: ‘Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year’ who says they need a tax cut is ‘being greedy’Speaking on ABC News Breakfast, Jacqui Lambie says there’s no easy answer to Australia’s budget woes, adding: “You cannot blame for this.”
“They’ve been in for five months … You had nine years of the Coalition. This is their mess that they are cleaning up.”She says the government should look at the stage 3 tax cuts to provide relief for those struggling.
“You can give some tax cuts, give them to those people on or below the poverty line. “I do not need a tax cut. Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year that says they do, I say you’re being greedy.”https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-26/live-updates-federal-budget-2022-reaction-jim-chalmers/101577442
What a bitch.
dv said:
Key Event
Jacqui Lambie: ‘Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year’ who says they need a tax cut is ‘being greedy’Speaking on ABC News Breakfast, Jacqui Lambie says there’s no easy answer to Australia’s budget woes, adding: “You cannot blame for this.”
“They’ve been in for five months … You had nine years of the Coalition. This is their mess that they are cleaning up.”She says the government should look at the stage 3 tax cuts to provide relief for those struggling.
“You can give some tax cuts, give them to those people on or below the poverty line. “I do not need a tax cut. Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year that says they do, I say you’re being greedy.”https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-26/live-updates-federal-budget-2022-reaction-jim-chalmers/101577442
Good stuff, JL!
sibeen said:
dv said:
Key Event
Jacqui Lambie: ‘Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year’ who says they need a tax cut is ‘being greedy’Speaking on ABC News Breakfast, Jacqui Lambie says there’s no easy answer to Australia’s budget woes, adding: “You cannot blame for this.”
“They’ve been in for five months … You had nine years of the Coalition. This is their mess that they are cleaning up.”She says the government should look at the stage 3 tax cuts to provide relief for those struggling.
“You can give some tax cuts, give them to those people on or below the poverty line. “I do not need a tax cut. Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year that says they do, I say you’re being greedy.”https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-26/live-updates-federal-budget-2022-reaction-jim-chalmers/101577442
What a bitch.
What? Why?
Michael V said:
sibeen said:
dv said:
Key Event
Jacqui Lambie: ‘Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year’ who says they need a tax cut is ‘being greedy’Speaking on ABC News Breakfast, Jacqui Lambie says there’s no easy answer to Australia’s budget woes, adding: “You cannot blame for this.”
“They’ve been in for five months … You had nine years of the Coalition. This is their mess that they are cleaning up.”She says the government should look at the stage 3 tax cuts to provide relief for those struggling.
“You can give some tax cuts, give them to those people on or below the poverty line. “I do not need a tax cut. Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year that says they do, I say you’re being greedy.”https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-26/live-updates-federal-budget-2022-reaction-jim-chalmers/101577442
What a bitch.
What? Why?
Gives mv’s sarcasm detector a damn good whacking
sibeen said:
Michael V said:
sibeen said:What a bitch.
What? Why?
Gives mv’s sarcasm detector a damn good whacking
Ha!
:)
Michael V said:
dv said:
Key Event
Jacqui Lambie: ‘Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year’ who says they need a tax cut is ‘being greedy’Speaking on ABC News Breakfast, Jacqui Lambie says there’s no easy answer to Australia’s budget woes, adding: “You cannot blame for this.”
“They’ve been in for five months … You had nine years of the Coalition. This is their mess that they are cleaning up.”She says the government should look at the stage 3 tax cuts to provide relief for those struggling.
“You can give some tax cuts, give them to those people on or below the poverty line. “I do not need a tax cut. Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year that says they do, I say you’re being greedy.”https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-26/live-updates-federal-budget-2022-reaction-jim-chalmers/101577442
Good stuff, JL!
I’m probably a lone voice here, but I think the stage 3 tax cuts are a good idea. Hopefully implementing the tax cuts in full will push the Labs into a situation where they have to come up with and actual innovative tax reform agenda. Something that looks at reducing the complexity of the tax system and that gets rid of all of the excerptions to the rule. We need to look at how wealth is taxed, how to get rid of the endless list of deductions and tax loopholes and take a very serious look at how superannuation is taxed and how to take better advantage of mineral resource rents.
anything short of this is just lazy politics IMO
diddly-squat said:
Michael V said:
dv said:
Key Event
Jacqui Lambie: ‘Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year’ who says they need a tax cut is ‘being greedy’Speaking on ABC News Breakfast, Jacqui Lambie says there’s no easy answer to Australia’s budget woes, adding: “You cannot blame for this.”
“They’ve been in for five months … You had nine years of the Coalition. This is their mess that they are cleaning up.”She says the government should look at the stage 3 tax cuts to provide relief for those struggling.
“You can give some tax cuts, give them to those people on or below the poverty line. “I do not need a tax cut. Anybody sitting on $200,000 a year that says they do, I say you’re being greedy.”https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-26/live-updates-federal-budget-2022-reaction-jim-chalmers/101577442
Good stuff, JL!
I’m probably a lone voice here, but I think the stage 3 tax cuts are a good idea. Hopefully implementing the tax cuts in full will push the Labs into a situation where they have to come up with and actual innovative tax reform agenda. Something that looks at reducing the complexity of the tax system and that gets rid of all of the excerptions to the rule. We need to look at how wealth is taxed, how to get rid of the endless list of deductions and tax loopholes and take a very serious look at how superannuation is taxed and how to take better advantage of mineral resource rents.
anything short of this is just lazy politics IMO
My own view is that stage 3 tax cuts are probably not a great idea but that Labor kind of has to do them anyway because otherwise they are handing the opposition a stick to beat them with in 2025.
dv said:
diddly-squat said:
Michael V said:Good stuff, JL!
I’m probably a lone voice here, but I think the stage 3 tax cuts are a good idea. Hopefully implementing the tax cuts in full will push the Labs into a situation where they have to come up with and actual innovative tax reform agenda. Something that looks at reducing the complexity of the tax system and that gets rid of all of the excerptions to the rule. We need to look at how wealth is taxed, how to get rid of the endless list of deductions and tax loopholes and take a very serious look at how superannuation is taxed and how to take better advantage of mineral resource rents.
anything short of this is just lazy politics IMO
My own view is that stage 3 tax cuts are probably not a great idea but that Labor kind of has to do them anyway because otherwise they are handing the opposition a stick to beat them with in 2025.
Can they use a riding crop instead to appeal to the horsie set and S & M aficionados
remember when Corruption were in power and this kind of thing would just have been called a slight market correction
Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers revealed in his first budget on Tuesday that the government expected electricity prices to skyrocket 56 per cent in the next two years as turmoil in the wholesale market flowed through to consumers.
but nah an 0.56 increase and boom
Laugh Out Loud someone should tell those dodgy doctors, better than rorting $8G from Medicare eh
Mr Natale is weighing up if he needs to close one of his four venues in the Cronulla area, because the staff he’s seeking want wages he can’t offer. “The number that people are throwing at the moment is $100,000. And … it’s ridiculous.” For a chef without restaurant experience – “No knife skills. Probably spent a month or two in a cafe” – demands for six-figure wages are now standard.
surgeons, n00bz
SCIENCE said:
remember when Corruption were in power and this kind of thing would just have been called a slight market correctionFederal Treasurer Jim Chalmers revealed in his first budget on Tuesday that the government expected electricity prices to skyrocket 56 per cent in the next two years as turmoil in the wholesale market flowed through to consumers.
but nah an 0.56 increase and boom
lol
Since last year, power prices have roughly trebled on average in the national electricity market, which services more than 10 million customers across the eastern seaboard.
Australia will join Biden’s global pledge to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030, Albanese confirms
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/australia-will-join-bidens-global-pledge-to-cut-methane-emissions-by-30-by-2030-albanese-confirms
dv said:
Australia will join Biden’s global pledge to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030, Albanese confirmshttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/australia-will-join-bidens-global-pledge-to-cut-methane-emissions-by-30-by-2030-albanese-confirms
sounds great, I wonder how they will do it?
diddly-squat said:
dv said:
Australia will join Biden’s global pledge to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030, Albanese confirmshttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/australia-will-join-bidens-global-pledge-to-cut-methane-emissions-by-30-by-2030-albanese-confirms
sounds great, I wonder how they will do it?
Short-odds favourite: give money to mining companies.
diddly-squat said:
dv said:
Australia will join Biden’s global pledge to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030, Albanese confirmshttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/australia-will-join-bidens-global-pledge-to-cut-methane-emissions-by-30-by-2030-albanese-confirms
sounds great, I wonder how they will do it?
Butt Plugs ?
They would have to be big ones.
diddly-squat said:
dv said:
Australia will join Biden’s global pledge to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030, Albanese confirmshttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/australia-will-join-bidens-global-pledge-to-cut-methane-emissions-by-30-by-2030-albanese-confirms
sounds great, I wonder how they will do it?
What if methane could be converted to something else ?
diddly-squat said:
dv said:
Australia will join Biden’s global pledge to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030, Albanese confirmshttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/australia-will-join-bidens-global-pledge-to-cut-methane-emissions-by-30-by-2030-albanese-confirms
sounds great, I wonder how they will do it?
It’s certainly going to be tough.
Tau.Neutrino said:
diddly-squat said:
dv said:
Australia will join Biden’s global pledge to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030, Albanese confirmshttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/australia-will-join-bidens-global-pledge-to-cut-methane-emissions-by-30-by-2030-albanese-confirms
sounds great, I wonder how they will do it?
What if methane could be converted to something else ?
If it can be converted to alcohol, we could be onto a winner.
captain_spalding said:
diddly-squat said:
dv said:
Australia will join Biden’s global pledge to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030, Albanese confirmshttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/australia-will-join-bidens-global-pledge-to-cut-methane-emissions-by-30-by-2030-albanese-confirms
sounds great, I wonder how they will do it?
Short-odds favourite: give money to mining companies.
I think that is very unlikely.. more likely is collect money from gas emitters
dv said:
diddly-squat said:
dv said:
Australia will join Biden’s global pledge to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030, Albanese confirmshttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/australia-will-join-bidens-global-pledge-to-cut-methane-emissions-by-30-by-2030-albanese-confirms
sounds great, I wonder how they will do it?
It’s certainly going to be tough.
if only there was a common, public market for carbon emissions… that might work…
diddly-squat said:
captain_spalding said:
diddly-squat said:sounds great, I wonder how they will do it?
Short-odds favourite: give money to mining companies.
I think that is very unlikely.. more likely is collect money from gas emitters
Increase taxes on corporations that make large donations to major political parties?
Interesting idea.
Never happen, of course, but an interesting idea.
captain_spalding said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
diddly-squat said:sounds great, I wonder how they will do it?
What if methane could be converted to something else ?
If it can be converted to alcohol, we could be onto a winner.
obviously if you burn the methane then you don’t have to worry about any more methane emissions duh
diddly-squat said:
captain_spalding said:
diddly-squat said:sounds great, I wonder how they will do it?
Short-odds favourite: give money to mining companies.
I think that is very unlikely.. more likely is collect money from gas emitters
If it costs mining companies money to reduce emissions, isn’t it reasonable that the government pays them money to do so?
SCIENCE said:
captain_spalding said:
Tau.Neutrino said:What if methane could be converted to something else ?
If it can be converted to alcohol, we could be onto a winner.
obviously if you burn the methane then you don’t have to worry about any more methane emissions duh
Collecting and burning methane that would otherwise have been emitted is a perfectly sensible thing to do. Especially if the resulting CO2 emissions are then collected.
The Rev Dodgson said:
diddly-squat said:
captain_spalding said:Short-odds favourite: give money to mining companies.
I think that is very unlikely.. more likely is collect money from gas emitters
If it costs mining companies money to reduce emissions, isn’t it reasonable that the government pays them money to do so?
They are miners. They can simply stop mining if the costs are higher than the returns. If the Gov’t gives them money they’ll just expand their efforts to get more. Agriculture is still the bigger issue here.
roughbarked said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
diddly-squat said:I think that is very unlikely.. more likely is collect money from gas emitters
If it costs mining companies money to reduce emissions, isn’t it reasonable that the government pays them money to do so?
They are miners. They can simply stop mining if the costs are higher than the returns. If the Gov’t gives them money they’ll just expand their efforts to get more. Agriculture is still the bigger issue here.
My irony detector is now confused.
roughbarked said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
diddly-squat said:I think that is very unlikely.. more likely is collect money from gas emitters
If it costs mining companies money to reduce emissions, isn’t it reasonable that the government pays them money to do so?
They are miners. They can simply stop mining if the costs are higher than the returns. If the Gov’t gives them money they’ll just expand their efforts to get more. Agriculture is still the bigger issue here.
My irony detector is now confused.
The Rev Dodgson said:
SCIENCE said:
captain_spalding said:If it can be converted to alcohol, we could be onto a winner.
obviously if you burn the methane then you don’t have to worry about any more methane emissions duh
Collecting and burning methane that would otherwise have been emitted is a perfectly sensible thing to do. Especially if the resulting CO2 emissions are then collected.
It doesn’t make a lot of sense to waste valuable resources to the atmosphere.
The Rev Dodgson said:
roughbarked said:
The Rev Dodgson said:If it costs mining companies money to reduce emissions, isn’t it reasonable that the government pays them money to do so?
They are miners. They can simply stop mining if the costs are higher than the returns. If the Gov’t gives them money they’ll just expand their efforts to get more. Agriculture is still the bigger issue here.
My irony detector is now confused.
:)
The Rev Dodgson said:
roughbarked said:
The Rev Dodgson said:If it costs mining companies money to reduce emissions, isn’t it reasonable that the government pays them money to do so?
They are miners. They can simply stop mining if the costs are higher than the returns. If the Gov’t gives them money they’ll just expand their efforts to get more. Agriculture is still the bigger issue here.
My irony detector is now confused.
You ought to go into politics. The inability to detect irony is an actual positive for that field.
captain_spalding said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
roughbarked said:They are miners. They can simply stop mining if the costs are higher than the returns. If the Gov’t gives them money they’ll just expand their efforts to get more. Agriculture is still the bigger issue here.
My irony detector is now confused.
You ought to go into politics. The inability to detect irony is an actual positive for that field.
Shouldn’t big business accept they will have to reduce emissions not expect the government to pay them to do so, not pass the cost onto the consumer and accept reduced profit (its still profit)
They live on the planet, if they don’t care they are damaging it then they can always be fined and shut down
No more half arsed measures
Cymek said:
captain_spalding said:
The Rev Dodgson said:My irony detector is now confused.
You ought to go into politics. The inability to detect irony is an actual positive for that field.
Shouldn’t big business accept they will have to reduce emissions not expect the government to pay them to do so, not pass the cost onto the consumer and accept reduced profit (its still profit)
They live on the planet, if they don’t care they are damaging it then they can always be fined and shut down
No more half arsed measures
The idea that “big business” will pay for all the changes required to reduce GHG emissions, so it won’t cost the rest of us anything, is just ridiculous.
If regulations are introduced that cost companies money, then either prices will go up or the cost of the changes has to be reimbursed.
The Rev Dodgson said:
Cymek said:
captain_spalding said:You ought to go into politics. The inability to detect irony is an actual positive for that field.
Shouldn’t big business accept they will have to reduce emissions not expect the government to pay them to do so, not pass the cost onto the consumer and accept reduced profit (its still profit)
They live on the planet, if they don’t care they are damaging it then they can always be fined and shut down
No more half arsed measures
The idea that “big business” will pay for all the changes required to reduce GHG emissions, so it won’t cost the rest of us anything, is just ridiculous.
If regulations are introduced that cost companies money, then either prices will go up or the cost of the changes has to be reimbursed.
Why ?
They’ve had a good run doing what they like, lying, not caring, times up.
It’s the cost of doing business in the modern world
The entire way economics works is no longer sustainable
The Rev Dodgson said:
Cymek said:
captain_spalding said:You ought to go into politics. The inability to detect irony is an actual positive for that field.
Shouldn’t big business accept they will have to reduce emissions not expect the government to pay them to do so, not pass the cost onto the consumer and accept reduced profit (its still profit)
They live on the planet, if they don’t care they are damaging it then they can always be fined and shut down
No more half arsed measures
The idea that “big business” will pay for all the changes required to reduce GHG emissions, so it won’t cost the rest of us anything, is just ridiculous.
If regulations are introduced that cost companies money, then either prices will go up or the cost of the changes has to be reimbursed.
I think you will find that these costs are already causing the mining companies to instigate change. ie: more miners are converting their diesels to electric than farmers.
I’ve been re-reading old “Snake tales” cartoons.
They say a lot about Australian politics in there.
mollwollfumble said:
I’ve been re-reading old “Snake tales” cartoons.They say a lot about Australian politics in there.
I have a soft spot for Allan Salisbury. He’s not only a clever cartoonist. 
http://www.snakecartoons.com/about.htm
Lennie the loser. 
Cymek said:
captain_spalding said:
The Rev Dodgson said:My irony detector is now confused.
You ought to go into politics. The inability to detect irony is an actual positive for that field.
Shouldn’t big business accept they will have to reduce emissions not expect the government to pay them to do so, not pass the cost onto the consumer and accept reduced profit (its still profit)
They live on the planet, if they don’t care they are damaging it then they can always be fined and shut down
No more half arsed measures
Why should consumer not be incentivised to decrease their usage through costs directly passed on to them by energy providers?
Cymek said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
Cymek said:Shouldn’t big business accept they will have to reduce emissions not expect the government to pay them to do so, not pass the cost onto the consumer and accept reduced profit (its still profit)
They live on the planet, if they don’t care they are damaging it then they can always be fined and shut down
No more half arsed measures
The idea that “big business” will pay for all the changes required to reduce GHG emissions, so it won’t cost the rest of us anything, is just ridiculous.
If regulations are introduced that cost companies money, then either prices will go up or the cost of the changes has to be reimbursed.
Why ?
They’ve had a good run doing what they like, lying, not caring, times up.
It’s the cost of doing business in the modern world
The entire way economics works is no longer sustainable
Um no…
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:
captain_spalding said:You ought to go into politics. The inability to detect irony is an actual positive for that field.
Shouldn’t big business accept they will have to reduce emissions not expect the government to pay them to do so, not pass the cost onto the consumer and accept reduced profit (its still profit)
They live on the planet, if they don’t care they are damaging it then they can always be fined and shut down
No more half arsed measures
Why should consumer not be incentivised to decrease their usage through costs directly passed on to them by energy providers?
Like reducing cooling and warming because they can’t afford it
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:
The Rev Dodgson said:The idea that “big business” will pay for all the changes required to reduce GHG emissions, so it won’t cost the rest of us anything, is just ridiculous.
If regulations are introduced that cost companies money, then either prices will go up or the cost of the changes has to be reimbursed.
Why ?
They’ve had a good run doing what they like, lying, not caring, times up.
It’s the cost of doing business in the modern world
The entire way economics works is no longer sustainableUm no…
Why not
Cannot continue to expand forever in a planet with finite resources.
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:Why ?
They’ve had a good run doing what they like, lying, not caring, times up.
It’s the cost of doing business in the modern world
The entire way economics works is no longer sustainableUm no…
Why not
Cannot continue to expand forever in a planet with finite resources.
Soon there will be finite humans.
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:Um no…
Why not
Cannot continue to expand forever in a planet with finite resources.Soon there will be finite humans.
This.
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:Um no…
Why not
Cannot continue to expand forever in a planet with finite resources.Soon there will be finite humans.
True
I just think big business and government have been getting away with all sorts of crimes against humanity with little or no consequence.
They are being given an easy way out by passing costs onto others when it should be the cost of doing business in a modern world.
They still make profit but that’s not good enough it has to be more profit than last year
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:Why ?
They’ve had a good run doing what they like, lying, not caring, times up.
It’s the cost of doing business in the modern world
The entire way economics works is no longer sustainableUm no…
Why not
Cannot continue to expand forever in a planet with finite resources.
Expanding forever is not a requirement of current economics.
The Rev Dodgson said:
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:Um no…
Why not
Cannot continue to expand forever in a planet with finite resources.Expanding forever is not a requirement of current economics.
SCIENCE will be along shortly to tell us that the economy MUST grow.
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:Shouldn’t big business accept they will have to reduce emissions not expect the government to pay them to do so, not pass the cost onto the consumer and accept reduced profit (its still profit)
They live on the planet, if they don’t care they are damaging it then they can always be fined and shut down
No more half arsed measures
Why should consumer not be incentivised to decrease their usage through costs directly passed on to them by energy providers?
Like reducing cooling and warming because they can’t afford it
As an essential service there is certainly the case for regulation but that doesn’t mean consumers should get a free ride. Every part of society has to work together to decrease emissions.
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:Why should consumer not be incentivised to decrease their usage through costs directly passed on to them by energy providers?
Like reducing cooling and warming because they can’t afford it
As an essential service there is certainly the case for regulation but that doesn’t mean consumers should get a free ride. Every part of society has to work together to decrease emissions.
Have to is where we are going to be forced to go whether we like it or not.
roughbarked said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
Cymek said:Why not
Cannot continue to expand forever in a planet with finite resources.Expanding forever is not a requirement of current economics.
SCIENCE will be along shortly to tell us that the economy MUST grow.
That’s it though isn’t it, if it doesn’t we’ve failed
Can we grow and be sustainable
Cymek said:
roughbarked said:
The Rev Dodgson said:Expanding forever is not a requirement of current economics.
SCIENCE will be along shortly to tell us that the economy MUST grow.
That’s it though isn’t it, if it doesn’t we’ve failed
Can we grow and be sustainable
We can grow more intelligently, yes.
roughbarked said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:Like reducing cooling and warming because they can’t afford it
As an essential service there is certainly the case for regulation but that doesn’t mean consumers should get a free ride. Every part of society has to work together to decrease emissions.
Have to is where we are going to be forced to go whether we like it or not.
The end result though is individuals who can least afford it are the ones that suffer.
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:Why not
Cannot continue to expand forever in a planet with finite resources.Soon there will be finite humans.
True
I just think big business and government have been getting away with all sorts of crimes against humanity with little or no consequence.
They are being given an easy way out by passing costs onto others when it should be the cost of doing business in a modern world.
They still make profit but that’s not good enough it has to be more profit than last year
The idea that big business and government collude to rip off the poor consumer is silly. No one complains when new technologies make current business practices redundant but somehow the hoi polloi are to be insulated from making changes to their consumption decisions?
roughbarked said:
Cymek said:
roughbarked said:SCIENCE will be along shortly to tell us that the economy MUST grow.
That’s it though isn’t it, if it doesn’t we’ve failed
Can we grow and be sustainableWe can grow more intelligently, yes.
Perhaps.
I was reading about how in the USA and I assume its everywhere, that big business tout recycling plastic is the solution instead of doing away with it as much as possible
Only about 5% is recycled the rest dumped.
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:Soon there will be finite humans.
True
I just think big business and government have been getting away with all sorts of crimes against humanity with little or no consequence.
They are being given an easy way out by passing costs onto others when it should be the cost of doing business in a modern world.
They still make profit but that’s not good enough it has to be more profit than last yearThe idea that big business and government collude to rip off the poor consumer is silly. No one complains when new technologies make current business practices redundant but somehow the hoi polloi are to be insulated from making changes to their consumption decisions?
Isn’t that what the Liberal party and big business do in Australia, Liberal party drag their heels about climate change and do the bare minimum as its hurts profit for their masters.
Pay people to lie about the effect us humans have on the planet so they can continue to do business as usual.
Cymek said:
roughbarked said:
Cymek said:That’s it though isn’t it, if it doesn’t we’ve failed
Can we grow and be sustainableWe can grow more intelligently, yes.
Perhaps.
I was reading about how in the USA and I assume its everywhere, that big business tout recycling plastic is the solution instead of doing away with it as much as possible
Only about 5% is recycled the rest dumped.
Unless we each do our own plastic manufacturing and recycle it ourselves (each country that is), the sheer cost of it all is mainly that it is shipped across seas both ways often enough. Particularly in the case of Australia.
I’m a cynic and pessimist so don’t trust government and big business to do what’s right.
Profit before people, you as an individual (poorish ones with little power) have one set of rules and we the rich and government have another.
How are we expected to respect laws and rules as people when those that make them find ways to not obey them.
The Rev Dodgson said:
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
Um no…
Why not
Cannot continue to expand forever in a planet with finite resources.Expanding forever is not a requirement of current economics.
no but it is a current requirement of being in an open universe so actually
roughbarked said:
Cymek said:
roughbarked said:We can grow more intelligently, yes.
Perhaps.
I was reading about how in the USA and I assume its everywhere, that big business tout recycling plastic is the solution instead of doing away with it as much as possible
Only about 5% is recycled the rest dumped.Unless we each do our own plastic manufacturing and recycle it ourselves (each country that is), the sheer cost of it all is mainly that it is shipped across seas both ways often enough. Particularly in the case of Australia.
Yeah well shipping it elsewhere it pretty damn poor behaviour, let someone else in a poor nation deal with it, you know kiddies can go through it instead of going to school
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:True
I just think big business and government have been getting away with all sorts of crimes against humanity with little or no consequence.
They are being given an easy way out by passing costs onto others when it should be the cost of doing business in a modern world.
They still make profit but that’s not good enough it has to be more profit than last yearThe idea that big business and government collude to rip off the poor consumer is silly. No one complains when new technologies make current business practices redundant but somehow the hoi polloi are to be insulated from making changes to their consumption decisions?
Isn’t that what the Liberal party and big business do in Australia, Liberal party drag their heels about climate change and do the bare minimum as its hurts profit for their masters.
Pay people to lie about the effect us humans have on the planet so they can continue to do business as usual.
So that means consumers should just be allowed to continue using cheap dirty electricity? The energy companies have taken the initiative to close dirty power plants and move to renewables because of the market and despite the former government’s opposition.
roughbarked said:
Cymek said:
roughbarked said:
SCIENCE will be along shortly to tell us that the economy MUST grow.
That’s it though isn’t it, if it doesn’t we’ve failed
Can we grow and be sustainableWe can grow more intelligently, yes.
imagine if some country had governance with adequate longer-term consideration and were able to develop such longer term energy solutions as (including) thorium fission or (potential) fusion which aside from providing for economic dominance would also provide a sufficient surplus to begin large-scale remediating industrial wastes and even terraforming the damaged environment
nah
Cymek said:
I’m a cynic and pessimist so don’t trust government and big business to do what’s right.
Profit before people, you as an individual (poorish ones with little power) have one set of rules and we the rich and government have another.
How are we expected to respect laws and rules as people when those that make them find ways to not obey them.
You work for the public service. Do you trust your own organisation to do what’s right?
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:
I’m a cynic and pessimist so don’t trust government and big business to do what’s right.
Profit before people, you as an individual (poorish ones with little power) have one set of rules and we the rich and government have another.
How are we expected to respect laws and rules as people when those that make them find ways to not obey them.You work for the public service. Do you trust your own organisation to do what’s right?
Not always
Do you think government and big business can be trusted to do what’s right
So many examples of them not doing so throughout history and in the present.
Life isn’t valued or respected and is expendable, people make decisions for money and power that kill millions
The war in Ukraine is an example of this.
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:
I’m a cynic and pessimist so don’t trust government and big business to do what’s right.
Profit before people, you as an individual (poorish ones with little power) have one set of rules and we the rich and government have another.
How are we expected to respect laws and rules as people when those that make them find ways to not obey them.You work for the public service. Do you trust your own organisation to do what’s right?
Not always
Do you think government and big business can be trusted to do what’s right
So many examples of them not doing so throughout history and in the present.
Life isn’t valued or respected and is expendable, people make decisions for money and power that kill millions
The war in Ukraine is an example of this.
everyone on Forum is trusting
roughbarked said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
Cymek said:Why not
Cannot continue to expand forever in a planet with finite resources.Expanding forever is not a requirement of current economics.
SCIENCE will be along shortly to tell us that the economy MUST grow.
My irony detector may be confused, but it’s not that confused.
Cymek said:
roughbarked said:
Witty Rejoinder said:As an essential service there is certainly the case for regulation but that doesn’t mean consumers should get a free ride. Every part of society has to work together to decrease emissions.
Have to is where we are going to be forced to go whether we like it or not.
The end result though is individuals who can least afford it are the ones that suffer.
That is the result of hiding costs, yes. It is not a necessary result of making costs visible.
The Rev Dodgson said:
roughbarked said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
Expanding forever is not a requirement of current economics.
SCIENCE will be along shortly to tell us that the economy MUST grow.
My irony detector may be confused, but it’s not that confused.
so what do you make of the contention that
You build the recycling centres on railway lines ( the recycling centre has its own platform)
You use hydrogen to run the locomotives between recycling centres and pick up points ( blowing through thousands of litres of diesel isn’t efficient)
Failing that try to use the waste plastic locally instead of sending to the recycling centre
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:
I’m a cynic and pessimist so don’t trust government and big business to do what’s right.
Profit before people, you as an individual (poorish ones with little power) have one set of rules and we the rich and government have another.
How are we expected to respect laws and rules as people when those that make them find ways to not obey them.You work for the public service. Do you trust your own organisation to do what’s right?
Not always
Do you think government and big business can be trusted to do what’s right
So many examples of them not doing so throughout history and in the present.
Life isn’t valued or respected and is expendable, people make decisions for money and power that kill millions
The war in Ukraine is an example of this.
I trust democratic systems to self correct when they do not properly respect the will of the electorate given time. And i think the world is getting a lot better as time goes on.
As for business it is comprised of people like the rest of us good or bad. I don’t believe that someone who works in a profit seeking industry is some how less honourable or conscientious than those who are not.
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:
Witty Rejoinder said:You work for the public service. Do you trust your own organisation to do what’s right?
Not always
Do you think government and big business can be trusted to do what’s right
So many examples of them not doing so throughout history and in the present.
Life isn’t valued or respected and is expendable, people make decisions for money and power that kill millions
The war in Ukraine is an example of this.
I trust democratic systems to self correct when they do not properly respect the will of the electorate given time. And i think the world is getting a lot better as time goes on.
As for business it is comprised of people like the rest of us good or bad. I don’t believe that someone who works in a profit seeking industry is some how less honourable or conscientious than those who are not.
Are you not factoring in the fact that in many instances, the investors who are seeking profit above all costs, don’t actually work in the businesses they invest in.
roughbarked said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:Not always
Do you think government and big business can be trusted to do what’s right
So many examples of them not doing so throughout history and in the present.
Life isn’t valued or respected and is expendable, people make decisions for money and power that kill millions
The war in Ukraine is an example of this.
I trust democratic systems to self correct when they do not properly respect the will of the electorate given time. And i think the world is getting a lot better as time goes on.
As for business it is comprised of people like the rest of us good or bad. I don’t believe that someone who works in a profit seeking industry is some how less honourable or conscientious than those who are not.
Are you not factoring in the fact that in many instances, the investors who are seeking profit above all costs, don’t actually work in the businesses they invest in.
you mean propaganda advertising works oh damn
SCIENCE said:
roughbarked said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
I trust democratic systems to self correct when they do not properly respect the will of the electorate given time. And i think the world is getting a lot better as time goes on.
As for business it is comprised of people like the rest of us good or bad. I don’t believe that someone who works in a profit seeking industry is some how less honourable or conscientious than those who are not.
Are you not factoring in the fact that in many instances, the investors who are seeking profit above all costs, don’t actually work in the businesses they invest in.
you mean
propagandaadvertising works oh damn
impossible
SCIENCE said:
SCIENCE said:
roughbarked said:
Are you not factoring in the fact that in many instances, the investors who are seeking profit above all costs, don’t actually work in the businesses they invest in.
you mean
propagandaadvertising works oh damn
impossible
Why else would people want to own numerous media outlets besides manipulating information for their and friends benefits
roughbarked said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
Cymek said:Not always
Do you think government and big business can be trusted to do what’s right
So many examples of them not doing so throughout history and in the present.
Life isn’t valued or respected and is expendable, people make decisions for money and power that kill millions
The war in Ukraine is an example of this.
I trust democratic systems to self correct when they do not properly respect the will of the electorate given time. And i think the world is getting a lot better as time goes on.
As for business it is comprised of people like the rest of us good or bad. I don’t believe that someone who works in a profit seeking industry is some how less honourable or conscientious than those who are not.
Are you not factoring in the fact that in many instances, the investors who are seeking profit above all costs, don’t actually work in the businesses they invest in.
This is true but that would mean that the wealthy are somehow less charitable than the average person. I’d nominate Bill Gates as someone who has shown that wealth and a social conscience can go hand in hand and i expect there are many others.
Now of course the business owning right-aligned section of the electorate may perhaps differ politically from the more socially conscious left but again they are still people with a legacy to pass on to their children and grandchildren and IMO over the past century they have showed that they are just as committed to making a better world over time.
Cymek said:
SCIENCE said:
SCIENCE said:
you mean
propagandaadvertising works oh damn
impossible
Why else would people want to own numerous media outlets besides manipulating information for their and friends benefits
out of the goodness of their hearts of course, democracy naturally entails altruism, not like Dirty Communism which is all about greedy bastards getting paid exactly the same amount for everything so there is never any incentive to do anything better or at all
The “tyranny of the majority” is the only glimmer of hope there is in the effort to weaken the actual tyranny of the minority.
Bruce Lehrmann’s defence claimed former prime minister Scott Morrison’s public apology to Brittany Higgins was a reason a trial should be halted, it has been revealed.
Lehrmann’s legal team asked the judge to order a permanent or temporary postponement of the trial in March following Mr Morrison’s apology to women in parliament.
The defence submitted Mr Morrison’s apology was “particularly egregious” and had elevated Ms Higgins “to a status she should not have”.
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/27/scott-morrison-apology-brittany-higgins/
there’s always SCIENCE to improve things
dv said:
Bruce Lehrmann’s defence claimed former prime minister Scott Morrison’s public apology to Brittany Higgins was a reason a trial should be halted, it has been revealed.Lehrmann’s legal team asked the judge to order a permanent or temporary postponement of the trial in March following Mr Morrison’s apology to women in parliament.
The defence submitted Mr Morrison’s apology was “particularly egregious” and had elevated Ms Higgins “to a status she should not have”.
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/27/scott-morrison-apology-brittany-higgins/
and the jury has been dismissed because someone brought some research material in despite the jurists being warned against it.
JudgeMental said:
dv said:
Bruce Lehrmann’s defence claimed former prime minister Scott Morrison’s public apology to Brittany Higgins was a reason a trial should be halted, it has been revealed.Lehrmann’s legal team asked the judge to order a permanent or temporary postponement of the trial in March following Mr Morrison’s apology to women in parliament.
The defence submitted Mr Morrison’s apology was “particularly egregious” and had elevated Ms Higgins “to a status she should not have”.
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/27/scott-morrison-apology-brittany-higgins/
and the jury has been dismissed because someone brought some research material in despite the jurists being warned against it.
Surely that would almost be grounds for contempt of court?
JudgeMental said:
dv said:
Bruce Lehrmann’s defence claimed former prime minister Scott Morrison’s public apology to Brittany Higgins was a reason a trial should be halted, it has been revealed.Lehrmann’s legal team asked the judge to order a permanent or temporary postponement of the trial in March following Mr Morrison’s apology to women in parliament.
The defence submitted Mr Morrison’s apology was “particularly egregious” and had elevated Ms Higgins “to a status she should not have”.
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/27/scott-morrison-apology-brittany-higgins/
and the jury has been dismissed because someone brought some research material in despite the jurists being warned against it.
i begin to wonder if someone isn’t pulling a ‘Joh’s jury’ in this matter.
Witty Rejoinder said:
roughbarked said:
Witty Rejoinder said:I trust democratic systems to self correct when they do not properly respect the will of the electorate given time. And i think the world is getting a lot better as time goes on.
As for business it is comprised of people like the rest of us good or bad. I don’t believe that someone who works in a profit seeking industry is some how less honourable or conscientious than those who are not.
Are you not factoring in the fact that in many instances, the investors who are seeking profit above all costs, don’t actually work in the businesses they invest in.
This is true but that would mean that the wealthy are somehow less charitable than the average person. I’d nominate Bill Gates as someone who has shown that wealth and a social conscience can go hand in hand and i expect there are many others.
Now of course the business owning right-aligned section of the electorate may perhaps differ politically from the more socially conscious left but again they are still people with a legacy to pass on to their children and grandchildren and IMO over the past century they have showed that they are just as committed to making a better world over time.
But did Bill fix the pollution he created?
Do body corporates care aboutKoala habitat or even stick insect habitat?
roughbarked said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
roughbarked said:Are you not factoring in the fact that in many instances, the investors who are seeking profit above all costs, don’t actually work in the businesses they invest in.
This is true but that would mean that the wealthy are somehow less charitable than the average person. I’d nominate Bill Gates as someone who has shown that wealth and a social conscience can go hand in hand and i expect there are many others.
Now of course the business owning right-aligned section of the electorate may perhaps differ politically from the more socially conscious left but again they are still people with a legacy to pass on to their children and grandchildren and IMO over the past century they have showed that they are just as committed to making a better world over time.
But did Bill fix the pollution he created?
Do body corporates care aboutKoala habitat or even stick insect habitat?
That just brings us back to questions of politics. If the electorate doesn’t care for stick insects should they be catered for? There’s no shortage of bat-shit crazy ideas that minorities profess to care about so for important but unpopular causes we have to rely on measured and reasonable advocacy to hopefully bring issues to the fore. Again i’d argue with time and successive generations we are slowly getting better.
captain_spalding said:
JudgeMental said:
dv said:
Bruce Lehrmann’s defence claimed former prime minister Scott Morrison’s public apology to Brittany Higgins was a reason a trial should be halted, it has been revealed.Lehrmann’s legal team asked the judge to order a permanent or temporary postponement of the trial in March following Mr Morrison’s apology to women in parliament.
The defence submitted Mr Morrison’s apology was “particularly egregious” and had elevated Ms Higgins “to a status she should not have”.
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/27/scott-morrison-apology-brittany-higgins/
and the jury has been dismissed because someone brought some research material in despite the jurists being warned against it.
i begin to wonder if someone isn’t pulling a ‘Joh’s jury’ in this matter.
Retrial February next year.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-27/trial-of-bruce-lehrmann-saw-brittany-higgins-take-the-spotlight/101558368
Witty Rejoinder said:
roughbarked said:
Witty Rejoinder said:This is true but that would mean that the wealthy are somehow less charitable than the average person. I’d nominate Bill Gates as someone who has shown that wealth and a social conscience can go hand in hand and i expect there are many others.
Now of course the business owning right-aligned section of the electorate may perhaps differ politically from the more socially conscious left but again they are still people with a legacy to pass on to their children and grandchildren and IMO over the past century they have showed that they are just as committed to making a better world over time.
But did Bill fix the pollution he created?
Do body corporates care aboutKoala habitat or even stick insect habitat?
That just brings us back to questions of politics. If the electorate doesn’t care for stick insects should they be catered for? There’s no shortage of bat-shit crazy ideas that minorities profess to care about so for important but unpopular causes we have to rely on measured and reasonable advocacy to hopefully bring issues to the fore. Again i’d argue with time and successive generations we are slowly getting better.
Insects are far more important that naking money. Because when all the insects go, so there we do too.
Witty Rejoinder said:
roughbarked said:
Witty Rejoinder said:This is true but that would mean that the wealthy are somehow less charitable than the average person. I’d nominate Bill Gates as someone who has shown that wealth and a social conscience can go hand in hand and i expect there are many others.
Now of course the business owning right-aligned section of the electorate may perhaps differ politically from the more socially conscious left but again they are still people with a legacy to pass on to their children and grandchildren and IMO over the past century they have showed that they are just as committed to making a better world over time.
But did Bill fix the pollution he created?
Do body corporates care aboutKoala habitat or even stick insect habitat?
That just brings us back to questions of politics. If the electorate doesn’t care for stick insects should they be catered for? There’s no shortage of bat-shit crazy ideas that minorities profess to care about so for important but unpopular causes we have to rely on measured and reasonable advocacy to hopefully bring issues to the fore. Again i’d argue with time and successive generations we are slowly getting better.
It is the regret of humanity that we think we are more important than nature and have the right to treat this planet in any way we think fit, whereas we are just a part of nature and should pay greater respect to the world we all belong.
JudgeMental said:
dv said:
Bruce Lehrmann’s defence claimed former prime minister Scott Morrison’s public apology to Brittany Higgins was a reason a trial should be halted, it has been revealed.Lehrmann’s legal team asked the judge to order a permanent or temporary postponement of the trial in March following Mr Morrison’s apology to women in parliament.
The defence submitted Mr Morrison’s apology was “particularly egregious” and had elevated Ms Higgins “to a status she should not have”.
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/27/scott-morrison-apology-brittany-higgins/
and the jury has been dismissed because someone brought some research material in despite the jurists being warned against it.
Bugger.
captain_spalding said:
JudgeMental said:
dv said:
Bruce Lehrmann’s defence claimed former prime minister Scott Morrison’s public apology to Brittany Higgins was a reason a trial should be halted, it has been revealed.Lehrmann’s legal team asked the judge to order a permanent or temporary postponement of the trial in March following Mr Morrison’s apology to women in parliament.
The defence submitted Mr Morrison’s apology was “particularly egregious” and had elevated Ms Higgins “to a status she should not have”.
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2022/10/27/scott-morrison-apology-brittany-higgins/
and the jury has been dismissed because someone brought some research material in despite the jurists being warned against it.
i begin to wonder if someone isn’t pulling a ‘Joh’s jury’ in this matter.
What do you mean?
So why does the NSW gov’t want to allow ferals to take over national parks?
Nice work, Qld.
dv said:
Nice work, Qld.
He might have some actual brain damage.
dv said:
Nice work, Qld.
American propaganda.
dv said:
Nice work, Qld.
Nothing to do with me.
Michael V said:
captain_spalding said:
JudgeMental said:and the jury has been dismissed because someone brought some research material in despite the jurists being warned against it.
i begin to wonder if someone isn’t pulling a ‘Joh’s jury’ in this matter.
What do you mean?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joh%27s_Jury
Bubblecar said:
dv said:
Nice work, Qld.
He might have some actual brain damage.
Might??
roughbarked said:
Michael V said:
captain_spalding said:i begin to wonder if someone isn’t pulling a ‘Joh’s jury’ in this matter.
What do you mean?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joh%27s_Jury
roughbarked said:
Michael V said:
captain_spalding said:i begin to wonder if someone isn’t pulling a ‘Joh’s jury’ in this matter.
What do you mean?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joh%27s_Jury
Oh, I looked up the remark and saw it referred to a film I have neither seen nor even heard of. I just asked the good captain to explain what he meant.
roughbarked said:
roughbarked said:
Michael V said:What do you mean?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joh%27s_Jury
Look, if you want to watch a movie and tell me what the good captain meant, that’s fine. I’m not going to use 1 hour 40 minutes to watch an unknown movie, when a few words might do.
Michael V said:
roughbarked said:
Michael V said:What do you mean?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joh%27s_Jury
Oh, I looked up the remark and saw it referred to a film I have neither seen nor even heard of. I just asked the good captain to explain what he meant.
It was quite an event at the time.
Veteran actor Norman Yemm along with then up and coming Noah Taylor.
Michael V said:
roughbarked said:
roughbarked said:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joh%27s_Jury
Look, if you want to watch a movie and tell me what the good captain meant, that’s fine. I’m not going to use 1 hour 40 minutes to watch an unknown movie, when a few words might do.
In 1991 Bjelke-Petersen faced criminal trial for perjury arising out of the evidence he had given to the Fitzgerald Inquiry (an earlier proposed charge of corruption was incorporated into the perjury charge). Evidence was given to the perjury trial by Sir Joh’s former police Special Branch bodyguard Sergeant Bob Carter that in 1986 he had twice been given packages of cash totalling $210,000 at Sir Joh’s office. He was told to take them to a Brisbane city law firm and then watch as the money was deposited in a company bank account.
Luke Shaw, member of the Young Nationals at the time of the trial, was on the jury, and apparently did everything he could to disrupt the jury’s considerations and to prevent it arriving at verdict, so as to protect both Bjelke-Petersen and the National Party.
Shaw later joined Bob Katter’s Australia Party.
Michael V said:
roughbarked said:
roughbarked said:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joh%27s_Jury
Look, if you want to watch a movie and tell me what the good captain meant, that’s fine. I’m not going to use 1 hour 40 minutes to watch an unknown movie, when a few words might do.
The point isn’t about the movie, but about the events of the trial, which were covered by general news media. A Young Nationals member called Luke Shaw was jury foreman, and as he was the only member of the jury permitted to communicate with the judge, did not properly convey the questions that the jury wished to ask, thus sabotaging the trial, ending in a mistrial, and the former Premier was spared a second trial because of illness.
dv said:
Michael V said:
roughbarked said:Look, if you want to watch a movie and tell me what the good captain meant, that’s fine. I’m not going to use 1 hour 40 minutes to watch an unknown movie, when a few words might do.
The point isn’t about the movie, but about the events of the trial, which were covered by general news media. A Young Nationals member called Luke Shaw was jury foreman, and as he was the only member of the jury permitted to communicate with the judge, did not properly convey the questions that the jury wished to ask, thus sabotaging the trial, ending in a mistrial, and the former Premier was spared a second trial because of illness.
Justice prevailed then
Michael V said:
roughbarked said:
roughbarked said:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joh%27s_Jury
Look, if you want to watch a movie and tell me what the good captain meant, that’s fine. I’m not going to use 1 hour 40 minutes to watch an unknown movie, when a few words might do.
I’m not watching the movie either but I believe that Joh was fond of saying things like “piffle, prove it”. or some such .
dv said:
Michael V said:
roughbarked said:Look, if you want to watch a movie and tell me what the good captain meant, that’s fine. I’m not going to use 1 hour 40 minutes to watch an unknown movie, when a few words might do.
The point isn’t about the movie, but about the events of the trial, which were covered by general news media. A Young Nationals member called Luke Shaw was jury foreman, and as he was the only member of the jury permitted to communicate with the judge, did not properly convey the questions that the jury wished to ask, thus sabotaging the trial, ending in a mistrial, and the former Premier was spared a second trial because of illness.
For instance here is an article about the event, published two years before the movie came out.
https://www.afr.com/politics/joh-jury-issue-has-queensland-confounded-19911112-k4o83
Cymek said:
dv said:
Michael V said:Look, if you want to watch a movie and tell me what the good captain meant, that’s fine. I’m not going to use 1 hour 40 minutes to watch an unknown movie, when a few words might do.
The point isn’t about the movie, but about the events of the trial, which were covered by general news media. A Young Nationals member called Luke Shaw was jury foreman, and as he was the only member of the jury permitted to communicate with the judge, did not properly convey the questions that the jury wished to ask, thus sabotaging the trial, ending in a mistrial, and the former Premier was spared a second trial because of illness.
Justice prevailed then
Yes. Joh eventually died and took the express chute straight to Hell.
captain_spalding said:
Michael V said:
roughbarked said:Look, if you want to watch a movie and tell me what the good captain meant, that’s fine. I’m not going to use 1 hour 40 minutes to watch an unknown movie, when a few words might do.
In 1991 Bjelke-Petersen faced criminal trial for perjury arising out of the evidence he had given to the Fitzgerald Inquiry (an earlier proposed charge of corruption was incorporated into the perjury charge). Evidence was given to the perjury trial by Sir Joh’s former police Special Branch bodyguard Sergeant Bob Carter that in 1986 he had twice been given packages of cash totalling $210,000 at Sir Joh’s office. He was told to take them to a Brisbane city law firm and then watch as the money was deposited in a company bank account.
Luke Shaw, member of the Young Nationals at the time of the trial, was on the jury, and apparently did everything he could to disrupt the jury’s considerations and to prevent it arriving at verdict, so as to protect both Bjelke-Petersen and the National Party.
Shaw later joined Bob Katter’s Australia Party.
Thanks.
diddly-squat said:
dv said:
Australia will join Biden’s global pledge to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030, Albanese confirmshttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/23/australia-will-join-bidens-global-pledge-to-cut-methane-emissions-by-30-by-2030-albanese-confirms
sounds great, I wonder how they will do it?
upping investment in the industry.
dv said:
Michael V said:
roughbarked said:Look, if you want to watch a movie and tell me what the good captain meant, that’s fine. I’m not going to use 1 hour 40 minutes to watch an unknown movie, when a few words might do.
The point isn’t about the movie, but about the events of the trial, which were covered by general news media. A Young Nationals member called Luke Shaw was jury foreman, and as he was the only member of the jury permitted to communicate with the judge, did not properly convey the questions that the jury wished to ask, thus sabotaging the trial, ending in a mistrial, and the former Premier was spared a second trial because of illness.
Thanks.
I don’t remember any of that in the NSW media. I do remember there was a mistrial and he couldn’t be re-tried due to illness. My excuse is that it was the first year of my PhD studies, I was working long hours, and didn’t have a TV.
Michael V said:
dv said:
Michael V said:Look, if you want to watch a movie and tell me what the good captain meant, that’s fine. I’m not going to use 1 hour 40 minutes to watch an unknown movie, when a few words might do.
The point isn’t about the movie, but about the events of the trial, which were covered by general news media. A Young Nationals member called Luke Shaw was jury foreman, and as he was the only member of the jury permitted to communicate with the judge, did not properly convey the questions that the jury wished to ask, thus sabotaging the trial, ending in a mistrial, and the former Premier was spared a second trial because of illness.
Thanks.
I don’t remember any of that in the NSW media. I do remember there was a mistrial and he couldn’t be re-tried due to illness. My excuse is that it was the first year of my PhD studies, I was working long hours, and didn’t have a TV.
Reasonable excuse. The media was full of it so you must have been studying hard.
I wonder what the appropriate action is for a jury in the event of foreman misconduct.
dv said:
I wonder what the appropriate action is for a jury in the event of foreman misconduct.
Having done a modicum of research on this topic I can tell you that in 1999 in Qld the juror’s handbook was updated to clarify that the foreman (or “speaker”) can be replaced at any time and that any member of the jury may ask to speak to the judge.
dv said:
I wonder what the appropriate action is for a jury in the event of foreman misconduct.
Maybe this should cover it?
Criminal conduct by a juror during and after the trial
1.
It is a criminal offence for a juror to make any inquiry during the course of a trial for the purpose of obtaining information about the accused or any matters relevant to the trial. The offence is punishable by a maximum of 2 years imprisonment. For this offence, “making any inquiry” includes: asking a question of any person conducting any research including the use of the internet viewing or inspecting any place or object conducting an experiment causing another person to make an inquiry.2.
It is a criminal offence for a juror to disclose to persons other than fellow jury members any information about the jury’s deliberations or how a juror or the jury formed any opinion or conclusion in relation to an issue arising in the trial, including any statements made, opinions expressed, arguments advanced or votes cast during the course of the jury’s deliberations. The offence is punishable by a fine. 3. It as a criminal offence for a juror or former juror, for a reward, to disclose or offer to disclose to any person information about the jury’s deliberations or how a juror or the jury formed any opinion or conclusion in relation to an issue arising in the trial, including any statements made, opinions expressed, arguments advanced or votes cast during the course of the jury’s deliberations. The offence is punishable by a fine.Michael V said:
dv said:
Michael V said:Look, if you want to watch a movie and tell me what the good captain meant, that’s fine. I’m not going to use 1 hour 40 minutes to watch an unknown movie, when a few words might do.
The point isn’t about the movie, but about the events of the trial, which were covered by general news media. A Young Nationals member called Luke Shaw was jury foreman, and as he was the only member of the jury permitted to communicate with the judge, did not properly convey the questions that the jury wished to ask, thus sabotaging the trial, ending in a mistrial, and the former Premier was spared a second trial because of illness.
Thanks.
I don’t remember any of that in the NSW media. I do remember there was a mistrial and he couldn’t be re-tried due to illness. My excuse is that it was the first year of my PhD studies, I was working long hours, and didn’t have a TV.
It’s okay, there’s no reason for NSW news to give detailed coverage of international events.
Michael V said:
dv said:
Michael V said:Look, if you want to watch a movie and tell me what the good captain meant, that’s fine. I’m not going to use 1 hour 40 minutes to watch an unknown movie, when a few words might do.
The point isn’t about the movie, but about the events of the trial, which were covered by general news media. A Young Nationals member called Luke Shaw was jury foreman, and as he was the only member of the jury permitted to communicate with the judge, did not properly convey the questions that the jury wished to ask, thus sabotaging the trial, ending in a mistrial, and the former Premier was spared a second trial because of illness.
Thanks.
I don’t remember any of that in the NSW media. I do remember there was a mistrial and he couldn’t be re-tried due to illness. My excuse is that it was the first year of my PhD studies, I was working long hours, and didn’t have a TV.
It’s okay, there’s no reason for NSW news to give detailed coverage of international events.
dv said:
dv said:
I wonder what the appropriate action is for a jury in the event of foreman misconduct.
Having done a modicum of research on this topic I can tell you that in 1999 in Qld the juror’s handbook was updated to clarify that the foreman (or “speaker”) can be replaced at any time and that any member of the jury may ask to speak to the judge.
same in NSW except that it is a criminal offence.
https://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/benchbks/criminal/the_jury.html
roughbarked said:
dv said:
I wonder what the appropriate action is for a jury in the event of foreman misconduct.
Maybe this should cover it?
Criminal conduct by a juror during and after the trial
1.
It is a criminal offence for a juror to make any inquiry during the course of a trial for the purpose of obtaining information about the accused or any matters relevant to the trial. The offence is punishable by a maximum of 2 years imprisonment. For this offence, “making any inquiry” includes: asking a question of any person conducting any research including the use of the internet viewing or inspecting any place or object conducting an experiment causing another person to make an inquiry.2.
It is a criminal offence for a juror to disclose to persons other than fellow jury members any information about the jury’s deliberations or how a juror or the jury formed any opinion or conclusion in relation to an issue arising in the trial, including any statements made, opinions expressed, arguments advanced or votes cast during the course of the jury’s deliberations. The offence is punishable by a fine. 3. It as a criminal offence for a juror or former juror, for a reward, to disclose or offer to disclose to any person information about the jury’s deliberations or how a juror or the jury formed any opinion or conclusion in relation to an issue arising in the trial, including any statements made, opinions expressed, arguments advanced or votes cast during the course of the jury’s deliberations. The offence is punishable by a fine.
I wonder if court costs can be awarded against them
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-27/liberal-party-donation-site-vec-investigation/101586700
dv said:
Michael V said:
dv said:The point isn’t about the movie, but about the events of the trial, which were covered by general news media. A Young Nationals member called Luke Shaw was jury foreman, and as he was the only member of the jury permitted to communicate with the judge, did not properly convey the questions that the jury wished to ask, thus sabotaging the trial, ending in a mistrial, and the former Premier was spared a second trial because of illness.
Thanks.
I don’t remember any of that in the NSW media. I do remember there was a mistrial and he couldn’t be re-tried due to illness. My excuse is that it was the first year of my PhD studies, I was working long hours, and didn’t have a TV.
It’s okay, there’s no reason for NSW news to give detailed coverage of international events.
LOLOLOL
Outrage as federal government slashes billions of dollars from public hospitals in budget
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-27/federal-budget-prompts-health-funding-backlash/101585400
dv said:
Outrage as federal government slashes billions of dollars from public hospitals in budgethttps://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-27/federal-budget-prompts-health-funding-backlash/101585400
They are acting like Liberals?
dv said:
Outrage as federal government slashes billions of dollars from public hospitals in budgethttps://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-27/federal-budget-prompts-health-funding-backlash/101585400
Does seem a strange thing to do.
The Rev Dodgson said:
dv said:
Outrage as federal government slashes billions of dollars from public hospitals in budgethttps://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-27/federal-budget-prompts-health-funding-backlash/101585400
Does seem a strange thing to do.
Labor party, not Health party
dv said:
Outrage as federal government slashes billions of dollars from public hospitals in budgethttps://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-27/federal-budget-prompts-health-funding-backlash/101585400
Seems a fairly insane decision.
I ain’t here to defend the government but their explanation is that the level of funding is based on demand estimates provided by the states, and that demand is expected, over the forward estimates, to decline faster than expected, partly due to the success in containing the pandemic.
dv said:
I ain’t here to defend the government but their explanation is that the level of funding is based on demand estimates provided by the states, and that demand is expected, over the forward estimates, to decline faster than expected, partly due to the success in containing the pandemic.
Sounds like a defense to me…… :D
monkey skipper said:
dv said:
I ain’t here to defend the government but their explanation is that the level of funding is based on demand estimates provided by the states, and that demand is expected, over the forward estimates, to decline faster than expected, partly due to the success in containing the pandemic.
Sounds like a defense to me…… :D
Let’s put it this way. I’m reporting to you what they said. I’m not saying what they said is true or reasonable.
dv said:
I ain’t here to defend the government but their explanation is that the level of funding is based on demand estimates provided by the states, and that demand is expected, over the forward estimates, to decline faster than expected, partly due to the success in containing the pandemic.
expected to decline faster than expected?
dv said:
I ain’t here to defend the government but their explanation is that the level of funding is based on demand estimates provided by the states, and that demand is expected, over the forward estimates, to decline faster than expected, partly due to the success in containing the pandemic.
Thanks Scotty.
The Rev Dodgson said:
dv said:
I ain’t here to defend the government but their explanation is that the level of funding is based on demand estimates provided by the states, and that demand is expected, over the forward estimates, to decline faster than expected, partly due to the success in containing the pandemic.
expected to decline faster than expected?
Expected now to decline faster than previously expected.
Peak Warming Man said:
dv said:
I ain’t here to defend the government but their explanation is that the level of funding is based on demand estimates provided by the states, and that demand is expected, over the forward estimates, to decline faster than expected, partly due to the success in containing the pandemic.
Thanks Scotty.
Yes.
dv said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
dv said:
I ain’t here to defend the government but their explanation is that the level of funding is based on demand estimates provided by the states, and that demand is expected, over the forward estimates, to decline faster than expected, partly due to the success in containing the pandemic.
expected to decline faster than expected?
Expected now to decline faster than previously expected.
so they mean that due to the (negative level of) success, demand will decline faster as more people are diverted to underground cavities, ovens, and GPs, earlier
understandable
dv said:
monkey skipper said:
dv said:
I ain’t here to defend the government but their explanation is that the level of funding is based on demand estimates provided by the states, and that demand is expected, over the forward estimates, to decline faster than expected, partly due to the success in containing the pandemic.
Sounds like a defense to me…… :D
Let’s put it this way. I’m reporting to you what they said. I’m not saying what they said is true or reasonable.
ah the modern style of journalism
SCIENCE said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
roughbarked said:
SCIENCE will be along shortly to tell us that the economy MUST grow.
My irony detector may be confused, but it’s not that confused.
so what do you make of the contention that
- when an economy X grows larger than an economy Y that does not grow,
- X will have the means to overwhelm Y and therefore
- the natural selection principle dictates that only economies sharing features of X such as Must Grow, survive to grow or not grow
In the short term, natural selection dictates that those species that survive and reproduce in the greatest number, will survive and reproduce in the greatest number.
But in the long term, natural selection dictates that those species that survive and reproduce with the greatest sustainability, will survive and reproduce with the greatest sustainability.
So evolution does not result in a small number species with ever growing populations, that extinguish the others. It results in a huge number of different species each attuned to their own niche.
It does result in the occasional mass-extinction event on the way though.
The Rev Dodgson said:
SCIENCE said:The Rev Dodgson said:
My irony detector may be confused, but it’s not that confused.
so what do you make of the contention that
- when an economy X grows larger than an economy Y that does not grow,
- X will have the means to overwhelm Y and therefore
- the natural selection principle dictates that only economies sharing features of X such as Must Grow, survive to grow or not grow
In the short term, natural selection dictates that those species that survive and reproduce in the greatest number, will survive and reproduce in the greatest number.
But in the long term, natural selection dictates that those species that survive and reproduce with the greatest sustainability, will survive and reproduce with the greatest sustainability.
So evolution does not result in a small number species with ever growing populations, that extinguish the others. It results in a huge number of different species each attuned to their own niche.
It does result in the occasional mass-extinction event on the way though.
Yes. Which puts us in the window for mass extinction unless we take the emphasis off the economic growth unsustainabily.
Another 59-41 poll in Victoria. They have mostly been around that mark.
2018 represented a very low mark for the Libs but it would appear they will go lower, especially if there is some tealification.
dv said:
Another 59-41 poll in Victoria. They have mostly been around that mark.2018 represented a very low mark for the Libs but it would appear they will go lower, especially if there is some tealification.
Are the teals contesting any Labor seats or are they the same horse different jockey?
Peak Warming Man said:
dv said:
Another 59-41 poll in Victoria. They have mostly been around that mark.2018 represented a very low mark for the Libs but it would appear they will go lower, especially if there is some tealification.
Are the teals contesting any Labor seats or are they the same horse different jockey?
The entire raison-d’etre of the Teals is to put forward candidates committed to “strongly advocate for increased action to mitigate climate change by reducing carbon emissions along with improved political integrity and accountability.” At the Federal level they only ran one candidate in a seat where Labor was in with a good shot (and indeed Labor won that seat). They could probably be considered to be significantly to the left of Labor on environmental issues, and wrung some minor concessions from Labor in terms of their emissions targets two months ago.
dv said:
Peak Warming Man said:
dv said:
Another 59-41 poll in Victoria. They have mostly been around that mark.2018 represented a very low mark for the Libs but it would appear they will go lower, especially if there is some tealification.
Are the teals contesting any Labor seats or are they the same horse different jockey?
The entire raison-d’etre of the Teals is to put forward candidates committed to “strongly advocate for increased action to mitigate climate change by reducing carbon emissions along with improved political integrity and accountability.” At the Federal level they only ran one candidate in a seat where Labor was in with a good shot (and indeed Labor won that seat). They could probably be considered to be significantly to the left of Labor on environmental issues, and wrung some minor concessions from Labor in terms of their emissions targets two months ago.
But to answer your first question, they are going to run a candidate in Bellarine, currently held by Labor. Near as I can tell, all the other seats they are targetting are held by the Coalition.
Don’t be surprised to hear the L/NP start making some Teal/Green noises in the next year or two.
Once they work out the strategy, and sell it to the senior party management, and to their corporate supporters, they’ll begin a campaign to convince the electorate that they’ve seen the error of their ways, that nasty Morrison man is gone now, give us another chance, we can change, honest.
It’ll all be a hollow facade, of course, but it’s getting back into power that matters.
captain_spalding said:
Don’t be surprised to hear the L/NP start making some Teal/Green noises in the next year or two.Once they work out the strategy, and sell it to the senior party management, and to their corporate supporters, they’ll begin a campaign to convince the electorate that they’ve seen the error of their ways, that nasty Morrison man is gone now, give us another chance, we can change, honest.
It’ll all be a hollow facade, of course, but it’s getting back into power that matters.
The recent polls indicate 54-46 in NSW as well, though that election is five months off so anything could happen. If it does go that way, Tasmania will be the only Lib government at the state, territory or federal level.
A senior public servant says former prime minister Scott Morrison may have breached the principles of cabinet confidence when briefing journalists during the COVID pandemic.
The Attorney-General’s Department will consider an investigation into a book that revealed Mr Morrison secretly appointed himself to five ministries early in the pandemic.
Earlier this year, a book titled Plague prompted a political scandal when it revealed how Mr Morrison appointed himself to the ministries without the knowledge of his colleagues.
The Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet’s John Reid on Friday told Senate estimates that it did not know Mr Morrison was briefing the book’s authors, or other journalists, about cabinet matters.
Mr Reid, the department’s first assistant secretary, said the book contains information that would usually be protected by cabinet confidentiality, like deliberations of the National Security Committee.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-28/department-considers-investigation-into-morrison-ministries-book/101591218
dv said:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-28/department-considers-investigation-into-morrison-ministries-book/101591218
This is not news.
Tell me of an instance where ScoMo did something right, because of the right motives, where he acted like a responsible, non-narcissistic, capable leader who was looking out for the benefit of his country and people rather than himself, his mates, and his sponsors.
That would be news.
Kevin Rudd
15 h ·
Murdoch cheered while Morrison cooked the budget, raised record debt and News Corp itself took millions from the taxpayer. Now they fearmonger that Labor’s budget discipline could kill. #MurdochCancerOnDemocracy
—
although I did see a sky news banner go past saying that the budget was the sort of budget one would expect from a liberal government.
Australian politicians produce CHINA propaganda
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/31/robodebt-key-public-officials-and-debt-collectors-to-appear-as-royal-commission-kicks-off
lol this is going to end well
Newspoll Australia poll, 55-45 to Labor.
Things have improved a bit for Dutton, as the preferred prime minister polls are now at 54-27.
there’s still time for fascist DPRNA to export its foreign interference influence no wuckers
SCIENCE said:
nnn. grr.
SCIENCE said:
so how does this compare with what public schools are getting?
JudgeMental said:
SCIENCE said:
so how does this compare with what public schools are getting?
Hold on, hold on, you’re not meant to ask questions like that.
sibeen said:
JudgeMental said:
SCIENCE said:
so how does this compare with what public schools are getting?
Hold on, hold on, you’re not meant to ask questions like that.
my seasonal ticket for the outrage bus has expired.
JudgeMental said:
SCIENCE said:
so how does this compare with what public schools are getting?
Per student commonwealth funding of private schools is roughly three times higher than that for public schools.
On the other hand state governments tend to funding state schools better than private schools. It ends up about even overall.
This jurisdictional tug of war is one of the reasons I think we should abolish the state governments but that’s just me.
It should be noted that Australia’s heavy subsidiation of private schools makes us somewhat unusual. In the UK and US, provate schools are not significantly subsidised. In Canada private schools receive funding equivalent to half the level per capita of public schools.
In NZ, private school subsidies are being phased out. I wouldn’t mind seeing the same in Australia. Focus govt funds on making the public schools the best in the world.
https://www.theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/australian-schools-see-biggest-shift-in-student-enrolments-in-a-decade/279648
The 2021 figures show that private schools now enrol 15.4% of all Australian school students, and 19.5% of all secondary enrolments.
sarahs mum said:
SCIENCE said:
nnn. grr.
Add a few for me please.
dv said:
JudgeMental said:
SCIENCE said:
so how does this compare with what public schools are getting?
It ends up about even overall.
Australia’s heavy subsidiation of private schools makes us somewhat unusual. In the UK and US, provate schools are not significantly subsidised. In Canada private schools receive funding equivalent to half the level per capita of public schools.
In NZ, private school subsidies are being phased out. I wouldn’t mind seeing the same in Australia. Focus govt funds on making the public schools the best in the world.
then again is it that different to those corrupt GPs, they can get the Medicare funding or they can charge a gap, oh wait
dv said:
JudgeMental said:
SCIENCE said:
so how does this compare with what public schools are getting?
Per student commonwealth funding of private schools is roughly three times higher than that for public schools.
On the other hand state governments tend to funding state schools better than private schools. It ends up about even overall.
This jurisdictional tug of war is one of the reasons I think we should abolish the state governments but that’s just me.
It should be noted that Australia’s heavy subsidiation of private schools makes us somewhat unusual. In the UK and US, provate schools are not significantly subsidised. In Canada private schools receive funding equivalent to half the level per capita of public schools.
In NZ, private school subsidies are being phased out. I wouldn’t mind seeing the same in Australia. Focus govt funds on making the public schools the best in the world.https://www.theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/australian-schools-see-biggest-shift-in-student-enrolments-in-a-decade/279648
The 2021 figures show that private schools now enrol 15.4% of all Australian school students, and 19.5% of all secondary enrolments.
If I recall coeectly, when public schools were getting all the students, the private schools lobbied the government to pay to allow children the choice of a private school.
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/privatisation-has-failed-andrews-hits-back-after-kennett-attack-on-energy-plan-20221023-p5bs4f.html
Premier Daniel Andrews said voters would decide if they wanted a publicly owned power company to generate electricity after former premier Jeff Kennett lambasted him for “quickly sending Victoria broke” and said his energy plan was “heartbreaking”.
Last week Andrews announced a re-elected Labor government would revive the State Electricity Commission (SEC) and spend $1 billion to create 4.5 gigawatts of renewable energy, about 30 per cent of the state’s electricity.
Victoria would have a 51 per cent stake in the revived commission, and its wind and solar projects. Andrews said the superannuation industry was the preferred investor in the remaining share.
Kennett, who carved up and sold off the commission during the 1990s, tweeted on Saturday that Andrews was “quickly sending Victoria broke” and “must be stopped”. “Now he wants to raid your superannuation funds to invest in a new energy company which the government owns.”
But Andrews said on Sunday he believed energy was an essential, not a business, and it had been a mistake for the Kennett government to sell off the commission’s assets.
He said his energy plan would benefit Victorians rather than private companies, which he said had made $23 billion in profits since privatisation.
“Privatisation has failed. It’s failed pensioners, it’s failed families, it’s failed Victorians,” Andrews said.
dv said:
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/privatisation-has-failed-andrews-hits-back-after-kennett-attack-on-energy-plan-20221023-p5bs4f.html
Premier Daniel Andrews said voters would decide if they wanted a publicly owned power company to generate electricity after former premier Jeff Kennett lambasted him for “quickly sending Victoria broke” and said his energy plan was “heartbreaking”.
Last week Andrews announced a re-elected Labor government would revive the State Electricity Commission (SEC) and spend $1 billion to create 4.5 gigawatts of renewable energy, about 30 per cent of the state’s electricity.
Victoria would have a 51 per cent stake in the revived commission, and its wind and solar projects. Andrews said the superannuation industry was the preferred investor in the remaining share.
Kennett, who carved up and sold off the commission during the 1990s, tweeted on Saturday that Andrews was “quickly sending Victoria broke” and “must be stopped”. “Now he wants to raid your superannuation funds to invest in a new energy company which the government owns.”
But Andrews said on Sunday he believed energy was an essential, not a business, and it had been a mistake for the Kennett government to sell off the commission’s assets.
He said his energy plan would benefit Victorians rather than private companies, which he said had made $23 billion in profits since privatisation.
“Privatisation has failed. It’s failed pensioners, it’s failed families, it’s failed Victorians,” Andrews said.
3.72 Dolorean travels in times
dv said:
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/privatisation-has-failed-andrews-hits-back-after-kennett-attack-on-energy-plan-20221023-p5bs4f.html
Premier Daniel Andrews said voters would decide if they wanted a publicly owned power company to generate electricity after former premier Jeff Kennett lambasted him for “quickly sending Victoria broke” and said his energy plan was “heartbreaking”.
Last week Andrews announced a re-elected Labor government would revive the State Electricity Commission (SEC) and spend $1 billion to create 4.5 gigawatts of renewable energy, about 30 per cent of the state’s electricity.
Victoria would have a 51 per cent stake in the revived commission, and its wind and solar projects. Andrews said the superannuation industry was the preferred investor in the remaining share.
Kennett, who carved up and sold off the commission during the 1990s, tweeted on Saturday that Andrews was “quickly sending Victoria broke” and “must be stopped”. “Now he wants to raid your superannuation funds to invest in a new energy company which the government owns.”
But Andrews said on Sunday he believed energy was an essential, not a business, and it had been a mistake for the Kennett government to sell off the commission’s assets.
He said his energy plan would benefit Victorians rather than private companies, which he said had made $23 billion in profits since privatisation.
“Privatisation has failed. It’s failed pensioners, it’s failed families, it’s failed Victorians,” Andrews said.
Cool!
Michael V said:
dv said:“Privatisation has failed. It’s failed pensioners, it’s failed families, it’s failed Victorians,” Andrews said.
Cool!
Well, it has failed, really.
When outfits like the SEC, and other former government ‘enterprises’ were broken up and hocked off to interested parties, there was all sorts of squawking about how privatisation would lead to lots of competition among the various electricity retailers, and this, in the best free-market spirit, would drive prices down and ensure large and long-term savings for customers. Things like electricity would become so cheap that no-one would even notice their bill.
Anyone seen a lot of that?
dv said:
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/privatisation-has-failed-andrews-hits-back-after-kennett-attack-on-energy-plan-20221023-p5bs4f.html
Premier Daniel Andrews said voters would decide if they wanted a publicly owned power company to generate electricity after former premier Jeff Kennett lambasted him for “quickly sending Victoria broke” and said his energy plan was “heartbreaking”.
Last week Andrews announced a re-elected Labor government would revive the State Electricity Commission (SEC) and spend $1 billion to create 4.5 gigawatts of renewable energy, about 30 per cent of the state’s electricity.
Victoria would have a 51 per cent stake in the revived commission, and its wind and solar projects. Andrews said the superannuation industry was the preferred investor in the remaining share.
Kennett, who carved up and sold off the commission during the 1990s, tweeted on Saturday that Andrews was “quickly sending Victoria broke” and “must be stopped”. “Now he wants to raid your superannuation funds to invest in a new energy company which the government owns.”
But Andrews said on Sunday he believed energy was an essential, not a business, and it had been a mistake for the Kennett government to sell off the commission’s assets.
He said his energy plan would benefit Victorians rather than private companies, which he said had made $23 billion in profits since privatisation.
“Privatisation has failed. It’s failed pensioners, it’s failed families, it’s failed Victorians,” Andrews said.
What does Bolt have to say about it?
captain_spalding said:
Michael V said:
dv said:“Privatisation has failed. It’s failed pensioners, it’s failed families, it’s failed Victorians,” Andrews said.
Cool!
Well, it has failed, really.
When outfits like the SEC, and other former government ‘enterprises’ were broken up and hocked off to interested parties, there was all sorts of squawking about how privatisation would lead to lots of competition among the various electricity retailers, and this, in the best free-market spirit, would drive prices down and ensure large and long-term savings for customers. Things like electricity would become so cheap that no-one would even notice their bill.
Anyone seen a lot of that?
Nope.
captain_spalding said:
Michael V said:
dv said:“Privatisation has failed. It’s failed pensioners, it’s failed families, it’s failed Victorians,” Andrews said.
Cool!
Well, it has failed, really.
When outfits like the SEC, and other former government ‘enterprises’ were broken up and hocked off to interested parties, there was all sorts of squawking about how privatisation would lead to lots of competition among the various electricity retailers, and this, in the best free-market spirit, would drive prices down and ensure large and long-term savings for customers. Things like electricity would become so cheap that no-one would even notice their bill.
Anyone seen a lot of that?
Not me.
Michael V said:
captain_spalding said:
Michael V said:Cool!
Well, it has failed, really.
When outfits like the SEC, and other former government ‘enterprises’ were broken up and hocked off to interested parties, there was all sorts of squawking about how privatisation would lead to lots of competition among the various electricity retailers, and this, in the best free-market spirit, would drive prices down and ensure large and long-term savings for customers. Things like electricity would become so cheap that no-one would even notice their bill.
Anyone seen a lot of that?
Not me.
The same was supposed to happen with the deregulation of the banks.
They were, supposedly, going to offer us all sorts of incentives to deposit with and borrow from their particular bank, driven by the inexorable spirit of competition.
Of course, what we got was an oligoply, where they all act in concert to maximise profits with no discernible advantage for customers between one bank and another.
captain_spalding said:
Michael V said:
captain_spalding said:Well, it has failed, really.
When outfits like the SEC, and other former government ‘enterprises’ were broken up and hocked off to interested parties, there was all sorts of squawking about how privatisation would lead to lots of competition among the various electricity retailers, and this, in the best free-market spirit, would drive prices down and ensure large and long-term savings for customers. Things like electricity would become so cheap that no-one would even notice their bill.
Anyone seen a lot of that?
Not me.
The same was supposed to happen with the deregulation of the banks.
They were, supposedly, going to offer us all sorts of incentives to deposit with and borrow from their particular bank, driven by the inexorable spirit of competition.
Of course, what we got was an oligoply, where they all act in concert to maximise profits with no discernible advantage for customers between one bank and another.
Interest rates rises, “hmm we are already getting at least double back what we lend you but we want more and too bad”
communists
SCIENCE said:
communists
Nah, that never works, either.
But, a bit more of a socialist outlook wouldn’t hurt.
dv said:
JudgeMental said:
SCIENCE said:
so how does this compare with what public schools are getting?
Per student commonwealth funding of private schools is roughly three times higher than that for public schools.
On the other hand state governments tend to funding state schools better than private schools. It ends up about even overall.
This jurisdictional tug of war is one of the reasons I think we should abolish the state governments but that’s just me.
It should be noted that Australia’s heavy subsidiation of private schools makes us somewhat unusual. In the UK and US, provate schools are not significantly subsidised. In Canada private schools receive funding equivalent to half the level per capita of public schools.
In NZ, private school subsidies are being phased out. I wouldn’t mind seeing the same in Australia. Focus govt funds on making the public schools the best in the world.https://www.theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/australian-schools-see-biggest-shift-in-student-enrolments-in-a-decade/279648
The 2021 figures show that private schools now enrol 15.4% of all Australian school students, and 19.5% of all secondary enrolments.
Isn’t that figure a bit misleading? When Bandnt is talking about private schools I imagine he’s throwing the catholics in with that. According to the bureau of stats (BoS) catholics make up around 19.5% of students.
dv said:
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/privatisation-has-failed-andrews-hits-back-after-kennett-attack-on-energy-plan-20221023-p5bs4f.html
Premier Daniel Andrews said voters would decide if they wanted a publicly owned power company to generate electricity after former premier Jeff Kennett lambasted him for “quickly sending Victoria broke” and said his energy plan was “heartbreaking”.
Last week Andrews announced a re-elected Labor government would revive the State Electricity Commission (SEC) and spend $1 billion to create 4.5 gigawatts of renewable energy, about 30 per cent of the state’s electricity.
Victoria would have a 51 per cent stake in the revived commission, and its wind and solar projects. Andrews said the superannuation industry was the preferred investor in the remaining share.
Kennett, who carved up and sold off the commission during the 1990s, tweeted on Saturday that Andrews was “quickly sending Victoria broke” and “must be stopped”. “Now he wants to raid your superannuation funds to invest in a new energy company which the government owns.”
But Andrews said on Sunday he believed energy was an essential, not a business, and it had been a mistake for the Kennett government to sell off the commission’s assets.
He said his energy plan would benefit Victorians rather than private companies, which he said had made $23 billion in profits since privatisation.
“Privatisation has failed. It’s failed pensioners, it’s failed families, it’s failed Victorians,” Andrews said.
ooo. yay team.
sibeen said:
dv said:
JudgeMental said:so how does this compare with what public schools are getting?
Per student commonwealth funding of private schools is roughly three times higher than that for public schools.
On the other hand state governments tend to funding state schools better than private schools. It ends up about even overall.
This jurisdictional tug of war is one of the reasons I think we should abolish the state governments but that’s just me.
It should be noted that Australia’s heavy subsidiation of private schools makes us somewhat unusual. In the UK and US, provate schools are not significantly subsidised. In Canada private schools receive funding equivalent to half the level per capita of public schools.
In NZ, private school subsidies are being phased out. I wouldn’t mind seeing the same in Australia. Focus govt funds on making the public schools the best in the world.https://www.theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/australian-schools-see-biggest-shift-in-student-enrolments-in-a-decade/279648
The 2021 figures show that private schools now enrol 15.4% of all Australian school students, and 19.5% of all secondary enrolments.Isn’t that figure a bit misleading? When Bandnt is talking about private schools I imagine he’s throwing the catholics in with that. According to the bureau of stats (BoS) catholics make up around 19.5% of students.
what isn’t private about catholic schools?
sibeen said:
dv said:
JudgeMental said:so how does this compare with what public schools are getting?
Per student commonwealth funding of private schools is roughly three times higher than that for public schools.
On the other hand state governments tend to funding state schools better than private schools. It ends up about even overall.
This jurisdictional tug of war is one of the reasons I think we should abolish the state governments but that’s just me.
It should be noted that Australia’s heavy subsidiation of private schools makes us somewhat unusual. In the UK and US, provate schools are not significantly subsidised. In Canada private schools receive funding equivalent to half the level per capita of public schools.
In NZ, private school subsidies are being phased out. I wouldn’t mind seeing the same in Australia. Focus govt funds on making the public schools the best in the world.https://www.theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/australian-schools-see-biggest-shift-in-student-enrolments-in-a-decade/279648
The 2021 figures show that private schools now enrol 15.4% of all Australian school students, and 19.5% of all secondary enrolments.Isn’t that figure a bit misleading? When Bandnt is talking about private schools I imagine he’s throwing the catholics in with that. According to the bureau of stats (BoS) catholics make up around 19.5% of students.
Well, should they not?
dv said:
sibeen said:
dv said:Per student commonwealth funding of private schools is roughly three times higher than that for public schools.
On the other hand state governments tend to funding state schools better than private schools. It ends up about even overall.
This jurisdictional tug of war is one of the reasons I think we should abolish the state governments but that’s just me.
It should be noted that Australia’s heavy subsidiation of private schools makes us somewhat unusual. In the UK and US, provate schools are not significantly subsidised. In Canada private schools receive funding equivalent to half the level per capita of public schools.
In NZ, private school subsidies are being phased out. I wouldn’t mind seeing the same in Australia. Focus govt funds on making the public schools the best in the world.https://www.theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/australian-schools-see-biggest-shift-in-student-enrolments-in-a-decade/279648
The 2021 figures show that private schools now enrol 15.4% of all Australian school students, and 19.5% of all secondary enrolments.Isn’t that figure a bit misleading? When Bandnt is talking about private schools I imagine he’s throwing the catholics in with that. According to the bureau of stats (BoS) catholics make up around 19.5% of students.
Well, should they not?
Yes, but I’m suggesting that the 19.5% of all secondary enrolments that was in your link doesn’t marry up with the figures for private school students according to the BoS.
sarahs mum said:
sibeen said:
dv said:Per student commonwealth funding of private schools is roughly three times higher than that for public schools.
On the other hand state governments tend to funding state schools better than private schools. It ends up about even overall.
This jurisdictional tug of war is one of the reasons I think we should abolish the state governments but that’s just me.
It should be noted that Australia’s heavy subsidiation of private schools makes us somewhat unusual. In the UK and US, provate schools are not significantly subsidised. In Canada private schools receive funding equivalent to half the level per capita of public schools.
In NZ, private school subsidies are being phased out. I wouldn’t mind seeing the same in Australia. Focus govt funds on making the public schools the best in the world.https://www.theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/australian-schools-see-biggest-shift-in-student-enrolments-in-a-decade/279648
The 2021 figures show that private schools now enrol 15.4% of all Australian school students, and 19.5% of all secondary enrolments.Isn’t that figure a bit misleading? When Bandnt is talking about private schools I imagine he’s throwing the catholics in with that. According to the bureau of stats (BoS) catholics make up around 19.5% of students.
what isn’t private about catholic schools?
Nothing.
sibeen said:
sarahs mum said:
sibeen said:Isn’t that figure a bit misleading? When Bandnt is talking about private schools I imagine he’s throwing the catholics in with that. According to the bureau of stats (BoS) catholics make up around 19.5% of students.
what isn’t private about catholic schools?
Nothing.
even your “extracurricular” activities!
captain_spalding said:
Michael V said:
dv said:“Privatisation has failed. It’s failed pensioners, it’s failed families, it’s failed Victorians,” Andrews said.
Cool!
Well, it has failed, really.
When outfits like the SEC, and other former government ‘enterprises’ were broken up and hocked off to interested parties, there was all sorts of squawking about how privatisation would lead to lots of competition among the various electricity retailers, and this, in the best free-market spirit, would drive prices down and ensure large and long-term savings for customers. Things like electricity would become so cheap that no-one would even notice their bill.
Anyone seen a lot of that?
I think you’re overselling it.
dv said:
sibeen said:
dv said:Per student commonwealth funding of private schools is roughly three times higher than that for public schools.
On the other hand state governments tend to funding state schools better than private schools. It ends up about even overall.
This jurisdictional tug of war is one of the reasons I think we should abolish the state governments but that’s just me.
It should be noted that Australia’s heavy subsidiation of private schools makes us somewhat unusual. In the UK and US, provate schools are not significantly subsidised. In Canada private schools receive funding equivalent to half the level per capita of public schools.
In NZ, private school subsidies are being phased out. I wouldn’t mind seeing the same in Australia. Focus govt funds on making the public schools the best in the world.https://www.theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/australian-schools-see-biggest-shift-in-student-enrolments-in-a-decade/279648
The 2021 figures show that private schools now enrol 15.4% of all Australian school students, and 19.5% of all secondary enrolments.Isn’t that figure a bit misleading? When Bandnt is talking about private schools I imagine he’s throwing the catholics in with that. According to the bureau of stats (BoS) catholics make up around 19.5% of students.
Well, should they not?
Because they’ll lose votes. There are lots of parents who want to send their kids to an affordable private school thinking they’ll get a “better” education than at a state school. They rely on the federal subsidies to make it affordable. If all private schools were forced to become fully privately funded there would be an enormous hue and cry about it.
Whether or not the education is “better” or not is open to debate. I won’t get into that, merely the perception in voter’s minds that it is somehow better is all that counts.
it would also be a huge upheaval for state schools to have to suddenly expand to take on all the extra students that can no longer afford private education. So would not be popular with the states either.
So we are kind of stuck with the funding model.
captain_spalding said:
Michael V said:
captain_spalding said:Well, it has failed, really.
When outfits like the SEC, and other former government ‘enterprises’ were broken up and hocked off to interested parties, there was all sorts of squawking about how privatisation would lead to lots of competition among the various electricity retailers, and this, in the best free-market spirit, would drive prices down and ensure large and long-term savings for customers. Things like electricity would become so cheap that no-one would even notice their bill.
Anyone seen a lot of that?
Not me.
The same was supposed to happen with the deregulation of the banks.
They were, supposedly, going to offer us all sorts of incentives to deposit with and borrow from their particular bank, driven by the inexorable spirit of competition.
Of course, what we got was an oligoply, where they all act in concert to maximise profits with no discernible advantage for customers between one bank and another.
No.
Witty Rejoinder said:
captain_spalding said:
Michael V said:Cool!
Well, it has failed, really.
When outfits like the SEC, and other former government ‘enterprises’ were broken up and hocked off to interested parties, there was all sorts of squawking about how privatisation would lead to lots of competition among the various electricity retailers, and this, in the best free-market spirit, would drive prices down and ensure large and long-term savings for customers. Things like electricity would become so cheap that no-one would even notice their bill.
Anyone seen a lot of that?
I think you’re overselling it.
No, it was oversold at the time.
captain_spalding said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
captain_spalding said:Well, it has failed, really.
When outfits like the SEC, and other former government ‘enterprises’ were broken up and hocked off to interested parties, there was all sorts of squawking about how privatisation would lead to lots of competition among the various electricity retailers, and this, in the best free-market spirit, would drive prices down and ensure large and long-term savings for customers. Things like electricity would become so cheap that no-one would even notice their bill.
Anyone seen a lot of that?
I think you’re overselling it.
No, it was oversold at the time.
Well you can trot off and find a source that said that privatising electricity would mean energy would become next to free.
Witty Rejoinder said:
captain_spalding said:
Witty Rejoinder said:I think you’re overselling it.
No, it was oversold at the time.
Well you can trot off and find a source that said that privatising electricity would mean energy would become next to free.
Yes, i probably could, but to be honest, i simply can’t be arsed.
You may have the point.
Witty Rejoinder said:
captain_spalding said:
Witty Rejoinder said:I think you’re overselling it.
No, it was oversold at the time.
Well you can trot off and find a source that said that privatising electricity would mean energy would become next to free.
a wardenclyffe tower in every town!
JudgeMental said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
captain_spalding said:No, it was oversold at the time.
Well you can trot off and find a source that said that privatising electricity would mean energy would become next to free.
a wardenclyffe tower in every town!
Cute idea, what? Think of how much copper wouldn’t have been needed.
Edison’s DC domestic power supply also needed lots of ‘local’ installations, many generators scattered throughout cities, feeding power via broad copper strips under pavements and roads.
sarahs mum said:
SCIENCE said:
nnn. grr.
I look forward to the day when most parents and governments finally decide that superstition should have no place in education.
But it won’t happen in my lifetime :/
captain_spalding said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
captain_spalding said:No, it was oversold at the time.
Well you can trot off and find a source that said that privatising electricity would mean energy would become next to free.
Yes, i probably could, but to be honest, i simply can’t be arsed.
You may have the point.
oh c’m‘on free market fetishists love the idea
they said:
destroying the cultural centre of a population was a bad long-term decision
ah well too bad if it’s in the name of mining profits though
party_pants said:
dv said:
sibeen said:Isn’t that figure a bit misleading? When Bandnt is talking about private schools I imagine he’s throwing the catholics in with that. According to the bureau of stats (BoS) catholics make up around 19.5% of students.
Well, should they not?
Because they’ll lose votes. There are lots of parents who want to send their kids to an affordable private school thinking they’ll get a “better” education than at a state school. They rely on the federal subsidies to make it affordable. If all private schools were forced to become fully privately funded there would be an enormous hue and cry about it.
Whether or not the education is “better” or not is open to debate. I won’t get into that, merely the perception in voter’s minds that it is somehow better is all that counts.
it would also be a huge upheaval for state schools to have to suddenly expand to take on all the extra students that can no longer afford private education. So would not be popular with the states either.
So we are kind of stuck with the funding model.
Having spoken to several of the parents that send their kiddies to these expensive private schools, it has nothing to do with the quality of the education and everything to do with having your kiddies befriend other rich parents kiddies. Once they grow up, they are well connected and often end up in positions of power and that helps your kiddies get “favours”.
Kingy said:
party_pants said:
dv said:Well, should they not?
Because they’ll lose votes. There are lots of parents who want to send their kids to an affordable private school thinking they’ll get a “better” education than at a state school. They rely on the federal subsidies to make it affordable. If all private schools were forced to become fully privately funded there would be an enormous hue and cry about it.
Whether or not the education is “better” or not is open to debate. I won’t get into that, merely the perception in voter’s minds that it is somehow better is all that counts.
it would also be a huge upheaval for state schools to have to suddenly expand to take on all the extra students that can no longer afford private education. So would not be popular with the states either.
So we are kind of stuck with the funding model.
Having spoken to several of the parents that send their kiddies to these expensive private schools, it has nothing to do with the quality of the education and everything to do with having your kiddies befriend other rich parents kiddies. Once they grow up, they are well connected and often end up in positions of power and that helps your kiddies get “favours”.
That’s the expensive private schools, they are a different kettle of fish. There are a lot that do not fall into this category. Like the schools I went to. Mostly run by church people who want their kids to go to a school that teaches bible stories and christian moral values, aside from the academic stuff.
fuck, chevron are like the biggest communists in town
SCIENCE said:
fuck, chevron are like the biggest communists in town
They pay the most tax.
SCIENCE said:
fuck, chevron are like the biggest communists in town
The CFO will probably get sacked for that.
SCIENCE said:
fuck, chevron are like the biggest communists in town
What country taxes gross income?
poikilotherm said:
SCIENCE said:
fuck, chevron are like the biggest communists in town
What country taxes gross income?
None.
OTOH, it seems pretty unlikely that all those companies had a real profit of zero or less.
Or even $100.
The Rev Dodgson said:
poikilotherm said:
SCIENCE said:
fuck, chevron are like the biggest communists in town
What country taxes gross income?
None.
OTOH, it seems pretty unlikely that all those companies had a real profit of zero or less.
Or even $100.
isn’t paye tax on gross income?
JudgeMental said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
poikilotherm said:What country taxes gross income?
None.
OTOH, it seems pretty unlikely that all those companies had a real profit of zero or less.
Or even $100.
isn’t paye tax on gross income?
For an individual yes, for a company, no.
The Rev Dodgson said:
poikilotherm said:
SCIENCE said:
fuck, chevron are like the biggest communists in town
What country taxes gross income?
None.
OTOH, it seems pretty unlikely that all those companies had a real profit of zero or less.
Or even $100.
Sure – there are many other taxes paid that aren’t related to real profit, eg payroll taxes and other state and federal taxes. Saying they paid $0 tax is not correct.
But I guess, it does say ‘income tax’…
poikilotherm said:
JudgeMental said:
The Rev Dodgson said:None.
OTOH, it seems pretty unlikely that all those companies had a real profit of zero or less.
Or even $100.
isn’t paye tax on gross income?
For an individual yes, for a company, no.
And even individuals deduct their expenses from the gross income at the end of the tax year.
as an aside i was interested in the term net or nett
net (adj.)
“remaining after deductions,” early 15c., from earlier sense of “trim, elegant, clean, neat” (c. 1300), from Old French net, nette “clean, pure, unadulterated,” from Latin nitere “to shine, look bright, glitter” (see neat (adj.)). Meaning influenced by Italian netto “remaining after deductions.” As a noun, “what remains after deductions,” by 1910. The notion is “clear of anything extraneous.”
poikilotherm said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
poikilotherm said:What country taxes gross income?
None.
OTOH, it seems pretty unlikely that all those companies had a real profit of zero or less.
Or even $100.
Sure – there are many other taxes paid that aren’t related to real profit, eg payroll taxes and other state and federal taxes. Saying they paid $0 tax is not correct.
I presume they are talking about income tax though.
The Rev Dodgson said:
poikilotherm said:
JudgeMental said:isn’t paye tax on gross income?
For an individual yes, for a company, no.
And even individuals deduct their expenses from the gross income at the end of the tax year.
that is if you have deductions. lots don’t.
poikilotherm said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
poikilotherm said:What country taxes gross income?
None.
OTOH, it seems pretty unlikely that all those companies had a real profit of zero or less.
Or even $100.
Sure – there are many other taxes paid that aren’t related to real profit, eg payroll taxes and other state and federal taxes. Saying they paid $0 tax is not correct.
i find payroll tax a trifle counterproductive.
JudgeMental said:
as an aside i was interested in the term net or nettnet (adj.)
“remaining after deductions,” early 15c., from earlier sense of “trim, elegant, clean, neat” (c. 1300), from Old French net, nette “clean, pure, unadulterated,” from Latin nitere “to shine, look bright, glitter” (see neat (adj.)). Meaning influenced by Italian netto “remaining after deductions.” As a noun, “what remains after deductions,” by 1910. The notion is “clear of anything extraneous.”
Nett is the right and proper spelling of course.
JudgeMental said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
poikilotherm said:For an individual yes, for a company, no.
And even individuals deduct their expenses from the gross income at the end of the tax year.
that is if you have deductions. lots don’t.
I suppose there are some mean arseholes that earn enough to pay income tax, but donate nothing to charities.
JudgeMental said:
poikilotherm said:
The Rev Dodgson said:None.
OTOH, it seems pretty unlikely that all those companies had a real profit of zero or less.
Or even $100.
Sure – there are many other taxes paid that aren’t related to real profit, eg payroll taxes and other state and federal taxes. Saying they paid $0 tax is not correct.
i find payroll tax a trifle counterproductive.
When I had employees, it was the one tax that really gave me the shits.
The same companies can’t dodge it elsewhere e.g. the US where Corporate Tax is imposed at the federal level on the income of entities treated for tax purposes as corporations.
Since January 1, 2018, the nominal federal corporate tax rate in the United States of America is a flat 21%.
US corporate income tax is based on net taxable income as defined under federal or state law. Generally, taxable income for a corporation is gross income (business and possibly non-business receipts less cost of goods sold) less allowable tax deductions.
captain_spalding said:
The same companies can’t dodge it elsewhere e.g. the US where Corporate Tax is imposed at the federal level on the income of entities treated for tax purposes as corporations.Since January 1, 2018, the nominal federal corporate tax rate in the United States of America is a flat 21%.
US corporate income tax is based on net taxable income as defined under federal or state law. Generally, taxable income for a corporation is gross income (business and possibly non-business receipts less cost of goods sold) less allowable tax deductions.
scratches head
Isn’t that the same as here, except for the rate?
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/newspoll-daniel-andrews-faces-battle-to-hold-on-to-majority-power-in-victoria/news-story/5ac7a71f6fea4dbfcf4cde97a95cd4f1%3Famp
Kind of a weird headline considering it is about a poll that has Vic ALP ahead 54-46.
Admittedly this is better for Libs than some recent polls but it’s still not especially close.
dv said:
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/newspoll-daniel-andrews-faces-battle-to-hold-on-to-majority-power-in-victoria/news-story/5ac7a71f6fea4dbfcf4cde97a95cd4f1%3Famp
Kind of a weird headline considering it is about a poll that has Vic ALP ahead 54-46.
Admittedly this is better for Libs than some recent polls but it’s still not especially close.
Major parties may have to accommodate popular policies of non-major players in forming a government? Is this all bad?
A black mark against Victorian Labor:
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/corruption-watchdog-calls-for-tough-laws-against-journalists-as-andrews-rebuffs-questions-on-investigation-20221105-p5bvta.html
Witty Rejoinder said:
A black mark against Victorian Labor:https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/corruption-watchdog-calls-for-tough-laws-against-journalists-as-andrews-rebuffs-questions-on-investigation-20221105-p5bvta.html
That is rather bullshitty.
I note that Opposition leader Matthew Guy said that ‘“Leopards don’t change their spots. The only way we’re going to get a government of integrity is to change the government.”
Matthew did not specify what level of integrity would result from the change of government.
captain_spalding said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
A black mark against Victorian Labor:https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/corruption-watchdog-calls-for-tough-laws-against-journalists-as-andrews-rebuffs-questions-on-investigation-20221105-p5bvta.html
That is rather bullshitty.
I note that Opposition leader Matthew Guy said that ‘“Leopards don’t change their spots. The only way we’re going to get a government of integrity is to change the government.”
Matthew did not specify what level of integrity would result from the change of government.
Neither did he didn’t specify who the new government would be.
party_pants said:
captain_spalding said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
A black mark against Victorian Labor:https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/corruption-watchdog-calls-for-tough-laws-against-journalists-as-andrews-rebuffs-questions-on-investigation-20221105-p5bvta.html
That is rather bullshitty.
I note that Opposition leader Matthew Guy said that ‘“Leopards don’t change their spots. The only way we’re going to get a government of integrity is to change the government.”
Matthew did not specify what level of integrity would result from the change of government.
Neither did he didn’t specify who the new government would be.
Yeah…
party_pants said:
captain_spalding said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
A black mark against Victorian Labor:https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/corruption-watchdog-calls-for-tough-laws-against-journalists-as-andrews-rebuffs-questions-on-investigation-20221105-p5bvta.html
That is rather bullshitty.
I note that Opposition leader Matthew Guy said that ‘“Leopards don’t change their spots. The only way we’re going to get a government of integrity is to change the government.”
Matthew did not specify what level of integrity would result from the change of government.
Neither did he
didn’tspecify who the new government would be.
Ooops. Bad edit etc.
Anyway, time for circket
https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2022/11/05/robo-debt-liberals-knew-it-was-illegal-before-it-started
JudgeMental said:
https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2022/11/05/robo-debt-liberals-knew-it-was-illegal-before-it-started
perhaps god’s will.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/05/a-shameful-chapter-how-australias-robodebt-saga-was-allowed-to-unfold
Pulford said she found no record the damning draft advice was finalised, something she said was common if it did not represent “the department’s preferred view”.
Commissioner Catherine Holmes said: “So what do you do? You get an advice in draft, and if it’s not favourable you just leave it that way?”
Pulford: “Yes, commissioner.”
“I’m appalled,” said Holmes.
JudgeMental said:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/05/a-shameful-chapter-how-australias-robodebt-saga-was-allowed-to-unfoldPulford said she found no record the damning draft advice was finalised, something she said was common if it did not represent “the department’s preferred view”.
Commissioner Catherine Holmes said: “So what do you do? You get an advice in draft, and if it’s not favourable you just leave it that way?”
Pulford: “Yes, commissioner.”
“I’m appalled,” said Holmes.
I particularly liked:
>>Later in the week, Holmes, a former chief justice of the Queensland supreme court, reflected on the fact it was apparently common for the federal government to discard draft legal advice that was unfavourable.
“It’s legal advice. It’s come from lawyers. It’s paid for. It exists,” she said. “It’s like a child putting its hands over its eyes and thinking you can’t see it.”<<
buffy said:
JudgeMental said:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/05/a-shameful-chapter-how-australias-robodebt-saga-was-allowed-to-unfoldPulford said she found no record the damning draft advice was finalised, something she said was common if it did not represent “the department’s preferred view”.
Commissioner Catherine Holmes said: “So what do you do? You get an advice in draft, and if it’s not favourable you just leave it that way?”
Pulford: “Yes, commissioner.”
“I’m appalled,” said Holmes.
I particularly liked:
>>Later in the week, Holmes, a former chief justice of the Queensland supreme court, reflected on the fact it was apparently common for the federal government to discard draft legal advice that was unfavourable.
“It’s legal advice. It’s come from lawyers. It’s paid for. It exists,” she said. “It’s like a child putting its hands over its eyes and thinking you can’t see it.”<<
It’s the time-honoured management strategy of ‘We’ll do it anyway, and maybe no-one will notice. And if they do, we can lie, and blame other people’.
It’s that kind of thinking that justifies top-level executive salaries.
buffy said:
JudgeMental said:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/05/a-shameful-chapter-how-australias-robodebt-saga-was-allowed-to-unfoldPulford said she found no record the damning draft advice was finalised, something she said was common if it did not represent “the department’s preferred view”.
Commissioner Catherine Holmes said: “So what do you do? You get an advice in draft, and if it’s not favourable you just leave it that way?”
Pulford: “Yes, commissioner.”
“I’m appalled,” said Holmes.
I particularly liked:
>>Later in the week, Holmes, a former chief justice of the Queensland supreme court, reflected on the fact it was apparently common for the federal government to discard draft legal advice that was unfavourable.
“It’s legal advice. It’s come from lawyers. It’s paid for. It exists,” she said. “It’s like a child putting its hands over its eyes and thinking you can’t see it.”<<
What is more ludicrous is that they think that by standing behind a post, that the public can’t see it.
JudgeMental said:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/05/a-shameful-chapter-how-australias-robodebt-saga-was-allowed-to-unfoldPulford said she found no record the damning draft advice was finalised, something she said was common if it did not represent “the department’s preferred view”.
Commissioner Catherine Holmes said: “So what do you do? You get an advice in draft, and if it’s not favourable you just leave it that way?”
Pulford: “Yes, commissioner.”
“I’m appalled,” said Holmes.
roughbarked said:
buffy said:“It’s like a child putting its hands over its eyes and thinking you can’t see it.”<<What is more ludicrous is that they think that by standing behind a post, that the public can’t see it.
I think you two have, between you, just described the US political system.
roughbarked said:
buffy said:
JudgeMental said:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/05/a-shameful-chapter-how-australias-robodebt-saga-was-allowed-to-unfoldPulford said she found no record the damning draft advice was finalised, something she said was common if it did not represent “the department’s preferred view”.
Commissioner Catherine Holmes said: “So what do you do? You get an advice in draft, and if it’s not favourable you just leave it that way?”
Pulford: “Yes, commissioner.”
“I’m appalled,” said Holmes.
I particularly liked:
>>Later in the week, Holmes, a former chief justice of the Queensland supreme court, reflected on the fact it was apparently common for the federal government to discard draft legal advice that was unfavourable.
“It’s legal advice. It’s come from lawyers. It’s paid for. It exists,” she said. “It’s like a child putting its hands over its eyes and thinking you can’t see it.”<<
What is more ludicrous is that they think that by standing behind a post, that the public can’t see it.
fkcn
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-11-06/power-on-the-brink-as-indian-coal-loan-turns-toxic/101612696
SCIENCE said:
fkcn
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-11-06/power-on-the-brink-as-indian-coal-loan-turns-toxic/101612696
Yeah. It is a bit of a worry. I guess we’re going to shut off coal production sooner than expected.
The first lesson for them is to keep religion out of politics.
Religion = snake oil = fiction.
Stop corruption in politics with nonsense religious fiction.
JudgeMental said:
Has anyone thought to search his holiday house?
JudgeMental said:
“Warnings about legal and policy problems with the proposed Robodebt scheme were “watered downin a brief being prepared for then social services minister Scott Morrison, according to evidence given to the Robodebt royal commission.
roughbarked said:
JudgeMental said:
“Warnings about legal and policy problems with the proposed Robodebt scheme were “watered downin a brief being prepared for then social services minister Scott Morrison, according to evidence given to the Robodebt royal commission.
Robodebt “Dead or alive your coming with me”
I’ll never understand the Bernardi story.
The Libs gave Cory an unloseable first slot in their Senate ticket for more than a decade. It was his first gig in politics: never worked his way up through local politics or the House or even loseable Senate runs or Party officialdom, just straight from zero to being carried on a litter. Never had to face a competitive election while with the Libs, never had to trouble himself with the needs or concerns of the public.
Why? Previously he had been a rower, and then ran his parents’ hotels. He never had any broad popularity, and his right wing rants tended to be a drag on the party. If he were a charismatic figure that captured the imaginations of South Australia I could understand it, but the true extent of his personal following was revealed when he quit the party and ran Australian Conservatives, who got 0.7% of the vote in the Senate.
He’s still rattling around Twitter, wailing about minorities and renewables and whatever. I’d love to know what was behind his rise to power.
dv said:
I’ll never understand the Bernardi story.
The Libs gave Cory an unloseable first slot in their Senate ticket for more than a decade. It was his first gig in politics: never worked his way up through local politics or the House or even loseable Senate runs or Party officialdom, just straight from zero to being carried on a litter. Never had to face a competitive election while with the Libs, never had to trouble himself with the needs or concerns of the public.
Why? Previously he had been a rower, and then ran his parents’ hotels. He never had any broad popularity, and his right wing rants tended to be a drag on the party. If he were a charismatic figure that captured the imaginations of South Australia I could understand it, but the true extent of his personal following was revealed when he quit the party and ran Australian Conservatives, who got 0.7% of the vote in the Senate.
He’s still rattling around Twitter, wailing about minorities and renewables and whatever. I’d love to know what was behind his rise to power.
A long-suffering wife.
As for the Libs, I think they regarded him as a “conservative intellectual” on account of he wrote this (apparently laughable) book:
dv said:
I’ll never understand the Bernardi story.
The Libs gave Cory an unloseable first slot in their Senate ticket for more than a decade. It was his first gig in politics: never worked his way up through local politics or the House or even loseable Senate runs or Party officialdom, just straight from zero to being carried on a litter. Never had to face a competitive election while with the Libs, never had to trouble himself with the needs or concerns of the public.
Why? Previously he had been a rower, and then ran his parents’ hotels. He never had any broad popularity, and his right wing rants tended to be a drag on the party. If he were a charismatic figure that captured the imaginations of South Australia I could understand it, but the true extent of his personal following was revealed when he quit the party and ran Australian Conservatives, who got 0.7% of the vote in the Senate.
He’s still rattling around Twitter, wailing about minorities and renewables and whatever. I’d love to know what was behind his rise to power.
Old school tie?
dv said:
I’ll never understand the Bernardi story.
The Libs gave Cory an unloseable first slot in their Senate ticket for more than a decade. It was his first gig in politics: never worked his way up through local politics or the House or even loseable Senate runs or Party officialdom, just straight from zero to being carried on a litter. Never had to face a competitive election while with the Libs, never had to trouble himself with the needs or concerns of the public.
Why? Previously he had been a rower, and then ran his parents’ hotels. He never had any broad popularity, and his right wing rants tended to be a drag on the party. If he were a charismatic figure that captured the imaginations of South Australia I could understand it, but the true extent of his personal following was revealed when he quit the party and ran Australian Conservatives, who got 0.7% of the vote in the Senate.
He’s still rattling around Twitter, wailing about minorities and renewables and whatever. I’d love to know what was behind his rise to power.
Satan ?
Bubblecar said:
dv said:
I’ll never understand the Bernardi story.
The Libs gave Cory an unloseable first slot in their Senate ticket for more than a decade. It was his first gig in politics: never worked his way up through local politics or the House or even loseable Senate runs or Party officialdom, just straight from zero to being carried on a litter. Never had to face a competitive election while with the Libs, never had to trouble himself with the needs or concerns of the public.
Why? Previously he had been a rower, and then ran his parents’ hotels. He never had any broad popularity, and his right wing rants tended to be a drag on the party. If he were a charismatic figure that captured the imaginations of South Australia I could understand it, but the true extent of his personal following was revealed when he quit the party and ran Australian Conservatives, who got 0.7% of the vote in the Senate.
He’s still rattling around Twitter, wailing about minorities and renewables and whatever. I’d love to know what was behind his rise to power.
A long-suffering wife.
As for the Libs, I think they regarded him as a “conservative intellectual” on account of he wrote this (apparently laughable) book:
Ugh conservatives, can think of ruder ways to describe them
Cymek said:
Bubblecar said:
dv said:
I’ll never understand the Bernardi story.
The Libs gave Cory an unloseable first slot in their Senate ticket for more than a decade. It was his first gig in politics: never worked his way up through local politics or the House or even loseable Senate runs or Party officialdom, just straight from zero to being carried on a litter. Never had to face a competitive election while with the Libs, never had to trouble himself with the needs or concerns of the public.
Why? Previously he had been a rower, and then ran his parents’ hotels. He never had any broad popularity, and his right wing rants tended to be a drag on the party. If he were a charismatic figure that captured the imaginations of South Australia I could understand it, but the true extent of his personal following was revealed when he quit the party and ran Australian Conservatives, who got 0.7% of the vote in the Senate.
He’s still rattling around Twitter, wailing about minorities and renewables and whatever. I’d love to know what was behind his rise to power.
A long-suffering wife.
As for the Libs, I think they regarded him as a “conservative intellectual” on account of he wrote this (apparently laughable) book:
Ugh conservatives, can think of ruder ways to describe them
It is the ways of the Pentecost.
dv said:
I’ll never understand the Bernardi story.
The Libs gave Cory an unloseable first slot in their Senate ticket for more than a decade. It was his first gig in politics: never worked his way up through local politics or the House or even loseable Senate runs or Party officialdom, just straight from zero to being carried on a litter. Never had to face a competitive election while with the Libs, never had to trouble himself with the needs or concerns of the public.
Why? Previously he had been a rower, and then ran his parents’ hotels. He never had any broad popularity, and his right wing rants tended to be a drag on the party. If he were a charismatic figure that captured the imaginations of South Australia I could understand it, but the true extent of his personal following was revealed when he quit the party and ran Australian Conservatives, who got 0.7% of the vote in the Senate.
He’s still rattling around Twitter, wailing about minorities and renewables and whatever. I’d love to know what was behind his rise to power.
What’s with the profile picture? Anh Do would never sink so low.
Witty Rejoinder said:
dv said:
I’ll never understand the Bernardi story.
The Libs gave Cory an unloseable first slot in their Senate ticket for more than a decade. It was his first gig in politics: never worked his way up through local politics or the House or even loseable Senate runs or Party officialdom, just straight from zero to being carried on a litter. Never had to face a competitive election while with the Libs, never had to trouble himself with the needs or concerns of the public.
Why? Previously he had been a rower, and then ran his parents’ hotels. He never had any broad popularity, and his right wing rants tended to be a drag on the party. If he were a charismatic figure that captured the imaginations of South Australia I could understand it, but the true extent of his personal following was revealed when he quit the party and ran Australian Conservatives, who got 0.7% of the vote in the Senate.
He’s still rattling around Twitter, wailing about minorities and renewables and whatever. I’d love to know what was behind his rise to power.
What’s with the profile picture? Anh Do would never sink so low.
He didn’t. It is a photo of him back in 1948 when he drove his first Holden at night.
roughbarked said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
dv said:
I’ll never understand the Bernardi story.
The Libs gave Cory an unloseable first slot in their Senate ticket for more than a decade. It was his first gig in politics: never worked his way up through local politics or the House or even loseable Senate runs or Party officialdom, just straight from zero to being carried on a litter. Never had to face a competitive election while with the Libs, never had to trouble himself with the needs or concerns of the public.
Why? Previously he had been a rower, and then ran his parents’ hotels. He never had any broad popularity, and his right wing rants tended to be a drag on the party. If he were a charismatic figure that captured the imaginations of South Australia I could understand it, but the true extent of his personal following was revealed when he quit the party and ran Australian Conservatives, who got 0.7% of the vote in the Senate.
He’s still rattling around Twitter, wailing about minorities and renewables and whatever. I’d love to know what was behind his rise to power.
What’s with the profile picture? Anh Do would never sink so low.
He didn’t. It is a photo of him back in 1948 when he drove his first Holden at night.
The Liberal conservative nostalgia playback. It is on a loop.
captain_spalding said:
JudgeMental said:
Has anyone thought to search his holiday house?
Or his church?
roughbarked said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
dv said:
I’ll never understand the Bernardi story.
The Libs gave Cory an unloseable first slot in their Senate ticket for more than a decade. It was his first gig in politics: never worked his way up through local politics or the House or even loseable Senate runs or Party officialdom, just straight from zero to being carried on a litter. Never had to face a competitive election while with the Libs, never had to trouble himself with the needs or concerns of the public.
Why? Previously he had been a rower, and then ran his parents’ hotels. He never had any broad popularity, and his right wing rants tended to be a drag on the party. If he were a charismatic figure that captured the imaginations of South Australia I could understand it, but the true extent of his personal following was revealed when he quit the party and ran Australian Conservatives, who got 0.7% of the vote in the Senate.
He’s still rattling around Twitter, wailing about minorities and renewables and whatever. I’d love to know what was behind his rise to power.
What’s with the profile picture? Anh Do would never sink so low.
He didn’t. It is a photo of him back in 1948 when he drove his first Holden at night.
I thought it was picture of Somerton Man at first.
Spiny Norman said:
Are they still using that pic?
If Melinda really believes it was taken in Victoria, she’d probably really be more upset that heavily-armed police were being taken away from the vital duty of keeping ‘undesirables’ out of her suburb.
captain_spalding said:
Spiny Norman said:
Are they still using that pic?
If Melinda really believes it was taken in Victoria, she’d probably really be more upset that heavily-armed police were being taken away from the vital duty of keeping ‘undesirables’ out of her suburb.
Looks like she lives in America.
Amid rising tensions in the Indo-Pacific region, Australia last year announced plans to build a fleet of nuclear submarines as part of the AUKUS defence pact with the United States and United Kingdom.
The Northern Territory’s interest in the nuclear submarines has been revealed in a defence department briefing given to the incoming Albanese government after the May election.
The briefing was released under Freedom of Information laws in September, but the Northern Territory’s approach to the department’s Nuclear-Powered Submarines Taskforce has not been previously reported.
Large parts of the undated brief were redacted but a short section on “stakeholder engagement” was published in full.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/07/complete-phil-gaetjens-report-into-sports-rorts-scandal-released-under-foi-laws
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/politics/australian-politics/2022/11/08/paul-bongiorno-workplace-relations/
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/09/robodebt-royal-commission-official-says-she-failed-to-tell-scott-morrison-scheme-could-be-unlawful
Hmmmmm a way out for the pollies?
JudgeMental said:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/09/robodebt-royal-commission-official-says-she-failed-to-tell-scott-morrison-scheme-could-be-unlawfulHmmmmm a way out for the pollies?
I don’t know. Why is one error going to outswamp all the others?
Scomo knew it was unlawful and closed his eyes to that.
JudgeMental said:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/09/robodebt-royal-commission-official-says-she-failed-to-tell-scott-morrison-scheme-could-be-unlawfulHmmmmm a way out for the pollies?
Falling on her sword. To insulate the pollies, I guess. Not good, but a bit better than what seems to happen in Russia, though.
Michael V said:
Falling on her sword. To insulate the pollies, I guess. Not good, but a bit better than what seems to happen in Russia, though.
Can you flail on your sword?
Woodie said:
Michael V said:Falling on her sword. To insulate the pollies, I guess. Not good, but a bit better than what seems to happen in Russia, though.
Can you flail on your sword?
I don’t know. I suppose it’s possible.
https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/2022/11/18/michael-pascoe-higher-wages/
Sure, bad news sells, but was it really necessary to sell the best news on wages in many years as bad news?
The verdict on Wednesday’s Wage Price Index (WPI) rise to 3.1 per cent growth for the latest year was close to uniform: The fastest wages growth in nearly a decade was bad – it allegedly meant the economy was “running hot” and would require more interest rate rises by the Reserve Bank.
Guess what? The RBA won’t be lifting interest rates because wages growth is starting with a three. I have that in writing from the Deputy Governor.
Similarly, Thursday’s announcement of our unemployment rate returning to 3.4 per cent – the lowest in nearly half a century – wasn’t met with celebration, with champagne corks popping and fireworks, but with more doom and gloom about the need to end such nonsense and force unemployment back up.
Um, OK, unfortunately, that is the Reserve Bank’s official policy, wanting the unemployment rate to start with a four.
For a long time during the 20-teens – Australia’s lost decade – the RBA’s official desire was to see the WPI starting with the three we have just managed. And the higher seasonally-adjusted private sector WPI of 3.4 per cent would have been no bad thing either.
Having finally got what it had been wishing for, we’re being told the RBA wants to squeeze the life out of wage growth.
But the RBA isn’t actually saying that, and it shouldn’t. Even annualising the September quarter growth to 4 per cent is a desirable outcome for the economy, never mind the individuals dealing with falling living standards.
That the latest WPI was the “highest in nearly a decade” doesn’t mean it was high, just that growth over the past decade was low.
Sure, the business lobby doesn’t like stronger wages growth – the business lobby only likes stronger profits growth. Years of wage suppression as official policy have delivered that.
This September 7 Australian Bureau of Statistics graph shows profits’ share of factor income at its highest level since the ABS started calculating it, while the compensation of employees’ share is at its lowest.
—-
More at link
dv said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/2022/11/18/michael-pascoe-higher-wages/Sure, bad news sells, but was it really necessary to sell the best news on wages in many years as bad news?
The verdict on Wednesday’s Wage Price Index (WPI) rise to 3.1 per cent growth for the latest year was close to uniform: The fastest wages growth in nearly a decade was bad – it allegedly meant the economy was “running hot” and would require more interest rate rises by the Reserve Bank.
Guess what? The RBA won’t be lifting interest rates because wages growth is starting with a three. I have that in writing from the Deputy Governor.
Similarly, Thursday’s announcement of our unemployment rate returning to 3.4 per cent – the lowest in nearly half a century – wasn’t met with celebration, with champagne corks popping and fireworks, but with more doom and gloom about the need to end such nonsense and force unemployment back up.
Um, OK, unfortunately, that is the Reserve Bank’s official policy, wanting the unemployment rate to start with a four.
For a long time during the 20-teens – Australia’s lost decade – the RBA’s official desire was to see the WPI starting with the three we have just managed. And the higher seasonally-adjusted private sector WPI of 3.4 per cent would have been no bad thing either.
Having finally got what it had been wishing for, we’re being told the RBA wants to squeeze the life out of wage growth.
But the RBA isn’t actually saying that, and it shouldn’t. Even annualising the September quarter growth to 4 per cent is a desirable outcome for the economy, never mind the individuals dealing with falling living standards.
That the latest WPI was the “highest in nearly a decade” doesn’t mean it was high, just that growth over the past decade was low.
Sure, the business lobby doesn’t like stronger wages growth – the business lobby only likes stronger profits growth. Years of wage suppression as official policy have delivered that.
This September 7 Australian Bureau of Statistics graph shows profits’ share of factor income at its highest level since the ABS started calculating it, while the compensation of employees’ share is at its lowest.
—-
More at link
Thanks Josh.
Peak Warming Man said:
dv said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/2022/11/18/michael-pascoe-higher-wages/Sure, bad news sells, but was it really necessary to sell the best news on wages in many years as bad news?
The verdict on Wednesday’s Wage Price Index (WPI) rise to 3.1 per cent growth for the latest year was close to uniform: The fastest wages growth in nearly a decade was bad – it allegedly meant the economy was “running hot” and would require more interest rate rises by the Reserve Bank.
Guess what? The RBA won’t be lifting interest rates because wages growth is starting with a three. I have that in writing from the Deputy Governor.
Similarly, Thursday’s announcement of our unemployment rate returning to 3.4 per cent – the lowest in nearly half a century – wasn’t met with celebration, with champagne corks popping and fireworks, but with more doom and gloom about the need to end such nonsense and force unemployment back up.
Um, OK, unfortunately, that is the Reserve Bank’s official policy, wanting the unemployment rate to start with a four.
For a long time during the 20-teens – Australia’s lost decade – the RBA’s official desire was to see the WPI starting with the three we have just managed. And the higher seasonally-adjusted private sector WPI of 3.4 per cent would have been no bad thing either.
Having finally got what it had been wishing for, we’re being told the RBA wants to squeeze the life out of wage growth.
But the RBA isn’t actually saying that, and it shouldn’t. Even annualising the September quarter growth to 4 per cent is a desirable outcome for the economy, never mind the individuals dealing with falling living standards.
That the latest WPI was the “highest in nearly a decade” doesn’t mean it was high, just that growth over the past decade was low.
Sure, the business lobby doesn’t like stronger wages growth – the business lobby only likes stronger profits growth. Years of wage suppression as official policy have delivered that.
This September 7 Australian Bureau of Statistics graph shows profits’ share of factor income at its highest level since the ABS started calculating it, while the compensation of employees’ share is at its lowest.
—-
More at link
Thanks Josh.
idgi
dv said:
Peak Warming Man said:
dv said:
https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/2022/11/18/michael-pascoe-higher-wages/Sure, bad news sells, but was it really necessary to sell the best news on wages in many years as bad news?
The verdict on Wednesday’s Wage Price Index (WPI) rise to 3.1 per cent growth for the latest year was close to uniform: The fastest wages growth in nearly a decade was bad – it allegedly meant the economy was “running hot” and would require more interest rate rises by the Reserve Bank.
Guess what? The RBA won’t be lifting interest rates because wages growth is starting with a three. I have that in writing from the Deputy Governor.
Similarly, Thursday’s announcement of our unemployment rate returning to 3.4 per cent – the lowest in nearly half a century – wasn’t met with celebration, with champagne corks popping and fireworks, but with more doom and gloom about the need to end such nonsense and force unemployment back up.
Um, OK, unfortunately, that is the Reserve Bank’s official policy, wanting the unemployment rate to start with a four.
For a long time during the 20-teens – Australia’s lost decade – the RBA’s official desire was to see the WPI starting with the three we have just managed. And the higher seasonally-adjusted private sector WPI of 3.4 per cent would have been no bad thing either.
Having finally got what it had been wishing for, we’re being told the RBA wants to squeeze the life out of wage growth.
But the RBA isn’t actually saying that, and it shouldn’t. Even annualising the September quarter growth to 4 per cent is a desirable outcome for the economy, never mind the individuals dealing with falling living standards.
That the latest WPI was the “highest in nearly a decade” doesn’t mean it was high, just that growth over the past decade was low.
Sure, the business lobby doesn’t like stronger wages growth – the business lobby only likes stronger profits growth. Years of wage suppression as official policy have delivered that.
This September 7 Australian Bureau of Statistics graph shows profits’ share of factor income at its highest level since the ABS started calculating it, while the compensation of employees’ share is at its lowest.
—-
More at link
Thanks Josh.
idgi
something to do with frydenberg and the last treasurer and why we’re in this mess?
JudgeMental said:
dv said:
Peak Warming Man said:
Thanks Josh.
idgi
something to do with frydenberg and the last treasurer and why we’re in this mess?
sorry we’re blind to these dogs
