I haven’t

but what would you do?

wookiemeister said:

I haven’t

but what would you do?

Fake my death and disappear with it

wookiemeister said:

I haven’t

but what would you do?

I just checked my Lotto ticket from last night and I had a win… I’m now $13.25 richer (which ironically was about the price of the ticket in the first place)

But with $70M I’d give up ‘work’ and happily interact a couple of hours a day with my management team… I’d travel, a lot, and buy nice cars… I’d probably also buy a small town in Western NSW somewhere and make myself King.

The same thing we do every day Pinky…

I’m not the missing Qlder with the winning ticket.

I’d probably stick a fair portion of it in the bank and live off the interest, as well as travel and buy a fancy car and some investment properties. Oh, and support some charities as well.

• The same thing we do every day Pinky…

Elicited a chuckle…

Divine Angel said:

I’m not the missing Qlder with the winning ticket.

I’d probably stick a fair portion of it in the bank and live off the interest, as well as travel and buy a fancy car and some investment properties. Oh, and support some charities as well.

I’d suggest you use a small portion of it to get some financial advice… the bank is probably the worst place for it and there are far better things to invest in than property…

Or you could come join me in Orange and I’ll make you a Duchess or something…

diddly-squat said:

I’d suggest you use a small portion of it to get some financial advice… the bank is probably the worst place for it and there are far better things to invest in than property…

Or you could come join me in Orange and I’ll make you a Duchess or something…

Well, it’s a moot point anyway :)
And I would never move to Orange!

I’d buy some land in the country, build a ceramic studio with a new kiln

and set up a project to give raspberry pi computers to children who dont have computers

Divine Angel said:

diddly-squat said:

I’d suggest you use a small portion of it to get some financial advice… the bank is probably the worst place for it and there are far better things to invest in than property…

Or you could come join me in Orange and I’ll make you a Duchess or something…

Well, it’s a moot point anyway :)
And I would never move to Orange!

but we could appoint poik to be court jester and rule over a butch of lowly New South Welshmen

Divine Angel said:

diddly-squat said:

I’d suggest you use a small portion of it to get some financial advice… the bank is probably the worst place for it and there are far better things to invest in than property…

Or you could come join me in Orange and I’ll make you a Duchess or something…

Well, it’s a moot point anyway :)
And I would never move to Orange!

She could start up a rival to KK and Divine Doughnuts and make herself the empress complete with a throne

I’d buy a new computer of course and give everyone on this forum a new computer.

• a butch of lowly New South Welshmen

So that is what you call a group of New South Welshmen? A “Butch”?

everyone can have free donuts too

and a case of wine

However I do endorse the idea of becoming royalty… Brooke would be upset, of course, but that’s the price you pay for not joining the holiday forum when the rest of us are making plans.

diddly-squat said:

But with $70M I’d give up ‘work’ and happily interact a couple of hours a day with my management team… I’d travel, a lot, and buy nice cars…

I’d keep working for while but take pleasure in telling dickhead clients where they can shove their stupid ideas..

Oh, err, did that sound bitter? I had a bit of client trouble today :)

pommiejohn said:

diddly-squat said:

But with $70M I’d give up ‘work’ and happily interact a couple of hours a day with my management team… I’d travel, a lot, and buy nice cars…

I’d keep working for while but take pleasure in telling dickhead clients where they can shove their stupid ideas..

Oh, err, did that sound bitter? I had a bit of client trouble today :)

No I did think I’d send an email to the entire department telling them to f’off

CrazyNeutrino said:

I’d buy a new computer of course and give everyone on this forum a new computer.

I think I’m in love.

pommiejohn said:

diddly-squat said:

But with $70M I’d give up ‘work’ and happily interact a couple of hours a day with my management team… I’d travel, a lot, and buy nice cars…

I’d keep working for while but take pleasure in telling dickhead clients where they can shove their stupid ideas..

Oh, err, did that sound bitter? I had a bit of client trouble today :)

Or simply change your business model and become a ‘photographic consultant’

Cymek said:

pommiejohn said:

diddly-squat said:

But with $70M I’d give up ‘work’ and happily interact a couple of hours a day with my management team… I’d travel, a lot, and buy nice cars…

I’d keep working for while but take pleasure in telling dickhead clients where they can shove their stupid ideas..

Oh, err, did that sound bitter? I had a bit of client trouble today :)

No I did think I’d send an email to the entire department telling them to f’off

Just make sure it in the bank first :)

There was a case in the UK in which a guy did the same numbers every week, and the one week he didn’t , those numbers came up . He topped himself. BUT, and here’s the thing, he’d mis read the numbers and wouldn’t have won the full amount anyway, just a few grand.

• I’d keep working for while but take pleasure in telling dickhead clients where they can shove their stupid ideas..

No pills for you! Next!

diddly-squat said:

pommiejohn said:

diddly-squat said:

But with $70M I’d give up ‘work’ and happily interact a couple of hours a day with my management team… I’d travel, a lot, and buy nice cars…

I’d keep working for while but take pleasure in telling dickhead clients where they can shove their stupid ideas..

Oh, err, did that sound bitter? I had a bit of client trouble today :)

Or simply change your business model and become a ‘photographic consultant’

What I’d really do of course is to buy my own race track and employ MV as circuit manager, Spiny N as chief track consultant and tester, and err, want a job diddly?

• There was a case in the UK in which a guy did the same numbers every week, and the one week he didn’t , those numbers came up . He topped himself. BUT, and here’s the thing, he’d mis read the numbers and wouldn’t have won the full amount anyway, just a few grand.

I worked at a place where a syndicate had their numbers come up, not retirement kind of money but decent nonetheless, and at the bar that night one member told the manager what he really thought of him. Turns out that the person responsible for getting the ticket did not get the ticket…

furious said:

• There was a case in the UK in which a guy did the same numbers every week, and the one week he didn’t , those numbers came up . He topped himself. BUT, and here’s the thing, he’d mis read the numbers and wouldn’t have won the full amount anyway, just a few grand.

I worked at a place where a syndicate had their numbers come up, not retirement kind of money but decent nonetheless, and at the bar that night one member told the manager what he really thought of him. Turns out that the person responsible for getting the ticket did not get the ticket…

Oops!

pommiejohn said:

What I’d really do of course is to buy my own race track and employ MV as circuit manager, Spiny N as chief track consultant and tester, and err, want a job diddly?

Yeah go on, DS, I can run the empire by myself

pommiejohn said:

furious said:

• There was a case in the UK in which a guy did the same numbers every week, and the one week he didn’t , those numbers came up . He topped himself. BUT, and here’s the thing, he’d mis read the numbers and wouldn’t have won the full amount anyway, just a few grand.

I worked at a place where a syndicate had their numbers come up, not retirement kind of money but decent nonetheless, and at the bar that night one member told the manager what he really thought of him. Turns out that the person responsible for getting the ticket did not get the ticket…

They could do a George Constanza and come into work the next day like the angry outburst never happened

Oops!

Ten lottery winners who would have been better off not winning ( Except number 9 “ The garbage man who won the lottery, lost it all with party and prostitutes and now is applying for his old job “ Which seems a reasonable use of the funds

http://www.oddee.com/item_97101.aspx

I once watched a show about people who won squillions in the lottery. Most people bought new homes and cars, a few invested into existing businesses (or started business ideas). One woman lived in a trailer with 6 kids and 17 dogs. She extended her trailer and bought a Lamborghini. That was it. She said money wouldn’t change who she was, but she did want a fancy car.

• Ten lottery winners who would have been better off not winning

I can’t open the site, seems it contains adult entertainment, so I don’t know what misfortunes befell them, but surely they would have been better off winning lotto AND not pissing it up against the wall on whatever crap they wasted it on…

• One woman lived in a trailer with 6 kids and 17 dogs

When you say “trailer”, do you mean:

I did think of starting an alternative music nightclub and getting HR Giger to design the interior but he’s dead so that wouldn’t happen

I saw a show in theUK that was about lottery winners.

Most of them were unhappy.

The famous “Spend Spend Spend “ woman who blew squillions in the 1960s ran a market stall and struggled to find £5 rent for the stall. She blamed the money for her husband’s death because he had a car crash while going to buy a pony for the daughter… he wouldn’t have been going if she hadn’t won the money.

Another was a tradesman ( plumber maybe) in a small village. Everyone knew he’d won and he said they all treated him differently also he was single and now he was inundated with women after his money, so he couldn’t tell if they even liked him.

The only happy one was a fella who loved greyhound racing and he bought his own dog race track. He was as happy as a pig in shit.

• I did think of starting an alternative music nightclub and getting HR Giger to design the interior but he’s dead so that wouldn’t happen

Bring back the loft…

LOL nah one of them redneck trailer homes in the US.

furious said:

• I did think of starting an alternative music nightclub and getting HR Giger to design the interior but he’s dead so that wouldn’t happen

Bring back the loft…

The Perth Loft?

• The Perth Loft?

Yes…

furious said:

• The Perth Loft?

Yes…

You went there I assume was a good night club, very laidback.
Did you ever go to Interzone near Fast Eddies it was another alt music nightclub.

furious said:

• Ten lottery winners who would have been better off not winning

I can’t open the site, seems it contains adult entertainment, so I don’t know what misfortunes befell them, but surely they would have been better off winning lotto AND not pissing it up against the wall on whatever crap they wasted it on…

LOL

they won Tatts and started a porn business

No thanks, I want a very quite life style

I like my house and where I live, I would get the place completely landscaped, a gay interior decorator for some design work, the shed redone and buy the paddock behind my place for a secure lock up for my car collection. Convert a spare room into the ultimate computer gaming room and hire a nurse housekeeper.

That’s about it, my wants are modest. I wouldn’t like people to know I have won and engage in some stealthy philanthropy.

AwesomeO said:

I like my house and where I live, I would get the place completely landscaped, a gay interior decorator for some design work, the shed redone and buy the paddock behind my place for a secure lock up for my car collection. Convert a spare room into the ultimate computer gaming room and hire a nurse housekeeper.

That’s about it, my wants are modest. I wouldn’t like people to know I have won and engage in some stealthy philanthropy.

I see we aren’t a lot different after all.

pommiejohn said:

diddly-squat said:

pommiejohn said:

I’d keep working for while but take pleasure in telling dickhead clients where they can shove their stupid ideas..

Oh, err, did that sound bitter? I had a bit of client trouble today :)

Or simply change your business model and become a ‘photographic consultant’

What I’d really do of course is to buy my own race track and employ MV as circuit manager, Spiny N as chief track consultant and tester, and err, want a job diddly?

sure… I’d be happy with a position as HR Director – I’ll simply look after the hiring of the promo girls

Cymek said:

I did think of starting an alternative music nightclub and getting HR Giger to design the interior but he’s dead so that wouldn’t happen

A whole house by H.R Giger would be interesting

three or four stories plus a nightclub, lounge, music room, swimming pool, etc

diddly-squat said:

sure… I’d be happy with a position as HR Director – I’ll simply look after the hiring of the promo girls

Good thing Bear’s not around or them’s fightin’ words.

Buy a country pub, hire a good manager, then become the Pubs best customer, if you became pissed and stroppy you wouldnt be thrown out, just put to bed.

Divine Angel said:

diddly-squat said:

sure… I’d be happy with a position as HR Director – I’ll simply look after the hiring of the promo girls

Good thing Bear’s not around or them’s fightin’ words.

I was going to hire Droppy as a specialist consultant – there are some necessary skills out there that you simply can’t teach…

I’d settle for a small hippy house

with a hammock area

I never buy lottery tickets so it’s not worth fantasising about :)

bob(from black rock) said:

Buy a country pub, hire a good manager, then become the Pubs best customer, if you became pissed and stroppy you wouldnt be thrown out, just put to bed.

Mrs SS and I have looked at buying one of the local pubs. It was stripped and renos started, but they ranout of money, so it’s sitting there half done.
We could get it for $250K, but it would need at least that again put into it and with 3 other pubs in town, it would be difficultto geta return on the investment

Just hire some unique entertainment, like can-can girls.

bob(from black rock) said:

Buy a country pub, hire a good manager, then become the Pubs best customer, if you became pissed and stroppy you wouldnt be thrown out, just put to bed.

Have I just invented perpetual motion? the more you drink the richer you get! eggslant!

Daily Mail on the story:

Jilted lover walks in front of train driven by girlfriend who left him three weeks ago
Gary Wells, 36, ‘distraught’ when Diane MacDonald, 29, left him in July
Killed instantly when he stepped in front of train near Fort William
Tributes paid to father-of-one who loved spending time with his son, Lewis
Miss MacDonald so distressed that she required sedation at the scene
She was the first woman driver of West Highland Line in Scotland

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2730292/Jilted-lover-36-walks-train-driven-girlfriend-left-three-weeks-ago.html#ixzz3B5pR8IQ0

Sorry WF

If I had 70 mill, I’d give a lot to keep the birds safe.

diddly-squat said:

pommiejohn said:

diddly-squat said:

Or simply change your business model and become a ‘photographic consultant’

What I’d really do of course is to buy my own race track and employ MV as circuit manager, Spiny N as chief track consultant and tester, and err, want a job diddly?

sure… I’d be happy with a position as HR Director – I’ll simply look after the hiring of the promo girls

Sorted. Send in your CV and show some examples of staff you’d like to hire.

bob(from black rock) said:

Buy a country pub, hire a good manager, then become the Pubs best customer, if you became pissed and stroppy you wouldnt be thrown out, just put to bed.

A friend of a friend did just that.. but his manager barred him!!! Honestly!

roughbarked said:

If I had 70 mill, I’d give a lot to keep the birds safe.

The most effective way of doing that, would be to spend a chunk of money in order to find a biological control of cats and foxes.

PermeateFree said:

roughbarked said:

If I had 70 mill, I’d give a lot to keep the birds safe.

The most effective way of doing that, would be to spend a chunk of money in order to find a biological control of cats and foxes.

Nobody has put 70 million towards that cause yet.

roughbarked said:

PermeateFree said:

roughbarked said:

If I had 70 mill, I’d give a lot to keep the birds safe.

The most effective way of doing that, would be to spend a chunk of money in order to find a biological control of cats and foxes.

Nobody has put 70 million towards that cause yet.

Unfortunately!

I’d buy a luxury boat for every person on the forum except PWM.

Skeptic Pete said:

I’d buy a luxury boat for every person on the forum except PWM.

That’d certainly increase the forum numbers :)

I’d spend 50 of it buying West End/Highgate Hill properties. The rest would then be needed for maintenance.

wookie, mate

what do you think the function of things like Lotto are, your opinion, out of interest, which I don’t have much, but do have a little bit.

Bubblecar said:

I never buy lottery tickets so it’s not worth fantasising about :)

Maybe we should regard buying lottery tickets as a public service. A contribution to the prize pool so that others may win.

That’s a thought … buy a lottery ticket, and claim the outlay on your tax return!

I should patent that idea. It’d make squillions!

:)

wookiemeister said:

I haven’t

but what would you do?

I remember many years ago my boss took his department out to lunch. At the time, there was also a large lottery jackpot. At the restaurant, he asked what we’d all do if we’d won. Everyone at the table said that they’d leave work etc. and it quickly became a fascinating topic. I had not answered though and so the boss specifically asked me. I replied that I wouldn’t know how I’d react until it actually happened. Within a couple of weeks, everyone was made redundant and I was the only person left in that department :(

Mr Speedy worked with someone who thought she’d won $250,000 on a scratchie. She came in to work and told the boss what she thought of him and that she was leaving. Turned out she’d only won $25,000. They did not “re-employ” her.

My mum actually won lotto back in the ’80s. It was part of a work syndicate and back when you would choose 6 from 38 (or something) and at that time there were always many winners every week (which was why they later added more numbers). Mum and her colleagues knew that they’d won that night, but the final numbers would not be in until morning. So, it turned out that there were 10 winners and her syndicate had 4, so $25,000 each. Some of her colleagues were so disappointed they didn’t show up to work, but mum was stoked. We got a new kitchen and new sliding door at the back of the house and the rest went on this thing mum discovered called the pokies. Mum’s had a gambling problem ever since :(

Oh and with this particular PB jackpot, I played from the time it reached $40 million. At the time, I said I would donate $5m to my favourite charity and that every time it jackpotted, half the difference would go to them. They were up to $20m! Not sure what I was going to do with the rest, but travelling very slowly around Australia to find my favourite place to settle was likely to be on the cards.

Speedy said:

Some of her colleagues were so disappointed they didn’t show up to work, but mum was stoked. We got a new kitchen and new sliding door at the back of the house and the rest went on this thing mum discovered called the pokies. Mum’s had a gambling problem ever since :(

That’s a shame, Speedy :( I guess it’s needless to say she hasn’t had a big win since?

Apparently an early biggish win can set a lot of impressionable people on a long gambling adventure, which always ends in tears.

Do people who never win have a short gambling ‘career’?

Divine Angel said:

Do people who never win have a short gambling ‘career’?

I’m no authority, never having gambled in my life :)

Divine Angel said:

Speedy said:

Some of her colleagues were so disappointed they didn’t show up to work, but mum was stoked. We got a new kitchen and new sliding door at the back of the house and the rest went on this thing mum discovered called the pokies. Mum’s had a gambling problem ever since :(

That’s a shame, Speedy :( I guess it’s needless to say she hasn’t had a big win since?

Yeah. She’s won maybe $5000 max at a time but still has lots of catching up to do. We recently went on a holiday with her and her husband (who does not gamble) for a week. Her “time-out” is spent at the pubs/clubs while the rest of us are doing normal holiday stuff. It’s sad really, as she complains about not seeing us and her grandkids yet when given the opportunity, would rather be in a smoke-filled dungeon at 10am if those lights and music are going. I don’t get it :(

Divine Angel said:

Do people who never win have a short gambling ‘career’?

I don’t know either, but I’m sure many do try hard to get their money back, spiralling out of control, where the only solution is to gamble even more.

Related perhaps, bit of a crap coverage of the subject by Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticipation

“…“More generally, anticipation is a central motivating force in everyday life – ‘the normal process of imaginative anticipation of, or speculation about, the future’. To enjoy one’s life, ‘one needs a belief in Time as a promising medium to do things in; one needs to be able to suffer the pains and pleasures of anticipation and deferral’….”

I’d squander it all away on the biggest rock star bender that it lasts for…

>I’d squander it all away on the biggest rock star bender that it lasts for…

…. groupie?

I’d buy me some politicians.

And abolish the states?

AND ZINC-AIR CARS FOR ALL

Totes cray-cray.

Actually I’d just blow the lot on Whoniverse fan-videos a la Barnfather.

dv said:

Actually I’d just blow the lot on Whoniverse fan-videos a la Barnfather.

I can’t see the boss lady acquiescing to that.

Witty Rejoinder said:

dv said:

Actually I’d just blow the lot on Whoniverse fan-videos a la Barnfather.

I can’t see the boss lady acquiescing to that.

With 70 million he can afford a better boss lady.

You don’t have to answer of course Alex, but what would you do?

Skeptic Pete said:

You don’t have to answer of course Alex, but what would you do?

Throw caution to the wind and marry Dropbear.

Skeptic Pete said:

You don’t have to answer of course Alex, but what would you do?

Umm sorry wrong thread.

Go to work as usual. If someone says something dumb or proposes something dumb, i’ll say “that’s dumb”.

Hmmm…i do that now.

Probably explains why i’m still at the bottom of the pay-scale.

Still doktar but part-time. I like killing doktaring. But I’d pay off our houses and HECSes and take the family to Europe for our own Who Do You Think You Are? Jony’s the only one of us to have gone to Europe and that was just the west.

OCDC said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

dv said:

Actually I’d just blow the lot on Whoniverse fan-videos a la Barnfather.

I can’t see the boss lady acquiescing to that.

With 70 million he can afford a better boss lady.

r u hitin on me

dv said:

OCDC said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

I can’t see the boss lady acquiescing to that.

With 70 million he can afford a better boss lady.

r u hitin on me

u sprung me dolan

Buy a large hill or small mountain, and build a castle on it.

party_pants said:

Buy a large hill or small mountain, and build a castle on it.

.. and my dream shed.

Skeptic Pete said:

Skeptic Pete said:

You don’t have to answer of course Alex, but what would you do?

Umm sorry wrong thread.

re: Down Syndrome?

Granulated sugar is an Americanism for ‘table sugar’, or just the usual stuff you put in your tea or coffee.

Milled sugar is finely-ground stuff like confectioners sugar / powdered sugar.

Demerara sugar is brown sugar, with some of the molasses extracted from it.

I worked in a sugar mill for a while. I’ve seen lots of sugar, of all sorts. Even learnt how to cook golden syrup.

Damn, i’ve caught the wrong-thread germ, too!

mmmm golden syrup

I have never worked in a sugar mill, and that wouldn’t change if I won a $70 million lottery :)

I think I’d pay some Dutchman to set fire to Lord Snowdon.

btm said:

I think I’d pay some Dutchman to set fire to Lord Snowdon.

I’d annexe the Sudetenland.

i’d buy a gold watch as big as a banjo.

Boris said:

i’d buy a gold watch as big as a banjo.

wouldn’t that make it a clock?

Postpocelipse said:

Boris said:

i’d buy a gold watch as big as a banjo.

wouldn’t that make it a clock?

If you bought half a dozen of them, it’d be six a clock.

captain_spalding said:

Postpocelipse said:

Boris said:

i’d buy a gold watch as big as a banjo.

wouldn’t that make it a clock?

If you bought half a dozen of them, it’d be six a clock.

or a bad NWA clip

I’d buy a big patch of desert and try and turn it into an oasis.

party_pants said:

I’d buy a big patch of desert and try and turn it into an oasis.

Conversely, you could by an oasis and turn it into desert.

But then, you’d just be another mining company.

captain_spalding said:

party_pants said:

I’d buy a big patch of desert and try and turn it into an oasis.

Conversely, you could by an oasis and turn it into desert.

But then, you’d just be another mining company.

there’d be no fun in that.

party_pants said:

captain_spalding said:

party_pants said:

I’d buy a big patch of desert and try and turn it into an oasis.

Conversely, you could by an oasis and turn it into desert.

But then, you’d just be another mining company.

there’d be no fun in that.

Mining companies seem to never tire of it.

diddly-squat said:

wookiemeister said:

I haven’t

but what would you do?

I just checked my Lotto ticket from last night and I had a win… I’m now $13.25 richer (which ironically was about the price of the ticket in the first place)

But with $70M I’d give up ‘work’ and happily interact a couple of hours a day with my management team… I’d travel, a lot, and buy nice cars… I’d probably also buy a small town in Western NSW somewhere and make myself King.

and plate yourself in gold

I’d buy a big pack of dessert.

captain_spalding said:

party_pants said:

captain_spalding said:

Conversely, you could by an oasis and turn it into desert.

But then, you’d just be another mining company.

there’d be no fun in that.

Mining companies seem to never tire of it.

I’d like to do it as a hobby.

maybe I’d set up a madrasa and canetoad farm

during the daytime the inmates could be radicalised by some suitable imam during the night they would tend to the cane toad stocks and release them with a fury into the locality

party_pants said:

captain_spalding said:

party_pants said:

there’d be no fun in that.

Mining companies seem to never tire of it.

I’d like to do it as a hobby.

the actual mining part or the buying off pollies bit?

Boris said:

i’d buy a gold watch as big as a banjo.

somewhere, in a pile of tree grafts…

a red light starts flashing…

Mining is great!

Cymek said:

Divine Angel said:

diddly-squat said:

I’d suggest you use a small portion of it to get some financial advice… the bank is probably the worst place for it and there are far better things to invest in than property…

Or you could come join me in Orange and I’ll make you a Duchess or something…

Well, it’s a moot point anyway :)
And I would never move to Orange!

She could start up a rival to KK and Divine Doughnuts and make herself the empress complete with a throne

I heard about some fellah who went mad in the eilat area in Palestine years ago, he started collecting rocks and build a huge rock pile with a throne on it

the council bulldozed it

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

captain_spalding said:

Mining companies seem to never tire of it.

I’d like to do it as a hobby.

the actual mining part or the buying off pollies bit?

No, I’d like to do the non-mining bit as a hobby. Turn a bit of desert into an oasis, I’d build a gold course and plant some date palms.

furious said:

Mining is great!

It’s not the mining i mind.

It’s the walking away from the mess that’s left behind like it’s not even there.

a gold watch as big as a banjo

• It’s the walking away from the mess that’s left behind like it’s not even there.

Ts not always like that…

wookiemeister said:

I heard about some fellah who went mad in the eilat area in Palestine years ago, he started collecting rocks and build a huge rock pile with a throne on it

the council bulldozed it

[/quote

Well, if you will continue to ignore the advice of the building inspectors…

furious said:

• It’s the walking away from the mess that’s left behind like it’s not even there.

Ts not always like that…

True. But, it seems that the bigger the mess, the more likely it is to be left behind.

captain_spalding said:

furious said:

Mining is great!

It’s not the mining i mind.

It’s the walking away from the mess that’s left behind like it’s not even there.

There’s lots of holes around Kalgoorlie.

• There’s lots of holes around Kalgoorlie.

Kalgoorlie is a hole…

In all seriousness I’d put together a small team of prank monkeys that have to come up with various stunts to bemuse and alarm the idiots of the world

I’d throw my ideas in the mix

I would buy a plot of land in the middle of no where and build a huge statue of myself

or…….

would I buy lots of smaller plots in many places and put smaller statues to myself? I mean with the interest alone you could buy thousands of small plots of land and get a contractor to go around installing precast statues of myself

maybe I could buy a plot of land and then put thousands of statues to myself in rows like an army

I’d need some kind of mausoleum built to my memory of course

Speedy said:

wookiemeister said:

I haven’t

but what would you do?

I remember many years ago my boss took his department out to lunch. At the time, there was also a large lottery jackpot. At the restaurant, he asked what we’d all do if we’d won. Everyone at the table said that they’d leave work etc. and it quickly became a fascinating topic. I had not answered though and so the boss specifically asked me. I replied that I wouldn’t know how I’d react until it actually happened. Within a couple of weeks, everyone was made redundant and I was the only person left in that department :(

Mr Speedy worked with someone who thought she’d won $250,000 on a scratchie. She came in to work and told the boss what she thought of him and that she was leaving. Turned out she’d only won $25,000. They did not “re-employ” her.

My mum actually won lotto back in the ’80s. It was part of a work syndicate and back when you would choose 6 from 38 (or something) and at that time there were always many winners every week (which was why they later added more numbers). Mum and her colleagues knew that they’d won that night, but the final numbers would not be in until morning. So, it turned out that there were 10 winners and her syndicate had 4, so $25,000 each. Some of her colleagues were so disappointed they didn’t show up to work, but mum was stoked. We got a new kitchen and new sliding door at the back of the house and the rest went on this thing mum discovered called the pokies. Mum’s had a gambling problem ever since :(

when I was fixing pokies I’d find unused credits left by the punter that had vacated the machine to let me do myself; I’d play the remaining credits and more often than not win , find the punter and give them their due

I got talking to one poor soul, she was playing in the RSL at 11am and had been to a funeral earlier that day

captain_spalding said:

Granulated sugar is an Americanism for ‘table sugar’, or just the usual stuff you put in your tea or coffee.

Milled sugar is finely-ground stuff like confectioners sugar / powdered sugar.

Demerara sugar is brown sugar, with some of the molasses extracted from it.

I worked in a sugar mill for a while. I’ve seen lots of sugar, of all sorts. Even learnt how to cook golden syrup.

apparently bagasse is very bad for your lungs

and bargearse is good for a laugh.

if you were particularly malicious you could use that money as a stake in “class actions” where people have lots of money because they are greedy. your take in the class actions and other law suits would ravage the land , laying waste to society as everyone is to blame , and no one.

some of this money could be used to fund the tuition of vast armies of legal people, real estate agents and police radar

you could set up a speed radar company that would feast on the lifeblood on the nation – you’d lobby for the council to put the speed limits down to 40 on a busy stretch then lace the entire length with speed radar, holding the infringements off until you’ve raked in millions then unleash them in the unsuspecting populace

it would be amusing to buy up some fancy houses and then rent them out to the problems of the world in fancy neighbours, you’d drive the neighbours mad

wookiemeister said:

it would be amusing to buy up some fancy houses and then rent them out to the problems of the world in fancy neighbours, you’d drive the neighbours mad

if you’re into that sort of stuff.

so .,….. Next door to Clive or next door to Gina?

party_pants said:

wookiemeister said:

it would be amusing to buy up some fancy houses and then rent them out to the problems of the world in fancy neighbours, you’d drive the neighbours mad

if you’re into that sort of stuff.

so .,….. Next door to Clive or next door to Gina?

you’d move in some aboriginals next door to Twiggy Forrest

wookiemeister said:

it would be amusing to buy up some fancy houses and then rent them out to the problems of the world in fancy neighbours, you’d drive the neighbours mad

drive the house prices down in the neighbourhood and buy them up very cheaply, then once you owned the lot, kick out the riff-raff and rent them back to the upper class, increasing the value of the neighbourhood back to it’s previous level and sell the places off for mega profit

stumpy_seahorse said:

wookiemeister said:

it would be amusing to buy up some fancy houses and then rent them out to the problems of the world in fancy neighbours, you’d drive the neighbours mad

drive the house prices down in the neighbourhood and buy them up very cheaply, then once you owned the lot, kick out the riff-raff and rent them back to the upper class, increasing the value of the neighbourhood back to it’s previous level and sell the places off for mega profit

rubs hands together

party_pants said:

wookiemeister said:

it would be amusing to buy up some fancy houses and then rent them out to the problems of the world in fancy neighbours, you’d drive the neighbours mad

if you’re into that sort of stuff.

so .,….. Next door to Clive or next door to Gina?

THey’d simply send in the bulldozers.

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

wookiemeister said:

it would be amusing to buy up some fancy houses and then rent them out to the problems of the world in fancy neighbours, you’d drive the neighbours mad

if you’re into that sort of stuff.

so .,….. Next door to Clive or next door to Gina?

THey’d simply send in the bulldozers.

you’d send in your army of lawyers

they’d be marching in their thousands across the landscape with a thirst for blood

wookiemeister said:

I haven’t

but what would you do?

I didn’t either – I did, however, win $26.20. So I was about seventy million dollars short of winning seventy million dollars.

A few things I’d do.

- Buy a trip to the ISS. ‘Bout US$20,000,000 or so.

- Buy that block of land on top of the ridge near my place. I really like it.

- Build a rather nice house with an awesome garage for my various toys on said block of land.

I’d also do pretty much whatever the hell I wanted, and do it many times.

I would definitely build that salt pyramid

I reckon they could really stimulate the economy if they put a million or two in everyone’s account.

roughbarked said:

I reckon they could really stimulate the economy if they put a million or two in everyone’s account.

It would be a disaster of unmitigated proportions.

“Gold would not be precious if we all had gold to spare” and all that.

party_pants said:

It would be a disaster of unmitigated proportions.

only for the currently very rich. those guys prefer to personally know who they are competing or bidding against.

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

It would be a disaster of unmitigated proportions.

only for the currently very rich. those guys prefer to personally know who they are competing or bidding against.

Nah, it would be massively inflationary. It would destroy the economy.

• only for the currently very rich.

Yeah, hyperinflation always improves the lot of the little guy at the expense of the rich…

>“Gold would not be precious if we all had gold to spare” and all that.

could get the ol’ ute goldplated, cold upgrade the copper wiring here, could go corrugates gold plating roof iron

There’s a darts competition in Maryborough this weekend, so the motel is full of fairly drunk, loud fat people. I couldn’t possibly beat them, so I’d better join them. I can do fat person with ease. I’ll try to make a dent in the drunk one, but the other, well, I’m not so good at that…

Uh-oh. Fred Wong. Sorry.

the ‘fortunate’ part about gambling, is that most people don’t.

transition said:

the ‘fortunate’ part about gambling, is that most people don’t.

Tell that to farmers, miners and any business operator.
It is only fortunate when the winnings are put into safe investments.

>Tell that to farmers, miners and any business operator.

those things above involve effort toward legitimate goals
quite a different proposition

transition said:

the ‘fortunate’ part about gambling, is that most people don’t.

you should hang out in a casino sometime…

The odds on wining Powerball are:

for a single game : 1 in nearly 77 million.

play 1 games: 1 in 6.4 million

If you told someone that the airliner they’re about to get on stood 1 in 6.4 million chance of crashing, they’d say “no problem, i’m boarding now”.

Tell them that there’s some money to win, and they’ll queue up at the newsagency, because “it just might happen to me”.

should read “play 12 games: 1in 6.4 million”

I’d give 65 million to those in need, 3 million to my immediate family, and then live a very comfortable life on the earnings from the remaining 2 million.

Actually, probably I wouldn’t do that, but that would be the logical thing to do, to get the greatest personal gain from the money, with minimum risk of things going horribly wrong.

captain_spalding said:

The odds on wining Powerball are:

for a single game : 1 in nearly 77 million.

play 1 games: 1 in 6.4 million

If you told someone that the airliner they’re about to get on stood 1 in 6.4 million chance of crashing, they’d say “no problem, i’m boarding now”.

Tell them that there’s some money to win, and they’ll queue up at the newsagency, because “it just might happen to me”.

in high school we hadto calculate the odds of winning different lottos, iirc you had the least chance of winning powerball than you had of the others, by a fair margin

>you should hang out in a casino sometime…

it stands, ‘most people’, to generalize, don’t.

transition said:

>you should hang out in a casino sometime…

it stands, ‘most people’, to generalize, don’t.

actually most people do gamble in some form. Raffle tickets, lotteries, prize competitions.. SP loves a meat raffle and PWM gambles everyday that he might get a boat

>actually most people do gamble in some form.

I doubt it.

speaking of gambling I had no idea that the TAB was ‘state run’

transition said:

>actually most people do gamble in some form.

I doubt it.

then where is all this huge prize money coming from?

captain_spalding said:

The odds on wining Powerball are:

for a single game : 1 in nearly 77 million.

play 1 games: 1 in 6.4 million

If you told someone that the airliner they’re about to get on stood 1 in 6.4 million chance of crashing, they’d say “no problem, i’m boarding now”.

Tell them that there’s some money to win, and they’ll queue up at the newsagency, because “it just might happen to me”.

The biggest gamblers in the world are not those who swim with sharks. It is those who put their whole family in the car every day.

transition said:

>Tell that to farmers, miners and any business operator.

those things above involve effort toward legitimate goals
quite a different proposition

Tell it to those who have to outlay 100 million just to have a look to see if it is worth the gamble.

roughbarked said:

Tell it to those who have to outlay 100 million just to have a look to see if it is worth the gamble.

That’s a lot of money. You’d think the govt would let them write some of it off against taxable earnings.

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Tell it to those who have to outlay 100 million just to have a look to see if it is worth the gamble.

That’s a lot of money. You’d think the govt would let them write some of it off against taxable earnings.

They have to earn the money to pay tax on before they can start writing any off. Sure, they aren’t going to chuck that sort of money at it unless they at least have a reasonable idea that there may be billions in it.

roughbarked said:

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Tell it to those who have to outlay 100 million just to have a look to see if it is worth the gamble.

That’s a lot of money. You’d think the govt would let them write some of it off against taxable earnings.

They have to earn the money to pay tax on before they can start writing any off. Sure, they aren’t going to chuck that sort of money at it unless they at least have a reasonable idea that there may be billions in it.

So, it’s not usually all that risky a kind of bet, and they can get some of it back anyway?

If only casinos worked like that!

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

captain_spalding said:

That’s a lot of money. You’d think the govt would let them write some of it off against taxable earnings.

They have to earn the money to pay tax on before they can start writing any off. Sure, they aren’t going to chuck that sort of money at it unless they at least have a reasonable idea that there may be billions in it.

So, it’s not usually all that risky a kind of bet, and they can get some of it back anyway?

If only casinos worked like that!

They do. Casinos mine the household budget. Mining companies mine the public purse.

roughbarked said:

Mining companies mine the public purse.

And, if, along the way, they find any interesting rocks to flog to someone, that’d just be a bonus.

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Mining companies mine the public purse.

And, if, along the way, they find any interesting rocks to flog to someone, that’d just be a bonus.

indeed.

Mining (and other risky forms of business) are fundamentally different from gambling.

Businesses that produce a useful product are a positive sum game; it is possible for everyone to win in the long term.

Gambling is a negative sum game (for the gamblers); anything you win comes out of the pocket of someone who loses.

speaking about mining and millions

Norwegians become crown millionaires as sovereign wealth fund hits benchmark

Everyone in Norway became a theoretical millionaire on Wednesday, in a milestone for the world’s biggest sovereign wealth fund that has ballooned thanks to high oil and gas prices.

Set up in 1990, the fund owns around 1 per cent of the world’s stocks, as well as bonds and real estate from London to Boston, making the Nordic nation an exception when others are struggling under a mountain of debts.

A preliminary counter on the website of the central bank, which manages the fund, rose to 5.11 trillion crowns ($931.87 billion), fractionally more than a million times Norway’s most recent official population estimate of 5,096,300.

more….

now, Imagine if Federal Australia at the beginning of Federation taxed mining at 70 percent?

How rich would you be now?

hmmm

and what are we doing with it,

squandering around with it, pissing it against the wall

CrazyNeutrino said:

speaking about mining and millions

Norwegians become crown millionaires as sovereign wealth fund hits benchmark

Everyone in Norway became a theoretical millionaire on Wednesday, in a milestone for the world’s biggest sovereign wealth fund that has ballooned thanks to high oil and gas prices.

Set up in 1990, the fund owns around 1 per cent of the world’s stocks, as well as bonds and real estate from London to Boston, making the Nordic nation an exception when others are struggling under a mountain of debts.

A preliminary counter on the website of the central bank, which manages the fund, rose to 5.11 trillion crowns ($931.87 billion), fractionally more than a million times Norway’s most recent official population estimate of 5,096,300.

more….

now, Imagine if Federal Australia at the beginning of Federation taxed mining at 70 percent?

How rich would you be now?

hmmm

and what are we doing with it,

squandering around with it, pissing it against the wall

and those who are against mining tax, well are you a millionaire?

or dont want other to be?

If you think a 70% mining tax is going to make everyone a millionaire with the same spending capacity as a current millionaire you are a crazy neutrino.

or you don’t want others to be?

CrazyNeutrino said:

or you don’t want others to be?

I have no problems with rich people being rich. Means and methods may be objected to, but as a general principle no. I don’t do envy politics.

AwesomeO said:

If you think a 70% mining tax is going to make everyone a millionaire with the same spending capacity as a current millionaire you are a crazy neutrino.

starting from Federation tha’ts 114 years ago

how much has mining made since then?

CrazyNeutrino said:

AwesomeO said:

If you think a 70% mining tax is going to make everyone a millionaire with the same spending capacity as a current millionaire you are a crazy neutrino.

starting from Federation tha’ts 114 years ago

how much has mining made since then?

Mining tax: it’s time for all Australians to realise they are being ripped off

Have a read of this

CrazyNeutrino said:

AwesomeO said:

If you think a 70% mining tax is going to make everyone a millionaire with the same spending capacity as a current millionaire you are a crazy neutrino.

starting from Federation tha’ts 114 years ago

how much has mining made since then?

No idea. Your next question needs to be quick as I am stepping out.

AwesomeO said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

AwesomeO said:

If you think a 70% mining tax is going to make everyone a millionaire with the same spending capacity as a current millionaire you are a crazy neutrino.

starting from Federation tha’ts 114 years ago

how much has mining made since then?

No idea. Your next question needs to be quick as I am stepping out.

If I was to research the total amount of exported resources

what figure would I come with?

for

gold
silver
copper
iron
gas
coal
oil
aluminum
uranium

and other materials

for each year

going back 114 years

what figure would we come with?

AwesomeO said:

If you think a 70% mining tax is going to make everyone a millionaire with the same spending capacity as a current millionaire you are a crazy neutrino.

It isn’t about making individuals rich it is about servicing the community.

>then where is all this huge prize money coming from?

As I said, most people don’t gamble, they aren’t ‘gamblers’.

To get around the momentum that it is otherwise, call them ungamblers.

Postpocelipse said:

AwesomeO said:

If you think a 70% mining tax is going to make everyone a millionaire with the same spending capacity as a current millionaire you are a crazy neutrino.

It isn’t about making individuals rich it is about servicing the community.

If we are talking about money well spent, what exactly have the mining moguls done with their profits aside from establish themselves on a list of people who see the community as below them?

Unfortunately one of the principles of Federation has been a division of powers and responsibilities between the states and the Commonwealth. Regulation of mining and the payment of royalties has been a state matter since Federation. It’s been a long road for the Commonwealth to realise it can tax mining under its corporations head of powers, something that was probably not quite intended 114 years ago.

party_pants said:

Unfortunately one of the principles of Federation has been a division of powers and responsibilities between the states and the Commonwealth. Regulation of mining and the payment of royalties has been a state matter since Federation. It’s been a long road for the Commonwealth to realise it can tax mining under its corporations head of powers, something that was probably not quite intended 114 years ago.

It shouldn’t just be a tax. Federal governments should be taking all proceeds from primary resources. Treating the population as if they are a primary resource is massively predatory especially when it is done two-fold, first by the government then secondly by mining and other heavy industry.

The Politics Of Carbon And The Price Of Doing What’s Right

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Unfortunately one of the principles of Federation has been a division of powers and responsibilities between the states and the Commonwealth. Regulation of mining and the payment of royalties has been a state matter since Federation. It’s been a long road for the Commonwealth to realise it can tax mining under its corporations head of powers, something that was probably not quite intended 114 years ago.

It shouldn’t just be a tax. Federal governments should be taking all proceeds from primary resources. Treating the population as if they are a primary resource is massively predatory especially when it is done two-fold, first by the government then secondly by mining and other heavy industry.

Though I entirely take your point here p_p.

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Unfortunately one of the principles of Federation has been a division of powers and responsibilities between the states and the Commonwealth. Regulation of mining and the payment of royalties has been a state matter since Federation. It’s been a long road for the Commonwealth to realise it can tax mining under its corporations head of powers, something that was probably not quite intended 114 years ago.

It shouldn’t just be a tax. Federal governments should be taking all proceeds from primary resources. Treating the population as if they are a primary resource is massively predatory especially when it is done two-fold, first by the government then secondly by mining and other heavy industry.

That would need a change to the Constitution.

… for instance….

Why Are There More Mental Health Patients in Prisons than Treatment Centers?

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Unfortunately one of the principles of Federation has been a division of powers and responsibilities between the states and the Commonwealth. Regulation of mining and the payment of royalties has been a state matter since Federation. It’s been a long road for the Commonwealth to realise it can tax mining under its corporations head of powers, something that was probably not quite intended 114 years ago.

It shouldn’t just be a tax. Federal governments should be taking all proceeds from primary resources. Treating the population as if they are a primary resource is massively predatory especially when it is done two-fold, first by the government then secondly by mining and other heavy industry.

That would need a change to the Constitution.

When did constitutions become sacred? It’s just a document full of half-arsed idealogical nit-wittedness. Every generation should be able to contribute to a developing constitution that recognises that even the best minds of any age can be surpassed in insight by the generation that follows it. The anti-religious sentiment that prevails is entirely mundane in its character when contrasted against our inept deferral to these so called public documents.

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

It shouldn’t just be a tax. Federal governments should be taking all proceeds from primary resources. Treating the population as if they are a primary resource is massively predatory especially when it is done two-fold, first by the government then secondly by mining and other heavy industry.

That would need a change to the Constitution.

When did constitutions become sacred? It’s just a document full of half-arsed idealogical nit-wittedness. Every generation should be able to contribute to a developing constitution that recognises that even the best minds of any age can be surpassed in insight by the generation that follows it. The anti-religious sentiment that prevails is entirely mundane in its character when contrasted against our inept deferral to these so called public documents.

what?

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

That would need a change to the Constitution.

When did constitutions become sacred? It’s just a document full of half-arsed idealogical nit-wittedness. Every generation should be able to contribute to a developing constitution that recognises that even the best minds of any age can be surpassed in insight by the generation that follows it. The anti-religious sentiment that prevails is entirely mundane in its character when contrasted against our inept deferral to these so called public documents.

what?

I’m saying that we spend a lot of time poo-pooing religions in a completely meaningless fashion while treating public documents that don’t make public sense as if they are irreproachable and omniscient. I for one am entirely sick of the incompetent and trifling biases that flounder around as if they opwn the place.

Postpocelipse said:

AwesomeO said:

If you think a 70% mining tax is going to make everyone a millionaire with the same spending capacity as a current millionaire you are a crazy neutrino.

It isn’t about making individuals rich it is about servicing the community.

Its Australian resources which belongs to all Australians

not Gina the bully or Clive the bully or whoever the bully

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

When did constitutions become sacred? It’s just a document full of half-arsed idealogical nit-wittedness. Every generation should be able to contribute to a developing constitution that recognises that even the best minds of any age can be surpassed in insight by the generation that follows it. The anti-religious sentiment that prevails is entirely mundane in its character when contrasted against our inept deferral to these so called public documents.

what?

I’m saying that we spend a lot of time poo-pooing religions in a completely meaningless fashion while treating public documents that don’t make public sense as if they are irreproachable and omniscient. I for one am entirely sick of the incompetent and trifling biases that flounder around as if they opwn the place.

I think you’re being silly. The constitution is about the long term stability of the country, above the daily grind of adversarial politics and what seems convenient at the time.

• Its Australian resources which belongs to all Australians

Sitting in the ground it ain’t worth $#!t. Only when someone pays to dig it up and process it is it then with something…

Postpocelipse said:

Postpocelipse said:

AwesomeO said:

If you think a 70% mining tax is going to make everyone a millionaire with the same spending capacity as a current millionaire you are a crazy neutrino.

It isn’t about making individuals rich it is about servicing the community.

If we are talking about money well spent, what exactly have the mining moguls done with their profits aside from establish themselves on a list of people who see the community as below them?

Clive wants to build his own empire, Dinosaur park, Holiday Resort and some Titanic the Chinese are biulding

Not sure what Gina does with her money, maybe she just looks at it, she isnt building solar plants with it is she?

CrazyNeutrino said:

speaking about mining and millions

Norwegians become crown millionaires as sovereign wealth fund hits benchmark

Everyone in Norway became a theoretical millionaire on Wednesday, in a milestone for the world’s biggest sovereign wealth fund that has ballooned thanks to high oil and gas prices.

Do you realise that every German was a nominal millionaire in the early 1930s.

Amazing.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Not sure what Gina does with her money, maybe she just looks at it, she isnt building solar plants with it is she?

She sits on it (and she can cover a very large pile), and tells her useless idiot children “you can’t have any”.

party_pants said:

Unfortunately one of the principles of Federation has been a division of powers and responsibilities between the states and the Commonwealth. Regulation of mining and the payment of royalties has been a state matter since Federation. It’s been a long road for the Commonwealth to realise it can tax mining under its corporations head of powers, something that was probably not quite intended 114 years ago.

not arguing with history

I’m just wondering how much money Australians could have had, if Federal Parliament and the states had agreed to a mining tax at 78 percent since Federation 114 years ago

That would be a lot of money for all those exported materials

I don’t know why profits of companies, not just mining companies, is not taxed like personal income I.e. a sliding scale…

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

what?

I’m saying that we spend a lot of time poo-pooing religions in a completely meaningless fashion while treating public documents that don’t make public sense as if they are irreproachable and omniscient. I for one am entirely sick of the incompetent and trifling biases that flounder around as if they opwn the place.

I think you’re being silly. The constitution is about the long term stability of the country, above the daily grind of adversarial politics and what seems convenient at the time.

And I think that adherence to believing that an outdated collection of regulations has the ability to provide long term stability is not only silly but dangerously incompetent.

CrazyNeutrino said:

I’m just wondering how much money Australians could have had, if Federal Parliament and the states had agreed to a mining tax at 78 percent since Federation 114 years ago

That would be a lot of money for all those exported materials

But, we have to let people from other countries dig up or resources and ship them out at bargain prices or else they won’t let us (i.e. our politicians) into the clubhouse and allow them to sit in the corner while the grown-ups talk.

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

It shouldn’t just be a tax. Federal governments should be taking all proceeds from primary resources. Treating the population as if they are a primary resource is massively predatory especially when it is done two-fold, first by the government then secondly by mining and other heavy industry.

That would need a change to the Constitution.

When did constitutions become sacred? It’s just a document full of half-arsed idealogical nit-wittedness. Every generation should be able to contribute to a developing constitution that recognises that even the best minds of any age can be surpassed in insight by the generation that follows it. The anti-religious sentiment that prevails is entirely mundane in its character when contrasted against our inept deferral to these so called public documents.

The State and Federal constitutions are outdated and unfair, they dont address human rights, equality and other issues, they are not sacred, they can be changed to reflect modern attitudes.

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

I’m saying that we spend a lot of time poo-pooing religions in a completely meaningless fashion while treating public documents that don’t make public sense as if they are irreproachable and omniscient. I for one am entirely sick of the incompetent and trifling biases that flounder around as if they opwn the place.

I think you’re being silly. The constitution is about the long term stability of the country, above the daily grind of adversarial politics and what seems convenient at the time.

And I think that adherence to believing that an outdated collection of regulations has the ability to provide long term stability is not only silly but dangerously incompetent.

I’m not prepared to throw the whole lot out just because it doesn’t contain one or two lines about no fat basttards or miners. The rest of it is pretty sound.

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

what?

I’m saying that we spend a lot of time poo-pooing religions in a completely meaningless fashion while treating public documents that don’t make public sense as if they are irreproachable and omniscient. I for one am entirely sick of the incompetent and trifling biases that flounder around as if they opwn the place.

I think you’re being silly. The constitution is about the long term stability of the country, above the daily grind of adversarial politics and what seems convenient at the time.

Sure the constitution is about the long term stability of the country, but they are outdated and unfair, they dont address equity, they dont address human rights, they dont address fairness.

The constitutions should be changed to reflect modern attitudes

furious said:

I don’t know why profits of companies, not just mining companies, is not taxed like personal income I.e. a sliding scale…

If the government retained primary resource income taxing secondary and tertiary production would be more practically achievable. Why doesn’t Australia produce anything? AFAICT it is because our collective capital is stuffed into the pockets of private interests as quickly as is possible.

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

I think you’re being silly. The constitution is about the long term stability of the country, above the daily grind of adversarial politics and what seems convenient at the time.

And I think that adherence to believing that an outdated collection of regulations has the ability to provide long term stability is not only silly but dangerously incompetent.

I’m not prepared to throw the whole lot out just because it doesn’t contain one or two lines about no fat basttards or miners. The rest of it is pretty sound.

I agree. It is the difficulty in addressing those subjects that most intimately effect the population as a whole that should have something done about it. It seems fairly obvious that the system is reaching a point of collapse that requires addressing.

I’d be open to a constitutional amendment to take mining out of the hands of the states and give it to the Commonwealth. I’d probably even vote for it. But I don’t get the point of bashing the principle behind have a constitution in the first place just because it doesn’t say evrything you want it to say.

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

I’m saying that we spend a lot of time poo-pooing religions in a completely meaningless fashion while treating public documents that don’t make public sense as if they are irreproachable and omniscient. I for one am entirely sick of the incompetent and trifling biases that flounder around as if they opwn the place.

I think you’re being silly. The constitution is about the long term stability of the country, above the daily grind of adversarial politics and what seems convenient at the time.

And I think that adherence to believing that an outdated collection of regulations has the ability to provide long term stability is not only silly but dangerously incompetent.

agreed, too many people just either dont get it or dont care

Postpocelipse said:

AwesomeO said:

If you think a 70% mining tax is going to make everyone a millionaire with the same spending capacity as a current millionaire you are a crazy neutrino.

It isn’t about making individuals rich it is about servicing the community.

I get that, but if you read back crazy seemed to be saying a sovereign tax would make everyone a millionaire, my responses should have made that obvious.

party_pants said:

I’d be open to a constitutional amendment to take mining out of the hands of the states and give it to the Commonwealth. I’d probably even vote for it. But I don’t get the point of bashing the principle behind have a constitution in the first place just because it doesn’t say evrything you want it to say.

I wasn’t bashing this principle. I was observing that these documents effectively get treated as items of religious significance.

AwesomeO said:

… crazy seemed to be saying a sovereign tax would make everyone a millionaire…

No, a tax won’t do that. You have to secede from a union to do that.

The Scots will vote on that this next month. Secession from the UK is apparently being sold as the miracle cure to all of Scotland’s ills, with ‘independence’ making everyone rich in a Utopian welfare state which provides absolutely everything, and which teaches those bastards in London a thing or two.

Postpocelipse said:

It seems fairly obvious that the system is reaching a point of collapse that requires addressing.

It seems fairly obvious that you are talking through your hat.

• I wasn’t bashing this principle. I was observing that these documents effectively get treated as items of religious significance.

Yeah, look at america and their guns thing…

I don’t know about drastic changes but if I have to review stupid procedures at work every year then surely a periodic review of these things can’t hurt…

AwesomeO said:

Postpocelipse said:

AwesomeO said:

If you think a 70% mining tax is going to make everyone a millionaire with the same spending capacity as a current millionaire you are a crazy neutrino.

It isn’t about making individuals rich it is about servicing the community.

I get that, but if you read back crazy seemed to be saying a sovereign tax would make everyone a millionaire, my responses should have made that obvious.

In may, in effect, make everyone a millionaire. Instead of the individual having a million dollars in his account it would actually be more effective to have a national float that substantially provides each individual with the weight of meaningful public resource.

captain_spalding said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

I’m just wondering how much money Australians could have had, if Federal Parliament and the states had agreed to a mining tax at 78 percent since Federation 114 years ago

That would be a lot of money for all those exported materials

But, we have to let people from other countries dig up or resources and ship them out at bargain prices or else they won’t let us (i.e. our politicians) into the clubhouse and allow them to sit in the corner while the grown-ups talk.

I wouldn’t call most of those politicians gown up, not in the sense of age but in the sense of understanding ethics, logic, critical thinking, observation in various forms, human rights, understanding how to create good law, and understanding the problems of religion

they still have lots to learn and should still be at university, and I mean that in a constructive way

I would think that only less than 5 percent of politicians are actually qualified to be in parliament, if that

there is no way I would let a religious nut case run the country or any country for that matter

Politics needs changing, the constitutions need changing, and we are running out of time………

sibeen said:

Postpocelipse said:

It seems fairly obvious that the system is reaching a point of collapse that requires addressing.

It seems fairly obvious that you are talking through your hat.

Am I? You aren’t experiencing life from my perspective. What I see is massive incompetence and greed railroading everything along it’s way. If you believe that the system is providing fair opportunity to the common man then you are as ignorant as Hockey when he tells the public that “low income earners(most of the population that is) either don’t have a car or don’t drive very far”.

furious said:

• I wasn’t bashing this principle. I was observing that these documents effectively get treated as items of religious significance.

Yeah, look at america and their guns thing…

I don’t know about drastic changes but if I have to review stupid procedures at work every year then surely a periodic review of these things can’t hurt…

here here!!!!

i also think people are confusing a constitution with a bill of rights.

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

I’d be open to a constitutional amendment to take mining out of the hands of the states and give it to the Commonwealth. I’d probably even vote for it. But I don’t get the point of bashing the principle behind have a constitution in the first place just because it doesn’t say evrything you want it to say.

I wasn’t bashing this principle. I was observing that these documents effectively get treated as items of religious significance.

No they don’t. They get treated like documents that spell out important principles.

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

I think you’re being silly. The constitution is about the long term stability of the country, above the daily grind of adversarial politics and what seems convenient at the time.

And I think that adherence to believing that an outdated collection of regulations has the ability to provide long term stability is not only silly but dangerously incompetent.

I’m not prepared to throw the whole lot out just because it doesn’t contain one or two lines about no fat basttards or miners. The rest of it is pretty sound.

>>>Im not prepared to throw the whole lot out just because it doesn’t contain one or two lines about no fat basttards or miners. The rest of it is pretty sound.

Well I am prepared to change it, its old, dusty, unfair, outdated, it does not address equity, it does not address human rights, it does not address fairness.

with careful thought the state and federal constitutions could be much better and even more sound

why should Gina, Clive, Peter and the others have all the money which belongs to all Australians

that’s the problem with the current constitutions and you are calling that sound

It’s not sound, it allows for greed.

But then who does the review, suggests the changes, makes the changes? The same politicians allegedly in the back pocket of big business? Your wish to change it might get some adverse outcomes…

Postpocelipse said:

AwesomeO said:

Postpocelipse said:

It isn’t about making individuals rich it is about servicing the community.

I get that, but if you read back crazy seemed to be saying a sovereign tax would make everyone a millionaire, my responses should have made that obvious.

In may, in effect, make everyone a millionaire. Instead of the individual having a million dollars in his account it would actually be more effective to have a national float that substantially provides each individual with the weight of meaningful public resource.

Everybody in Norway is now a millionaire

and in Australia we have far far more resources that they have

It does not take much thought to work out we could all be Millionaires as well

JudgeMental said:

i also think people are confusing a constitution with a bill of rights.

these discrepancies could be addressed were inclusion of the public in the ongoing development of these various documents seen as paramount to the healthy institution of the result. As it stands, these documents are essentially the exclusive domain of the elite.

Postpocelipse said:

sibeen said:

Postpocelipse said:

It seems fairly obvious that the system is reaching a point of collapse that requires addressing.

It seems fairly obvious that you are talking through your hat.

Am I? You aren’t experiencing life from my perspective. What I see is massive incompetence and greed railroading everything along it’s way. If you believe that the system is providing fair opportunity to the common man then you are as ignorant as Hockey when he tells the public that “low income earners(most of the population that is) either don’t have a car or don’t drive very far”.

I totally agree with Postpocelipse

at least some of us are good observers

CrazyNeutrino said:

Well I am prepared to change it, its old, dusty, unfair, outdated, it does not address equity, it does not address human rights, it does not address fairness.

with careful thought the state and federal constitutions could be much better and even more sound

why should Gina, Clive, Peter and the others have all the money which belongs to all Australians

that’s the problem with the current constitutions and you are calling that sound

It’s not sound, it allows for greed.

This is where you are just plain wrong. It doesn’t belong to all Australians.

If you want to raise the topic of “should it belong to all Australians” then I’d be happy to entertain that discussion (in between doing my Saturday household chores). But that’s only a theoretical topic at the moment.

Postpocelipse said:

then you are as ignorant as Hockey when he tells the public that “low income earners(most of the population that is) either don’t have a car or don’t drive very far”.

How far out was Hockey’s statement?

Buffy was making the same statement about her area a couple of days before Hockey said it.

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

I’d be open to a constitutional amendment to take mining out of the hands of the states and give it to the Commonwealth. I’d probably even vote for it. But I don’t get the point of bashing the principle behind have a constitution in the first place just because it doesn’t say evrything you want it to say.

I wasn’t bashing this principle. I was observing that these documents effectively get treated as items of religious significance.

No they don’t. They get treated like documents that spell out important principles.

That no one but the chosen priests are able to interpret. They are not a public document when the public is effectively excluded from addressing the result of there use.

Postpocelipse said:

sibeen said:

Postpocelipse said:

It seems fairly obvious that the system is reaching a point of collapse that requires addressing.

It seems fairly obvious that you are talking through your hat.

Am I? You aren’t experiencing life from my perspective. What I see is massive incompetence and greed railroading everything along it’s way. If you believe that the system is providing fair opportunity to the common man then you are as ignorant as Hockey when he tells the public that “low income earners(most of the population that is) either don’t have a car or don’t drive very far”.

Hmm, Australia has had about 23 years of continuous economic growth. We rank second in the Human Development Index, we rank highest in mean wealth, and the proportion of those with more than $100K is the world’s highest.

Yep, we’re well screwed.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Postpocelipse said:

AwesomeO said:

I get that, but if you read back crazy seemed to be saying a sovereign tax would make everyone a millionaire, my responses should have made that obvious.

In may, in effect, make everyone a millionaire. Instead of the individual having a million dollars in his account it would actually be more effective to have a national float that substantially provides each individual with the weight of meaningful public resource.

Everybody in Norway is now a millionaire

and in Australia we have far far more resources that they have

It does not take much thought to work out we could all be Millionaires as well

if we were all millionaires… who would do the work?

Australia would crumble

hockey’s statement was basically accurate. what the problem with it was the % of real income spent on fuel between the groups.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Everybody in Norway is now a millionaire

Do you even read the links that you post.

They are millionaire in Norwegian Currency.

At the moment one Aus dollar is worth 5.75 Norwegian Krone.

if we were all millionaires… who would do the work?

457 visa’s….

>>>i also think people are confusing a constitution with a bill of rights.

our constitutions dont have one

they didn’t think of human rights, equality and fairness 114 years ago

that’s why they need updating

and no one needs to run away in fear, the new ones will be even more sound if they included equality and fairness

• if we were all millionaires… who would do the work?

Do like oil rich mid east countries and get in third world labour we can pay peanuts to and treat like animals…

CrazyNeutrino said:

Everybody in Norway is now a millionaire

With petrol selling for a minimum of $2.73 per litre, they’ll need to be.

JudgeMental said:

if we were all millionaires… who would do the work?

457 visa’s….

seriously..

read DA’s post in chat.

What millionaire would put up with that crap?
and the service industry is full of that sort of patronage.

Who would want to work as a checkout chick/bloke? a servo attendant? a fast food worker?

party_pants said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Well I am prepared to change it, its old, dusty, unfair, outdated, it does not address equity, it does not address human rights, it does not address fairness.

with careful thought the state and federal constitutions could be much better and even more sound

why should Gina, Clive, Peter and the others have all the money which belongs to all Australians

that’s the problem with the current constitutions and you are calling that sound

It’s not sound, it allows for greed.

This is where you are just plain wrong. It doesn’t belong to all Australians.

If you want to raise the topic of “should it belong to all Australians” then I’d be happy to entertain that discussion (in between doing my Saturday household chores). But that’s only a theoretical topic at the moment.

Well Im happy to disagree with you there, it does and should belong to all Australians not just a few rich people

If I were in Parliament I would be pushing for a 78 percent mining TAX and if current miners dont like it then they can get out of the business and go elsewhere

stumpy_seahorse said:

Postpocelipse said:

then you are as ignorant as Hockey when he tells the public that “low income earners(most of the population that is) either don’t have a car or don’t drive very far”.

How far out was Hockey’s statement?

Buffy was making the same statement about her area a couple of days before Hockey said it.

Add up what the sentiment is ignoring. The reason a person on newstart does not own a car or drive very far is because the income they recieve is not enought to provide accomadation. If you don’t have a job at the moment you are in very real danger of joining the junkies on the street. The statement is baldly dismissive and contemptuous.

furious said:

• if we were all millionaires… who would do the work?

Do like oil rich mid east countries and get in third world labour we can pay peanuts to and treat like animals…

you are getting in more and more citizens, but argueing to make all australians millionaires…

Isn’t that a bit counterproductive?

get more people in, nationalise them, damn, they arenow australians, better make them millionaires… get more people in to work, repeat

sibeen said:

Postpocelipse said:

sibeen said:

It seems fairly obvious that you are talking through your hat.

Am I? You aren’t experiencing life from my perspective. What I see is massive incompetence and greed railroading everything along it’s way. If you believe that the system is providing fair opportunity to the common man then you are as ignorant as Hockey when he tells the public that “low income earners(most of the population that is) either don’t have a car or don’t drive very far”.

Hmm, Australia has had about 23 years of continuous economic growth. We rank second in the Human Development Index, we rank highest in mean wealth, and the proportion of those with more than $100K is the world’s highest.

Yep, we’re well screwed.

Australia is positioned in the world to ensure this. The fact that Australian economic success is inevitable does not negate the fact that it is being achieved at the cost of the public.

If we tax every one out of ferraris then we can all have a scooter. It will be a paradise of earth.

CrazyNeutrino said:

If I were in Parliament I would be pushing for a 78 percent mining TAX and if current miners dont like it then they can get out of the business and go elsewhere

…and they would. They’d be out before you could blink and the country would be screwed within months.

I’ve heard stupider ideas, but they’re normally on a website devoted to wooo.

stumpy_seahorse said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Postpocelipse said:

In may, in effect, make everyone a millionaire. Instead of the individual having a million dollars in his account it would actually be more effective to have a national float that substantially provides each individual with the weight of meaningful public resource.

Everybody in Norway is now a millionaire

and in Australia we have far far more resources that they have

It does not take much thought to work out we could all be Millionaires as well

if we were all millionaires… who would do the work?

Australia would crumble

um everybody in Norway is a millionaire and they are not crumbling, in fact it makes them stronger doesent

and people would still work

just look at Gina, Peter and Clive they still work, dont they

robots are here anyway so I would not worry about who is going to do the work

• Isn’t that a bit counterproductive?

I was being facetious…

sibeen said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Everybody in Norway is now a millionaire

Do you even read the links that you post.

They are millionaire in Norwegian Currency.

At the moment one Aus dollar is worth 5.75 Norwegian Krone.

Norwegian Currency is still money

CrazyNeutrino said:

party_pants said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Well I am prepared to change it, its old, dusty, unfair, outdated, it does not address equity, it does not address human rights, it does not address fairness.

with careful thought the state and federal constitutions could be much better and even more sound

why should Gina, Clive, Peter and the others have all the money which belongs to all Australians

that’s the problem with the current constitutions and you are calling that sound

It’s not sound, it allows for greed.

This is where you are just plain wrong. It doesn’t belong to all Australians.

If you want to raise the topic of “should it belong to all Australians” then I’d be happy to entertain that discussion (in between doing my Saturday household chores). But that’s only a theoretical topic at the moment.

Well Im happy to disagree with you there, it does and should belong to all Australians not just a few rich people

If I were in Parliament I would be pushing for a 78 percent mining TAX and if current miners dont like it then they can get out of the business and go elsewhere

No it doesn’t, and it is not open for you to disagree on a point of fact.

$100 makes you a millionaire in Indonesia…

AwesomeO said:

If we tax every one out of ferraris then we can all have a scooter. It will be a paradise of earth.

?? I’d settle for newstart providing enough to secure decent accomadation and even possibly allow for a vehicle(for those who can manage money) so that the newstart recipient not only has a stable living environment to start a new job from but also allows that person the vehicle required by just about any advertised low-skill job demands as prerequisite.

CrazyNeutrino said:

sibeen said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Everybody in Norway is now a millionaire

Do you even read the links that you post.

They are millionaire in Norwegian Currency.

At the moment one Aus dollar is worth 5.75 Norwegian Krone.

Norwegian Currency is still money

Norwegians are also fairly disciplined, they still have compulsary service where they are paid the equivalent value of 2 beers/week during their service

sibeen said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

If I were in Parliament I would be pushing for a 78 percent mining TAX and if current miners dont like it then they can get out of the business and go elsewhere

…and they would. They’d be out before you could blink and the country would be screwed within months.

I’ve heard stupider ideas, but they’re normally on a website devoted to wooo.

and we would get other people to do it

no shortage of that

I’m not the one in the Land of Woo, other people are, with their head stuck in the sand.

furious said:

$100 makes you a millionaire in Indonesia…

it depends where in Indo… Jakarta is quite affluent.

Norwegian Currency is still money

yeah, but it isn’t real money like the great british pound is.

party_pants said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

party_pants said:

This is where you are just plain wrong. It doesn’t belong to all Australians.

If you want to raise the topic of “should it belong to all Australians” then I’d be happy to entertain that discussion (in between doing my Saturday household chores). But that’s only a theoretical topic at the moment.

Well Im happy to disagree with you there, it does and should belong to all Australians not just a few rich people

If I were in Parliament I would be pushing for a 78 percent mining TAX and if current miners dont like it then they can get out of the business and go elsewhere

No it doesn’t, and it is not open for you to disagree on a point of fact.

The vast majority of the global population would see primary resource as everybodies. The only fact is that the elite have been provided the authority to decide what is a fact.

CrazyNeutrino said:

If I were in Parliament I would be pushing for a 78 percent mining TAX and if current miners dont like it then they can get out of the business and go elsewhere

That’s it, let’s form the SSSF party and run at the next election.

• Norwegians are also fairly disciplined

And they listen to a lot of death metal…

JudgeMental said:

Norwegian Currency is still money

yeah, but it isn’t real money like the great british pound is.

It still can be cashed in

i think sssfers would make excellent politicians.

Postpocelipse said:

AwesomeO said:

If we tax every one out of ferraris then we can all have a scooter. It will be a paradise of earth.

?? I’d settle for newstart providing enough to secure decent accomadation and even possibly allow for a vehicle(for those who can manage money) so that the newstart recipient not only has a stable living environment to start a new job from but also allows that person the vehicle required by just about any advertised low-skill job demands as prerequisite.

I don’t disagree that Social equity can and should be enhanced but if you tax the crap out of people so that they leave the country who pays?

It is taxes that provide the services that the less well off require.

Divine Angel said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

If I were in Parliament I would be pushing for a 78 percent mining TAX and if current miners dont like it then they can get out of the business and go elsewhere

That’s it, let’s form the SSSF party and run at the next election.

The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.
(2 Henry VI, 4.2.59)

furious said:

• Norwegians are also fairly disciplined

And they listen to a lot of death metal…

And eat whales.

party_pants: –

Could you clarify your point of fact?

Who do the mineral resources of this country belong to?

JudgeMental said:

i think sssfers would make excellent politicians.

We’d be pushing to bring back CSIRO funding, at the very least.

captain_spalding said:

Divine Angel said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

If I were in Parliament I would be pushing for a 78 percent mining TAX and if current miners dont like it then they can get out of the business and go elsewhere

That’s it, let’s form the SSSF party and run at the next election.

The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.
(2 Henry VI, 4.2.59)

Yeah, Law needs cleaning up

…tax the crap out of people so that they leave the country who pays?

didn’t that happen in the uk back in the 60s? all the top bands left cos of the tax.

• it depends where in Indo… Jakarta is quite affluent.

No matter where you are though, $100 gets you 1000000 in their money and according to some it seems that having a million in any currency makes you automatically very well off…

AwesomeO said:

Postpocelipse said:

AwesomeO said:

If we tax every one out of ferraris then we can all have a scooter. It will be a paradise of earth.

?? I’d settle for newstart providing enough to secure decent accomadation and even possibly allow for a vehicle(for those who can manage money) so that the newstart recipient not only has a stable living environment to start a new job from but also allows that person the vehicle required by just about any advertised low-skill job demands as prerequisite.

I don’t disagree that Social equity can and should be enhanced but if you tax the crap out of people so that they leave the country who pays?

It is taxes that provide the services that the less well off require.

I’m not talking tax. I’m talking “ENTIRE PRIMARY PROCEEDS”. What right have foreign interests got to be plundering our country?

and we have a ready made Constitution

Postpocelipse said:

AwesomeO said:

Postpocelipse said:

?? I’d settle for newstart providing enough to secure decent accomadation and even possibly allow for a vehicle(for those who can manage money) so that the newstart recipient not only has a stable living environment to start a new job from but also allows that person the vehicle required by just about any advertised low-skill job demands as prerequisite.

I don’t disagree that Social equity can and should be enhanced but if you tax the crap out of people so that they leave the country who pays?

It is taxes that provide the services that the less well off require.

I’m not talking tax. I’m talking “ENTIRE PRIMARY PROCEEDS”. What right have foreign interests got to be plundering our country?

I was referring to crazies idea about taxing them to buggery and they can leave if they like.

Who is plundering?

• I’m not talking tax. I’m talking “ENTIRE PRIMARY PROCEEDS”. What right have foreign interests got to be plundering our country?

Sitting in the ground it ain’t worth $#!t. Only when someone pays to dig it up and process it is it then worth something…

AwesomeO said:

Postpocelipse said:

AwesomeO said:

I don’t disagree that Social equity can and should be enhanced but if you tax the crap out of people so that they leave the country who pays?

It is taxes that provide the services that the less well off require.

I’m not talking tax. I’m talking “ENTIRE PRIMARY PROCEEDS”. What right have foreign interests got to be plundering our country?

I was referring to crazies idea about taxing them to buggery and they can leave if they like.

Who is plundering?

looks like everyone who can afford to get away with it from here.

furious said:

• I’m not talking tax. I’m talking “ENTIRE PRIMARY PROCEEDS”. What right have foreign interests got to be plundering our country?

Sitting in the ground it ain’t worth $#!t. Only when someone pays to dig it up and process it is it then worth something…

So send work for the dolers west with a shovel. The idea that we can’t manage digging dirt up and sending it to be processed is another sentiment of contempt.

Postpocelipse said:

So send work for the dolers west with a shovel. The idea that we can’t manage digging dirt up and sending it to be processed is another sentiment of contempt.

All that is needed now is wookie.

• The idea that we can’t manage digging dirt up and sending it to be processed is another sentiment of contempt.

We can, and do, manage to dig it up and process it but only because someone picks up the considerable tab. I’m not sure if there is any impediment to a government run mining company in Australia but to do this the government needs to front up the costs to get it started…

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants: –

Could you clarify your point of fact?

Who do the mineral resources of this country belong to?

The Crown.

party_pants said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants: –

Could you clarify your point of fact?

Who do the mineral resources of this country belong to?

The Crown.

Wot? Crown Lager?

AwesomeO said:

Postpocelipse said:

So send work for the dolers west with a shovel. The idea that we can’t manage digging dirt up and sending it to be processed is another sentiment of contempt.

All that is needed now is wookie.

I was being facetious with the first comment. What is the sentiment that the public are a dangerous bunch of mindless droolers who have to be controlled, coerced and manipulated to get a result out of if not contemptuous? I have met a very minimal subset of people who can be described as such and they are all suffer mental health issues.

bob(from black rock) said:

party_pants said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants: –

Could you clarify your point of fact?

Who do the mineral resources of this country belong to?

The Crown.

Wot? Crown Lager?

Given time. Crown Casino.

party_pants said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants: –

Could you clarify your point of fact?

Who do the mineral resources of this country belong to?

The Crown.

The Crown can Bugger off as well

Just imagine the tantrums Gina and Clive would throw with a 78 percent tax

LOL

Queen Gina and King Clive.

bob(from black rock) said:

party_pants said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants: –

Could you clarify your point of fact?

Who do the mineral resources of this country belong to?

The Crown.

Wot? Crown Lager?

Crown Lager is ok

• The Crown.

• Wot? Crown Lager?

I think it was a typo, he obviously meant “The Clown”…

CrazyNeutrino said:

party_pants said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants: –

Could you clarify your point of fact?

Who do the mineral resources of this country belong to?

The Crown.

The Crown can Bugger off as well

Just imagine the tantrums Gina and Clive would throw with a 78 percent tax

LOL

What a great title for a movie. “When Treasurers Attack”.

Tamb said:

bob(from black rock) said:

party_pants said:

The Crown.

Wot? Crown Lager?

Given time. Crown Casino.

I’d shut down Casinos

Imagine the tantrum James would throw

The term “The Crown” hasn’t held weight since Queen Victoria. We are still operating on an Empire based system. That genuinelly hasn’t worked since dying in a muddy ditch went out of fashion.

furious said:

• The Crown.

• Wot? Crown Lager?

I think it was a typo, he obviously meant “The Clown”…

Tim Curry would make a fukkin AWESOME Emperor!!!! :D hahahahaa

The Crown’s powers have been delegated to the State parliaments to administer. By their oath of office they are bound to serve well and truly the people of their state. So if there is any argument about who exercises practical ownership of mineral resources, it is the state parliament and the people of that state.

party_pants said:

The Crown’s powers have been delegated to the State parliaments to administer. By their oath of office they are bound to serve well and truly the people of their state. So if there is any argument about who exercises practical ownership of mineral resources, it is the state parliament and the people of that state.

ie; the public

party_pants said:

The Crown’s powers have been delegated to the State parliaments to administer. By their oath of office they are bound to serve well and truly the people of their state. So if there is any argument about who exercises practical ownership of mineral resources, it is the state parliament and the people of that state.

bring on the republic

Lets get rid of the monarchy

its outdated and elitist

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

The Crown’s powers have been delegated to the State parliaments to administer. By their oath of office they are bound to serve well and truly the people of their state. So if there is any argument about who exercises practical ownership of mineral resources, it is the state parliament and the people of that state.

ie; the public

of that state, not of the Federation.

I’d change Law so it could be understood by Everybody

Goodbye greedy solicitors and barristers

If you write legalese in plain English it’s easier to find loopholes.

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

The Crown’s powers have been delegated to the State parliaments to administer. By their oath of office they are bound to serve well and truly the people of their state. So if there is any argument about who exercises practical ownership of mineral resources, it is the state parliament and the people of that state.

ie; the public

of that state, not of the Federation.

divide and conquer?

Divine Angel said:

If you write legalese in plain English it’s easier to find loopholes.

I’m sure

party_pants said:

Postpocelipse said:

party_pants said:

The Crown’s powers have been delegated to the State parliaments to administer. By their oath of office they are bound to serve well and truly the people of their state. So if there is any argument about who exercises practical ownership of mineral resources, it is the state parliament and the people of that state.

ie; the public

of that state, not of the Federation.

Exactly. It was written that way so that you evil WAliens don’t get you filthy hands on Victoria’s beautiful brown coal.

party_pants said:

The Crown’s powers have been delegated to the State parliaments to administer. By their oath of office they are bound to serve well and truly the people of their state. So if there is any argument about who exercises practical ownership of mineral resources, it is the state parliament and the people of that state.

The people of the states are Australian, aren’t they?

Setting aside whether or not they are competent, would mining companies be willing to manage hospitals? Not likely. If we cannot trust them to contribute to genuine public concerns why are we allowing them to manage our resources?

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants said:

The Crown’s powers have been delegated to the State parliaments to administer. By their oath of office they are bound to serve well and truly the people of their state. So if there is any argument about who exercises practical ownership of mineral resources, it is the state parliament and the people of that state.

The people of the states are Australian, aren’t they?

Unless you are seeking to take advantage of them. Then they are a bunch of divided incompetents who don’t know what is good for them.

“When people have the freedom to choose, they choose wrong.”

I am always suss on anyone who judges everyone else apart from themselves to be incompetent and wrong.

Postpocelipse said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants said:

The Crown’s powers have been delegated to the State parliaments to administer. By their oath of office they are bound to serve well and truly the people of their state. So if there is any argument about who exercises practical ownership of mineral resources, it is the state parliament and the people of that state.

The people of the states are Australian, aren’t they?

Unless you are seeking to take advantage of them. Then they are a bunch of divided incompetents who don’t know what is good for them.

“When people have the freedom to choose, they choose wrong.”

Dead people, I mean Robots, I see Robots

AwesomeO said:

I am always suss on anyone who judges everyone else apart from themselves to be incompetent and wrong.

What about the people who are incompetent and wrong?

And you all Win Free Bees

AwesomeO said:

I am always suss on anyone who judges everyone else apart from themselves to be incompetent and wrong.

Yeah, but why would we worry about what someone who is incompetent and wrong is suss on? :)

CrazyNeutrino said:

AwesomeO said:

I am always suss on anyone who judges everyone else apart from themselves to be incompetent and wrong.

What about the people who are incompetent and wrong?

It is true that people can be incompetent and wrong.

AwesomeO said:

I am always suss on anyone who judges everyone else apart from themselves to be incompetent and wrong.

In order to be logically consistent they’d have to be people with whom nobody else agrees about anything.

United States presidential line of succession

1 Vice President of the United States
2 Speaker of the House

Sorry… wrong thread and all that…

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants said:

The Crown’s powers have been delegated to the State parliaments to administer. By their oath of office they are bound to serve well and truly the people of their state. So if there is any argument about who exercises practical ownership of mineral resources, it is the state parliament and the people of that state.

The people of the states are Australian, aren’t they?

Somebody from NSW can’t vote in say a QLD election if they aren’t happy with the way that the QLD government are managing the mineral resources. Even though people from QLD and NSW are both citizens of Australia. In terms of exercising practical ownership of the mineral resources through parliament and the democratic process it is only people of a particular state can have the power, not everyone within the Federation.

AwesomeO said:

I am always suss on anyone who judges everyone else apart from themselves to be incompetent and wrong.

An eminently respectable standpoint.

party_pants said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants said:

The Crown’s powers have been delegated to the State parliaments to administer. By their oath of office they are bound to serve well and truly the people of their state. So if there is any argument about who exercises practical ownership of mineral resources, it is the state parliament and the people of that state.

The people of the states are Australian, aren’t they?

Somebody from NSW can’t vote in say a QLD election if they aren’t happy with the way that the QLD government are managing the mineral resources. Even though people from QLD and NSW are both citizens of Australia. In terms of exercising practical ownership of the mineral resources through parliament and the democratic process it is only people of a particular state can have the power, not everyone within the Federation.

But everyone within the Federation lives in a state, and there is no restriction in moving states for any citizen, so the distinction between the resources belonging to the people of Australia or the people of the individual states is entirely academic.

The Rev Dodgson said:

But everyone within the Federation lives in a state, and there is no restriction in moving states for any citizen, so the distinction between the resources belonging to the people of Australia or the people of the individual states is entirely academic.

academic and often pedantically deceptive depending on who has the resource to take advantage of vague lines in the sand.

Postpocelipse said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

But everyone within the Federation lives in a state, and there is no restriction in moving states for any citizen, so the distinction between the resources belonging to the people of Australia or the people of the individual states is entirely academic.

academic and often pedantically deceptive depending on who has the resource to take advantage of vague lines in the sand.

like the one between Syria and Iraq?

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

The people of the states are Australian, aren’t they?

Somebody from NSW can’t vote in say a QLD election if they aren’t happy with the way that the QLD government are managing the mineral resources. Even though people from QLD and NSW are both citizens of Australia. In terms of exercising practical ownership of the mineral resources through parliament and the democratic process it is only people of a particular state can have the power, not everyone within the Federation.

But everyone within the Federation lives in a state, and there is no restriction in moving states for any citizen, so the distinction between the resources belonging to the people of Australia or the people of the individual states is entirely academic.

I think we’re dabbling in semantics now.

“All mineral resources within Australia are owned by Australians” – I’ll pay that

But not “All mineral resources are with Australia are owned by all Australians”.

Anyway, time for lunch.

roughbarked said:

Postpocelipse said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

But everyone within the Federation lives in a state, and there is no restriction in moving states for any citizen, so the distinction between the resources belonging to the people of Australia or the people of the individual states is entirely academic.

academic and often pedantically deceptive depending on who has the resource to take advantage of vague lines in the sand.

like the one between Syria and Iraq?

or Israel and Hamas and probably a long list of others

party_pants said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants said:

Somebody from NSW can’t vote in say a QLD election if they aren’t happy with the way that the QLD government are managing the mineral resources. Even though people from QLD and NSW are both citizens of Australia. In terms of exercising practical ownership of the mineral resources through parliament and the democratic process it is only people of a particular state can have the power, not everyone within the Federation.

But everyone within the Federation lives in a state, and there is no restriction in moving states for any citizen, so the distinction between the resources belonging to the people of Australia or the people of the individual states is entirely academic.

I think we’re dabbling in semantics now.

“All mineral resources within Australia are owned by Australians” – I’ll pay that

But not “All mineral resources are with Australia are owned by all Australians”

Anyway, time for lunch.

Not “All mineral resources within Australia are owned by all Australians”.

party_pants said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants said:

Somebody from NSW can’t vote in say a QLD election if they aren’t happy with the way that the QLD government are managing the mineral resources. Even though people from QLD and NSW are both citizens of Australia. In terms of exercising practical ownership of the mineral resources through parliament and the democratic process it is only people of a particular state can have the power, not everyone within the Federation.

But everyone within the Federation lives in a state, and there is no restriction in moving states for any citizen, so the distinction between the resources belonging to the people of Australia or the people of the individual states is entirely academic.

I think we’re dabbling in semantics now.

“All mineral resources within Australia are owned by Australians” – I’ll pay that

But not “All mineral resources are with Australia are owned by all Australians”.

Anyway, time for lunch.

Why is everyone missing the example set by Norway? The equity in Australia belongs to Australians.

party_pants said:

party_pants said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

But everyone within the Federation lives in a state, and there is no restriction in moving states for any citizen, so the distinction between the resources belonging to the people of Australia or the people of the individual states is entirely academic.

I think we’re dabbling in semantics now.

“All mineral resources within Australia are owned by Australians” – I’ll pay that

But not “All mineral resources are with Australia are owned by all Australians”

Anyway, time for lunch.

Not “All mineral resources within Australia are owned by all Australians”.

The revenues owed are.

Postpocelipse said:

Setting aside whether or not they are competent, would mining companies be willing to manage hospitals? Not likely. If we cannot trust them to contribute to genuine public concerns why are we allowing them to manage our resources?

To point out the obvious, mining companies are after easy money. If anyones right to easy money should be protected it should be the publics. Private sector should be relegated to addressing more complex needs requiring meaningful specialisation.

Postpocelipse said:

Postpocelipse said:

Setting aside whether or not they are competent, would mining companies be willing to manage hospitals? Not likely. If we cannot trust them to contribute to genuine public concerns why are we allowing them to manage our resources?

To point out the obvious, mining companies are after easy money. If anyones right to easy money should be protected it should be the publics. Private sector should be relegated to addressing more complex needs requiring meaningful specialisation.

Some of the better arguments are indeed coming out of the aboriginal community.

I don’t own any mineral resources.

Bubblecar said:

I don’t own any mineral resources.

No that is right. You do have an obligation to make responsible decisions in regard to collective resource management though, if you can find a way to exercise them.

You wouldn’t even own them if they were found on your property (assuming you owned that property).

Divine Angel said:

You wouldn’t even own them if they were found on your property (assuming you owned that property).

Windfalls are all rotten apples?

I am sitting on a red chair. You might think that I use should sit on a blue one instead for whatever reasons you might think are persuasive Fine, I can go along with that. But I won’t entertain the argument that my red chair is in fact blue.

The way Federation was set up, ownership and control over mineral resources rests with the state parliaments. You might think that it ought to be arranged differently so that ownership and control rests Federally. Fine, argue away. But it doesn’t mean that things are actually arranged that way just because you think that’s how it ought to be.

party_pants said:

I am sitting on a red chair. You might think that I use should sit on a blue one instead for whatever reasons you might think are persuasive Fine, I can go along with that. But I won’t entertain the argument that my red chair is in fact blue.

The way Federation was set up, ownership and control over mineral resources rests with the state parliaments. You might think that it ought to be arranged differently so that ownership and control rests Federally. Fine, argue away. But it doesn’t mean that things are actually arranged that way just because you think that’s how it ought to be.

You do realise that nobody ever took colour blindness into account here?

I think the comforting knowledge that you can go out and buy any colour Triton you want would be the first thing that would go through the mind of a 70 million dollar winner.

Peak Warming Man said:

I think the comforting knowledge that you can go out and buy any colour Triton you want would be the first thing that would go through the mind of a 70 million dollar winner.

A man who thinks like me.. I lost a deep green Triton and had to settle for a farken silver one.

I’d probably invest some in a movie. Something about an American and a Korean backpacker in Australia. Hygiene ensues.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000796XXM/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B000796XXM&linkCode=as2&tag=wwwiflscience-20&linkId=WHBSFJXUVFJY3CSK

http://unitednuclear.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=27_82
Death Ray parts

http://www.unitednuclear.com/

I would bring back the SSSF, Scribbly and Techtalk.

ms spock said:

I would bring back the SSSF, Scribbly and Techtalk.

:) morning spocky.

> what would you do if you won 70 million dollars? I haven’t. but what would you do?

Hire someone to build my space rocket for me? In a time-span of one month. But that would only use up $1000 or so.

Was watching a program about the Boeing 747 tonight. Perhaps I could hire Boeing, or Russia, to build a long-range supersonic passenger aircraft.

Hire someone to build a bridge or tunnel between North and South Islands on New Zealand.